Don't miss

Banksy Is Damien Hirst Part 1

By on March 15, 2015

Goldwoody knows for a fact that Banksy is Damien Hirst, our tenacious and cut-throat correspondents in the UK have been on him for a while. It’s like Damien walks in his house in Bristol and then a hooded dude comes out carrying a Tesco’s plastic bag full of sounds of cans rattling around, though even this hooded guy is a decoy. We have been following Damien Hirst for a while now, and even have our peeps in Thailand right now watching him, half kidding.

Banksy doesn’t even need to go out and put his work up on walls anymore, he sends someone else to do it for him, and gives them art direction. Anywawa! Banksy is in fact a guise of Damien Hirst’s and has been playing us like a jukebox all this time, he has been leaving clues everywhere. The essential similarities bring out more clues then ever. To Damien  its like giving a man with Parkinsons a bag of popcorn to hold for a laugh, or calculate a heroin addicts addiction, playing, playing playing us! It’s like apologizing for harassing someone, by harassing them, or it’s even like that Alanis Morissette songs lyrics that are all about being ironic, though are not about fucking irony at all, though maybe thats the point, ironic that this songs lyrics are supposed to be ironic though there not.  That’s Irony right? Twisting your melon am I? Anywhoo Hirst is Banksy and that’s Ironic.

Hirst loves rats, Banksy loves rats, love dots pretend to collaborate with each other, they are both from Brsitol in the UK, Jude Tyrell of Studio Manager Hurst’s Company may have provided this direction since joining the company in 2004 where he was directed various projects. Hey does this rag smell of chloroform? It is bloody well blatant and as much as Hirst likes to leave clues or trails everywhere, he is laughing right now all the way. Hirst who allegedly finances Banksy has been financing himself all this time, cheeky monkey.

The Mail On Sunday fell straight into the trap when Hurst sent out Robin Cunningham to be so very delibertly caught on camera, and the tabloids went crazy thinking that Cunningham is Banksy. It’s a load of applesauce and Cunningham was used as a decoy.

The decoy, Robin Cunningham

We all have alter egos, why not play on them I say. Though our investigative journalism has revealed this little cockeroo. Hurst and Banksy have indeed shaken up the world with their prepossessing art, however I am sure that there is some young girl called Allison that is when reaches the age of 24 will shake up the world even more so, and that’s great to know.

The collaboration of Bansky with his rat and Hirst with his famous dots, it must be a great thing to collaborate with yourself and be praised for it, oh my!

Damien Hirst above in front of his church windows style piece.

Bansky’s piece with similar church windows as a clue.


Part 2 gets very crazy indeed as we confront the might mouse, or rat even.










About Gold Woody


  1. Rhino

    March 7, 2013 at 10:44 pm


  2. Amanda Smooth

    March 8, 2013 at 2:40 am

    Makes sense actually! When is part 2 coming?

  3. Andrew, Canterbury, UK

    October 10, 2013 at 2:55 am

    One teeny weeny flaw in your otherwise perfect argument:

    Damien Hirst is a pompous egotistical git with zero sense of humour, while Banksy is a sly, devious and very witty individual.

    Other than that small detail – and the lack of personality transplants in posh wine bars – I’m sure you’d be right.

  4. Gold Woody

    February 15, 2014 at 11:18 pm

    Really this is odd, so Google tells me this post got 200k pages views so far from around the world, and it got 491 likes on Facebook and 3 comments, what does that tell me? It’s aight, it’s aight, aiiight! She moves in mysterious ways!

  5. John

    October 12, 2015 at 2:01 pm

    Hirst is not that smart and probably less wealthy and impressive than Banksy is. Only to similarities don’t count!

  6. Dan

    February 29, 2016 at 11:13 am

    If you call it art and place it a position of prcimnenoe, it becomes art.I’ve become sort of obsessed with this idea lately. Is art really just pointing at something and calling it art ? If it is, is that necessarily a bad thing? What does that tell us about us as humans? Perhaps merely that we’re obsessed with labels and categorizing things.What could I, with no significant non-musical artistic skill to speak of, get away with? What if I just grabbed a TV remote and titled it Master could I get it shown in a gallery? Would I need some sort of clout first? Would it be more readily accepted by viewers if I was, I don’t know, a survivor of the Khmer Rouge, or a Manhattan socialite, or a female bisexual Canadian hipster?tl;dr: hmmmmm .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *