I’ve always had an interest in good graffiti. I can’t stand the stuff where people are just writing signatures and dumb slogans on any open wall, but I do like it when people try to make a point. I’ve taken lots of pictures graffiti all over Asia and Europe, but I’ve never thought much about the artists themselves. Moreover, I’d be interested in learning about the different styles and trends in graffiti.
Recently, I bought Banksy’s Wall and Piece and Shepard Fairey’s Obey. Now, I’d just like recommendations about good websites, documentaries (haven’t yet seen Exit Through the Gift Shop), books, etc. to keep up with this.
Thanks, Oakminster, for your input, but that doesn’t really answer my question. For the sake of the thread, we’ll say that whether its legal or illegal, it’s still art. Therefore, the people doing it can be called artists.
Otherwise, we’re getting into great debate territory.
But they are not. It is not art if it is not your substrate. It is vandalism. Sorry for the disagreement, but this is a big sticky point for me and a lot of people.
It’s not art. It’s vandalism and trespassing. Nothing more. Bigging it up into something else is just an effort to take away from the criminality of it. Further, praising the criminals “style” will just encourage more of it.
Again, this is not Great Debate. There is a lot of interesting stuff to talk about as to the value, nature, or being of “art” in a legal context, but that is not the conversation being had here. I have serious qualms about a lot of what these people do. Plenty of good art has been made in an illegal fashion, and plenty of bad art has been created within the limits of the law.
Trust me, I sympathize with you. I have seen a lot of stuff (even in the books that I mentioned above) that makes me furious, but we are not talking about that here. You cannot tell me that art that is made illegally is not art and that those who do it are not artists. It reminds me of when my wife worked for a museum in Paris that put on a fantastic exhibit that was sponsored by a skin care company and people were outraged that so-called “artists” would sell out like that.
If it is a sticking point for you, I understand (let me stress, I UNDERSTAND, you have a valid point), but you don’t have to answer my question.
For the purposes of this thread, street artists are artists, no matter the legality of their actions.
That’s like saying for purposes of this thread, the sun rises in the West. It just ain’t so. “Illegal Art” is created by criminals. They may be talented criminals, but they are still criminals.
You are going to have a tough go of this trying to call it “art”. We also understand your interest in the stylings, but to call it art really grates on people.
No it’s not. It’s just a belief that things aren’t always black and white. Things can be profound, or at least thought provoking, and still be illegal. However, I think the vast majority of graffiti/street art is mindless, crass, and mundane. That doesn’t mean it all is. In general, I find most art to be that way. There always only a few people who stand out.
It’s not always illegal either. Some cities have designated graffiti areas.
Moreover, some graffiti even leaves places cleaner than they were found.
If I spray paint GITFIDDLE IS A DUMMY across your house, are you going to call it art? I could from across the street, but you might have a different opinion. You would call it criminal vandalism.
I actually wouldn’t be thinking about art. I would be wondering why someone feels so passionate about me being a dummy that he would scrawl it across the wall of my house.
You’re missing my point. I’m not questioning the legality of most graffiti. It is almost always vandalism. What I’m saying is that that doesn’t make it not art.
I have spent LOTS of time in art museums around the world, and there are loads of stuff in these buildings that I do not consider worthy of being called art. Just because I don’t find Duchamp’s vandalizing of a urinal worthy of being in the Pompidou, I don’t go around telling people that they aren’t allowed to consider it art.
If the cops caught Banksy, Fairey, or any other person destroying property, then they’re getting what they deserve under the law. That sentiment is completely detached from my appreciation for some of the stuff they do.
The “sticking point” for me is that you’re telling me what I am and am not allowed to call art based on where someone does it. It’s like saying that a busker playing a beautiful song in a place where busking is prohibited is not actually a talented musician because it’s simply illegal to do it where he’s doing it. I don’t hold the same view.
I like Banksy and I am dying to see the movie. I heard it is like a mockumentary on some level…
James Top because I love how he is good at multiple styles, including tagging, which I think is an important aspect of graffiti. Also, I dug a lot of the pro black themes…the power to the people theme.
Jean Michael Basquiat; because I had to stretch hard to appreciate him, but I do appreciate him now, and can’t remember how I ever missed his genius before.
My husband’s neice’s boyfriend. Julio the Jesus. A complete unknown from a small city in upstate NY who literally takes his life in his hands to do some of the awesome work he does, but he is really good.