Perhaps, I’ll grant, the individual punks are a bit more like collectibles, but the CryptoPunks project is one giant generative artwork. It’s one creation, with one onchain event to create it, and people have been interacting with it onchain almost every day since.  When I look at an onchain generative art collection like Autoglyphs or Fidenza, the art is the algorithm and the outputs in totality.. not the individual outputs (what we typically call pieces). 

Punks are valued and people connect with them for their aesthetics. People form a deep personal connection to their tokens.. which represent the pictures. When you think about that, the work is profound. Those outside of NFTs don’t get it. Those in this space.. those who really sink their hearts into digital ownership.. they can’t see any differently. 

Blockchain as a medium 

Larva Labs, as I understand it, had their generative character algorithm before they really dove into blockchains. They had these characters, and wanted to do something more with them. Making a fixed supply of unique characters on one smart contract.. it’s something no one else had done prior, and people have been connecting with their work ever since. It was such a powerful demonstration of what Ethereum enabled. At least for me it was the project that convinced me that Ethereum was incredibly important. There are Bitcoin maxis (or were) that work for Blockstream that own CryptoPunks. If you know your crypto history.. read that sentence again, and wonder.

The punks have been a nearly perfect vessel for pseudonymous people to build an identity, reputation, and visual form without revealing their faces or bodies. Many have used them this way. This might seem to make them have too much ‘utility’ to be fine art but again, the actual artwork is the whole damn thing, not the individual punks and how we choose to use them. No one could own the whole digital object, even with infinite money. No one can ‘buy’ the contract. CryptoPunks simply is.

The emergence of CryptoPunks was a culture making event. The pfp genre was born. Blockchains plus generative art would go on to become an important art genre for crypto natives. Even a new token standard, the ERC-721, was inspired in part by the work in CryptoPunks. Traits spread through the culture. Even pixel art in this space has spread in part because of Punks, which have some damn great pixel art having seen a lot of it over the last few years. Truly Crypto iconic.

113, creator of Terraforms, considers the immutable marketplace, as an unstoppable live running program, the crucial part that makes it art. I don’t entirely disagree, but I think the visual traits, the (as yet unpublished) generative algorithm, are all crucial parts of the art. The use of punks, which harkens back to the cypherpunks indirectly and to the counterculture punk movement of the late 20th century, adds to the meaning of this immutable onchain marketplace.

The sale to Yuga. For many punks a traumatic event. The final event in a tumultuous 12 months for punks, that saw the rise of NFTs into mainstream awareness, Punks often under fire, and calls from prominent holders to ‘do something’ just not whatever Matt and John actually did. Why do you care, anon? It’s interesting that so many people do care. What that shows me is how people have so deeply connected emotionally to the work. A work that still lives in the same place, just as it did in 2017. On the Ethereum blockchain. No smart contract was transferred to Yuga. No ‘transfer contract’ command exists. A prominent collector recently pointed to the sale as evidence that they are collectibles. I point to the visceral reaction to this sale.. the emotional wrenching, as clear evidence that this must be art.

DMCAs.. some punks wring their hands that Yuga could do this.. but ironically LL sent more DMCAs than current IP owners. People don’t really get the context and history. Scammers. Fraudsters. Hucksters.I give the creators the benefit of the doubt that their goal was to protect buyers from outright scams, not to assert their authority of how people used the work. But punks outgrew their creators. Some of the community wanted leaders.. but not Matt and John. By selling, they got to fill the role they always wanted: as holders and participants in their own work.

V1s. The draft. The immutable tokens. The passionate debate. More dialogue with the final work. More debate. What is a CryptoPunk? 

Straybits opines that the community that forms around them are part of the art. This artwork is a vessel that holds a community within. It’s an  interesting angle. From that framework I would include the former holders as part of that ever growing artwork. A network stamped onchain.

This is a work of art that’s worth celebrating and interpreting. Worth thinking about. Worth engaging with. Worth owning in part, if you can afford to do so, and worth exploring how we can expand ownership and experience of the work.

What does it mean? Jonathan Mann asks this question in the original CryptoPunks song. Well.. what does it mean to you anon?