banksy: cardinal sin banksy: cardinal sin
dec 16, 2011

banksy: cardinal sin

‘cardinal sin’ (detail) by banksy image via design you trust

street artist banksy has revealed his latest work, this time vandalizing a statue of a priest by sawing off its face, and replacing it with an arrangement of blank tiles. the result is a ‘pixellated’, blurred out visage of the 18th century stone bust replica which stands to be a comment on recent crimes perpetrated by the church, specifically the child abuse scandal and its subsequent cover-up.

on show at the walker art gallery in liverpool, the sculpture is on display alongside artistic masterpieces by rubens and van dyck, within room three of the museum’s 17th century old master galleries.

this is the first time that ‘cardinal sin’ is on display to the public and has been loaned to the gallery indefinitely by the artist.

‘cardinal sin’ image via design you trust

banksy’s ‘cardinal sin’ sitting alongside the artworks of 17th century master painters image © reuters

via BBC, daily mail

  • soooo incredibly good!!

    vg says:
  • Amazing idea, but colours don’t seem to match as well as they could..

    ralph says:
  • brilliant

    beta says:
  • Pfft. It’s not vandalizing if you own the thing. It’s just pseudo-vandalizing.

    giovannigf says:
  • Looks like a creeper from minecraft… Coincidence?

    amaranth says:
  • awesome!

    btt says:
  • amazing

    martin says:
  • @ralph….the colours don’t match …lol……have you seen it in the gallery….i thought not

    agreatartist says:
  • Who cares if the colors don’t match, the point of the piece is not to “match colors” is to suggest the existance of a face, a blurred face. The stament is clear, the real identity has been erased and made ambiguous and a generic representation of a man, a cover up if you must which is the intent of the artist. BRILLIANT!

    ArtCrit says:
  • Why is db deleting comments? there were some positive reviews about this piece, censorship over nothing?

    Dave says:
  • Normally the faces of the ‘innocent’ are blurred to protect them, so why blur his face ?

    Not sure if the concept is coherent here

    griff says:

have something to add? share your thoughts in our comments section below.

comments policy
LOG IN
designboom's comment policy guidelines
generally speaking, if we publish something, it's because we're genuinely interested in the subject. we hope you'll share this interest and if you know even more about it, please share! our goal in the discussion threads is to have good conversation and we prefer constructive opinions. we and our readers have fun with entertaining ones. designboom welcomes alerts about typos, incorrect names, and the like.
the correction is at the discretion of the post editor and may not happen immediately.

what if you disagree with what we or another commenter has to say?
let's hear it! but please understand that offensive, inappropriate, or just plain annoying comments may be deleted or shortened.

- please do not make racist, sexist, anti-semitic, homophobic or otherwise offensive comments.
- please don't personally insult the writers or your fellow commenters.
- please avoid using offensive words, replacing a few letters with asterisks is not a valid workaround.
- please don't include your website or e-mail address in your comments for the purpose of self-promotion.
- please respect jury verdicts and do not discuss offensively on the competition results
(there is only one fist prize, and designboom usually asks renown professionals to help us to promote talent.
in addition to the awarded designs, we do feel that almost all deserve our attention, that is why we publish
the best 100-200 entries too.)

a link is allowed in comments as long as they add value in the form of information, images, humor, etc. (links to the front page of your personal blog or website are not okay). unwelcome links (to commercial products or services of others, offensive material etc. ) will be redacted. and, ... yes, spam gets banned. no, we do not post fake comments.

art news