Pictured, top: the full image of the Banksy piece on a wall in Jeffrey’s Street. Bottom: The Banksy artwork  at the Town Hall

Published: 10 May, 2012
by PAVAN AMARA

WHEN the world’s most famous guerrilla street artist left a piece of his art on the side of the block of flats he owns, Bhupen Raja felt as if he had been struck by amazing good fortune.

The Banksy stencil of a boy blowing bubbles became something of an offbeat tourist attraction in Camden Town, with people making special trips to photograph it.

Mr Raja even looked into whether he could sell the work left on a white side wall in Jeffrey’s Street before protecting it with a Perspex screen, just as Camden Council officials had done with a paint stencil of a rat on their offices in King’s Cross.

But this week Mr Raja told of the headache the whole affair had caused him as he received an enforcement notice from the Town Hall ordering him to take down the screen – an order which many say is effectively a death warrant for the artwork.

Notoriously, works by Banksy have become the target of vandals in recent months, and critics of the move say the council might as well whitewash the wall.

Camden Council seemed well aware of the risks when it placed a screen over its own Banksy six years ago.

Officials were warned that they must be careful when doing a waterblast clean of the Town Hall building and bizarre inquiries were made about insuring it against theft or damage.

Emails later showed former deputy council leader Janet Grauberg said: “Since hearing about the Banksy on the Town Hall, I have seen several books about his work.

"While I understand the issues about graffiti, it is quite clear this is something different and we would be in a lot of trouble if we got rid of it.”

The risk of graffiti attack is not insignificant: a famous Banksy picture of a maid in Chalk Farm Road was repeatedly scrubbed out by vandals until it could not longer be restored, while another street piece by the artist left in Archway – a hitch-hiking Charles Manson – was blotted out last year.

The work in Jeffrey’s Street makes reference to London’s underground world of graffiti as the bubbles the boy is blowing spell out the name of “TOX”, a prolific tagger jailed last year for leaving his spray paint mark across the underground system.

The case led to claims that it was one rule for Banksy, another for TOX.

Mr Raja protected the artwork in Jeffrey’s Street with a £600 Perspex frame after it first appeared last August and installed a £2,000 CCTV camera.

But some neighbours complained that the Banksy ruined the appearance of the street, a conservation area.

“This Banksy has been very costly for me,” said Mr Raja, who received the order to remove the frame on Thursday.

The letter referred to a “breach of planning control”, and had been sent to 13 addressees, which included Mr Raja, all tenants in the property and the mortgage company.  

The council outlined that the screen would be removed on June 12 unless an appeal was made to the Secretary of State.

It continued: “Without planning permission: installation of timber and Perspex box, cctv camera, and associated camera house to the flank wall.”

Mr Raja said: “I wish I had used my brain and just got rid of it as soon as he did it.

"It has caused me a headache from the start.

"I have spent £2,600 at least, maybe more, on protecting this Banksy and now I’m going to lose it all.

"The landlord said selling the artwork was not an option.

“There was one man who put in a good offer but he insisted he wanted to take the wall away too.

“He promised me he would replace the wall for me but I couldn’t trust him to do that.

"I didn’t want to risk it. I just want to sell it now. I’ve had enough.”  

In October last year, the CCTV camera was ripped out from above the mural, and the Perspex has been subjected to numerous attempts to remove it.

A hole was drilled in the screen and black paint poured inside.  

Mr Raja said: “I don’t want an appeal to be another waste of money though, so I’m seeing if it’s worth my while.

"I do think it’s very silly of the council to ruin it.

“My wife thinks Camden Council are stupid because if the Perspex comes down, then the art will be defaced, so that will be the end of the Banksy.

"If I have to take the Perspex away I’ll get rid of the Banksy myself, because then it’ll make my property a target for people to come and deface the Banksy.
 
“It’s ridiculous timing because the Olympics are coming now, and tourists from all over the world would have been flocking to my property.

"Some of the planning officers themselves have come down to have a look.”

He added: “It’s not costing Camden a penny, and this borough is known for its art.

"Why they insist on removing it I don’t know.”  

Rob Skipper, who has lived at a flat in the property for more than 20 years, said he had not heard neighbours complain, adding: “I would love to see it kept, but if it wasn’t a Banksy it would have been cleaned up ages ago.
 
 “I respect that it is a conservation area and I wouldn’t want to see the whole street covered in graffiti.

"You have to wonder why it’s given special treatment because it’s Banksy, but no other graffiti is protected in the same way.

"At the same time I know art lovers and photographers come from everywhere to see this.”  

Peter Burt, 42, who has lived in Jeffrey’s Street for four years, said: “Some art is meant to be transitory.

"It’s had its day and now it’s time to go.

"At first, yes, I complained about the graffiti, but now I’ve got quite used to it and I wouldn’t mind if it stayed.

"It’s the idea of the Perspex on top of it. I think that looks horrid.”

Brenda Sutherland, who has lived in the street for more than 30 years, said: “If it had been left as a virgin painting I wouldn’t have minded, but it’s been defaced and that’s what brings the whole street down.

"I have a feeling the owner of the property has put Perspex on top of the Banksy so the value of the house will go up, but it brings the value of our houses down because it looks so messy on the side of the road.

“There’s a lot of room for political statements, I like that about it.

"I could live with the Banksy if it was kept in a pristine way, but it’s not, and the defacing of a street that’s meant to be a conservation area is what the real problem is.”

A Camden Council spokeswoman said that an enforcement notice had been served against a timber and Perspex box and a CCTV camera on the side wall covering the Banksy graffiti.   

These were considered to harm the character and appearance of the building, street scene and the Camden Town conservation area.

She added: “The council has a Banksy on the rear of the Town Hall extension.

"This is small in scale and covered by a clear Perspex plate.

"Due to its limited size and location on the building it is considered appropriate.”