From the Financial District Times "'Girl With Balloon' already broke an important auctions record for Bansky, selling for $1.4M. After its recent shredding, we certainly expect this important work to raise the bar even further. While casual art observers consider the work to be destroyed, collectors are drawn to its one-of-a-kind circumstance. We wouldn't be surprised if it's already doubled in value."

In a paragraph of at least five sentences, address Banksy's advice "not to buy anything by anybody, unless it was created for sale in the first place." Include at least one specific reference to each excerpt in your response.

I already answered this essay with my own response and got full grade.

This is for future students who need help with this problem.

My

Bansky is saying that you should not buy something unless the original artist intended to sell it in the first place. For example, the article by Rowena Salazar states "He openly criticizes commercialism . . ." Revealing that Bansky does not like it when people buy things just to try to signal to other people that they are better than everyone else. As a result, Bansky's statement reveals that he does not like it when people take his art, which should be appreciated for its political and social message, and attempt to turn it into a status symbol. Also, the article from the Financial District Times states "After its recent shredding, we certainly expect this important wok to raise the bar even further." Revealing that Bansky shredded his painting in order to stop people from turning it into a commercialized product.

the first proposition is to question economic materialism and victorian christianity. the lines are:

“it moves us not.—great god! i'd rather be

a pagan suckled in a creed outworn; ”

wordsworth is stating that nature no longer interests mankind, that the latter is not “moved” by it and explains that ancient western paganism had a more positive attitude concerning nature since it lacked the perv erted judaeo-christian interpretation of having received the world and all its animals and elements from god to use as we , instead of humans actually being not only part of nature but its wardens, meant to appreciate it and protect it.

the next lines are:

“so might i, standing on this pleasant lea,

have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;

have sight of proteus coming from the sea;

or hear old triton blow his wreathed horn.”

wordsworth here make it very clear that by actually looking and contemplating nature, human beings would reconnect with happiness, serenity and purpose. the use of mythological figures is quite evocative as well, proteus is a greek mythological god of the changing sea. he personifies the sea that changes, which symbolizes the way nature changes and inevitably can change to be destructive not only due to natural causes but to human pollution. furthermore, the sea is even more symbolic since all life originated in the sea so it is not only our past but our future since no life form in our planet can survive without water and if all water is destroyed in earth all life will be gone as well.

he then uses triton which is symbolic of the synthesis of both nature and mankind. triton is a mythological greek god that has the upper body of a man and the lower body of a fish (a merman). this human fish duality evokes the fact that humans are not only human but also part of nature, the fish tail representing nature. the main attribute of this god was that he used a conch shell as a horn to calm the roaring seas. in other words, triton uses nature through science for the benefit of human sailors who risk death during tempests. with the use of such metaphor, wordworth is conveying the message that human technology   is supposed to use nature to preserve nature and thereby humanity as well.

hmm, sadly there is no dialogue. there is no place in the story where he is talking to anyone. it's more of just describing what he eats and where he sleeps. you have to become anne frank, give details of where you are, what other folks look like, how the environment is. have a little bit of dialogue tell of what people are specifically saying. anne frank talked about her entire household including the people, the objects, the lighting, the food they ate, and even the smell in the air. there has to be more to your diary entries, the whole story in its current state is only about peter van daan, the food, the sounds, and where he sleeps. also he seems to be writing only once a year yet more than that happened from day to day. for a friend, i can you write it out, if you want.