aftog

by afternoon

user profile | dashboard | imagewall

« older newer »

aftnn.orgMy other home.

Search this moblog

Recent visitors

Graffiti as art

(viewed 7603 times)

One morning, this fine burner appeared around the corner from me, a fairly rare thing in this well-off area. A few days later somebody, not necessarily the artist, attached this curator's note to it. Street as gallery space or a sneaky attempt to improve the work's chances of survival?

The note reads:

"Untitled III

"Artist Unknown

"Mural: Spraypaint on stone

"Circa, 2007, this piece confronts our assumptions of the conventional forms of spatial ownership and the use of the visible surface as part of our urban lexicon. The media chosen by the artist reflects his/her thinking on the process of making art, in this case choosing speed and discretion as the primary generatives influences. The selected location for the piece not only forms part of a wider artistic network or territory, but is also intended to make the immediate viewers more aware of the vast gap in aesthetics and values between this cultural island, and others in London's deverse archipelago."

Meaningful. I wonder if this is a standard graffito note downloaded from somewhere. The language is chosen to sound scholarly, but don't miss the content.

5th Feb 2007, 09:09 | tags:#art

,#discourse

,#graffiti

,#public space

MiniFF says:

Haha love it!

5th Feb 2007, 10:09

Dhamaka says:

hehe

I'm sorely tempted to put a notice up a short way from my place. Rather than a curator's note, it'd be along the lines of 'do you really want the world to see this rubbish, why not paint over it with something attractive and/or imaginative' or even 'put up good graff or die'...

5th Feb 2007, 10:13

afternoon says:

A big part of why I like this work is because it went over the top of some exceedingly poor scrawl, which had previously annoyed me.

I find it sad that people don't care for any graffiti, and it's all the same shit to them. I can understand it, as 99% of graffiti is just the worst form of territorial marking, pissing on a wall would be better in most cases. Then every now and again, you get someone who has clearly put a lot of time and effort into perfecting their form. Whether you like the work or not, I think it deserves some respect.

I find the debate on whether it's right for graffiti writers to force people to see their work somewhat stillborn. As humans we externalise constantly. The world is covered in imagery. I simply don't believe that ownership of the land, the building, the vehicle, should equate to ability to pollute the visual environment, especially as that is unequally applied, anyone with a bit of cash can get ad space, but you have to get planning permission to change the exterior of your own house. The space in Piccadilly Circus may belong to big corporations, but millions of people have to walk past that eyesore each week. There's just so much stuff that deserves more exposure, whatever your particular tastes.

5th Feb 2007, 10:28

Dhamaka says:

I like and am fascinated by good graff, but think it very strange when graffiti artists or stencil artists complain about their work being copied

5th Feb 2007, 11:03

afternoon says:

Pertinent to this conversation: Delete! - Delettering the public space. A series of images of shopping areas with all the text-bearing panels covered over. See how much yellow there is!

Delettered!