The artist or the oeuvre?
In recent days was published in the site Tenement TV an article titled “Could Massive Attack’s 3D Be Banksy?” by Craig Williams. According to this article, the “startling suggestion was made this afternoon by sources close to Il Cartello, the Italian online cultural magazine”, and the reasons of this association are that Robert Del Naja (aka 3D, one of the members of the English trip hop group Massive Attack) was a graffiti artist before “becoming the “creative director” of sorts of Massive Attack, and is held in high regard as one of the pioneers of the stencil graffiti movement, helping to bring hip-hop and graffiti culture to Bristol in the 1980s”. Also, is well known the friendship between Banksy and Del Naja, but “what may provide more weight to the theory, a look at previous tour dates for Massive Attack around the world in the past decade coincides with the appearance of some of Banksy’s work in the same places”. (You can read the full article in this link: http://www.tenementtv.com/news/could-this-be-banksys-real-identity/ )
This theory has a lot of resonance in the musical media in the last days. If it’s true or not, at the moment nor Banksy neither 3D, have confirmed or not this information.
But this take us to a different place, the idea of the artist without face, the anonymous artist.
There are a reason for still been anonymous? Is important know the face of the artist? Why is so powerful the desire for know the real identity of Banksy, of the members of Daft Punk, of The Knife, of Gorillaz, of Sia? Their art and music is not more important than his faces? Or only is a marketing strategy using the mystery?
But at the same time the question goes for the fans… Until which point the fans should know the life of his artists? The private life of the artist (house, wife/husband, kids, likes, dislikes and so on are part of the artist as a public image?