Bansky's action is one of art because he uses dark humor in trying to stop his works from becoming commercialized products. For example, the article by Rowena Salazar states "Bansky often incorporates dark humor . . . into his art." Revealing that Bansky's shredding of his painting, after it sold for $1.4 million, incorporated his trademark of dark humor, and was an act of art. Specifically, shredding the painting was sad, but also funny, because by shredding the painting Bansky tried to stop it from becoming a commercialized product, which is what he hates. Also, Bansky's action is one of art because it produced the same reaction as his other artistic pieces. For example, according to the Grafitti Review Bansky's shredding of the painting was "beautiful . . . had a live audience . . and it most certainly elicited a strong reaction."
<em>Banksys' plan to sell anything as "art" is pure genius, as Banksy is a firm believer in not placing a price on art. Therefore his act was out of art, not vandalism because he was trying to get his point across the board. Although he didn't make his point clear due to the art selling for even more after self-destructing. Banksy makes street art and putting a price on his art to destroy it was the most modernly artistic thing an artist could do nowadays. Everyone is pricing their art for millions, while Banksy is making his free for the people to appreciate.</em>
