Friday, May 18, 2012

was reading the Vandalog art blog advertising a "street art" fair in London. makes me sort of crazy when I read things like "regardless of the level of talent involved in the act of graffiti the action itself is a pure form of artistic expression." So left a comment...

yeah, but I think it's tough with graffiti. this is all just my opinion, but if you were bringing people together to show their art, like paintings and stuff they did at home, it'd be a different thing than bringing people to one section of a city where you led an "insurgency" and put up a bunch of art that's basically been sprayed on a surface owned by someone else. I don't get that whole spectacle of it. I live in Prague. The city is full of graffiti. A house, a garage, whatever, is freshly painted and it doesn't take long before someone comes along and tags it. is that supposed to bring people together? does that "create a positive environment for creativity and give back to the public"? i don't know guys. art is everything. it's about sharing and communicating what you feel that might be like what other people feel. graffiti bums me out because they same way you don't want adverts and stuff imposed on you, you are imposing your art on people. most people don't care about your art, my art, or anyone's art. i don't get it. just share with like-minded people, screw the rest.

1 comment:

  1. Let's make the assumption that art allows for freedon of expression. But when does an artist's freedom to express intrude on the freedom of another, even the freedom of a person to own a building, a wall, a walk and want to to look the way they want, to express what they want? I agree with Materurbium that the moment you "impose" or attempt to impost your art on people who don't care about it, someone's freedom is compromised.