Comments on: The Retraction: Wooster Collective Follow-up

By: duane

duane — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:15:27 +0000

its funny that this editorial mishap is garnering more attention than Banksy’s movie, perhaps a testament to the film, just saying.

By: duane

duane — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:15:00 +0000

its funny that this editorial mishap is garnering more attention than Banksy’s movie, perhaps a testament to the film, just saying.

By: Will

Will — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:27:09 +0000

So Schiller wasn’t getting paid, but he probably should’ve been more forthright about his personal involvement in the Banksy film (i.e. volunteering for the film’s distribution company and curating the film’s intro)? It may not be the law and the ethics can be gray, but being upfront only benefits one’s integrity and their audience’s trust.

By: Will

Will — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:27:00 +0000

By: Mat Gleason

Mat Gleason — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:08:34 +0000

Does Schiller own art that is championed in this film? Does his incessant cheerleading (or shall we say, Schiller’s shilling) leverage his reputation in the industry to raise the value of his personal holdings?

If the answer is anything in the gray area outside of “NO” than the discussion of a possible conflict of interest on the part Schiller is a reasonable subject for discussion in a contemporary art forum.

And what is up with the thin skin on all these so-called “street” art people. I thought you were all so “fuckin cool”®

By: Mat Gleason

Mat Gleason — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:08:00 +0000

And what is up with the thin skin on all these so-called “street” art people. I thought you were all so “fuckin cool”®

By: Art Fag City

Art Fag City — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:02:09 +0000

@claire There’s nothing irresponsible about calling Schiller a fanboy in the retraction. It is not however, particularly character building.

By: Art Fag City

Art Fag City — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:02:00 +0000

@claire There’s nothing irresponsible about calling Schiller a fanboy in the retraction. It is not however, particularly character building.

By: claire

claire — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:44:27 +0000

Agree with Samson: she SLANDERED someone. Not cool. And instead of apologizing nicely she calls the guy a fanboy in her retraction. There is nothing “responsible” about what went on here.

By: claire

claire — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:44:00 +0000

Agree with Samson: she SLANDERED someone. Not cool. And instead of apologizing nicely she calls the guy a fanboy in her retraction. There is nothing “responsible” about what went on here.