Slashdot Mirror
Reverse Graffiti
glawrie writes "UK Graffiti artist 'Moose' thought he had come up with a perfect socially friendly approach to his art - to trade paints for cleaning fluid. An article in the UK's Independent Newspaper describes how he has created graffiti by taking '... any dirty inner-city wall or pavement, place a template over it, and scrub the concrete clean, revealing an image as sharp as any spray paint which fades with time.' Moose was commissioned by a subsidiary of drinks manufacturer Diageo to create some 'clean' graffiti in Leeds to promote their vodka brand Smirnoff to local students. However, this work was subsequently condemned by Gerry Harper, a Leeds councillor, as 'sheer vandalism'. With wonderful irony, the council demanded that the artist 'clean-up' the graffiti that appeared in one of the city's gloomiest underpasses. Maybe all those senseless vandals out there will now think twice in future before scrawling 'Clean Me' on the back of vehicles overdue for a wash... But perhaps the state is now going too far - surely it is only a matter of time before rainfall is similarly targetted by the good guys."
Brings new meaning to "Clean up your act!"
His parents must be regretting that wording now.
Disconnect and self-destruct, one bullet at a time.
In my town (Halifax, Canada) we have a few walls which are owned by local companies which have been 'donated' to local grafitti artists. You can go down there any time and see a lighted wall of absolutely amazing artwork, and it changes almost every day.
I don't see what the big problem is.. just give the artists enough places to paint and the problem will reduce if not disappear. What's the problem with that?
Did he have a mobile phone in his back pocket when he did this? Am I missing the part that relates to nerds?
Why does the article present this as some sort of travesty? It is what it is, and that is unlawful advertising on public space. To get rid of it would require public money to clean the rest of the overpass. It's graffiti, period. Why can't people just leave things alone, is it that hard to resist 'making your mark?'
I mean come on, is this for real? We're supposed to feel sorry for this guy and Smirnoff? Gimme a break, they crossed the line and should be responsible.
It's funny, until you realize he's not doing grafitti, he's doing commercials.
What do they mean by clean up?
And "Smirnoff has removed the offending work - not because of the legality of the threat but by "its own volition" it said." but how did he remove it?
Go dump more dirt on the place, or clean the rest up?
Why do some people think that they have the right to deface property they don't own in any way?
Some buildings benefit from a hundred years of "patina", and marring that affects their value.
Not only that, but it reduces the presentability of the neighborhood, reducing property values for everyone.
And it's just selfish, stupid, and ugly.
I just hope that anyone about to defend this consider how much you hate what you think of as unwanted commercial messages all over the place. Besides pop-up blockers, many /. readers block banner ads and the like as well.
It's not their place to be placing these messages. It's not a matter of betterment of public spaces, that's just a distraction from the fact that these are unwanted commercial messages placed where the advertiser wants them.
-PM
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
I was having a look around to see if there were any photos of this and found instead references to them doing this back in Oct 2003.
e ting-examples.shtml#oct2003
http://www.bizhelp24.com/marketing/guerrilla-mark
(\(\
(^.^)
(")")
*This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread
But perhaps the state is now going too far - surely it is only a matter of time before rainfall is similarly targetted by the good guys.
Sorry, but I agree that "clean graffiti" is still graffiti. No, this is not like the rain. If you don't believe me, then consider this situation: I make some "clean graffiti" in the shape of a swastika or making racial slurs. Are you offended, or are you happy that I'm cleaning a few selected parts of a gaffiti-covered wall? Personally, I would be offended if someone did this. So how do you these type of messages if you don't acknowledge that "clean graffiti" really is an unauthorized message (graffiti).
Maybe all those senseless vandals out there will now think twice in future before scrawling 'Clean Me' on the back of vehicles overdue for a wash...
I did that to the hood of my dad's old '63 Pontiac, which hadn't been washed in ages. Being a clever grrl, I used a rag dipped in Turtle Wax, so as not to be destructive.
Unfortunately, I didn't realize that the Turtle Wax would actually remove the dull surface of the paint, leaving the car forevermore to bear a (slightly bright) sign, quite legible from above, that read, "Wash me!"
My dad didn't kill me, obviously, nor did he take the hint. I guess I knew it was a forlorn hope, when he epoxied a chunk of plywood to replace the rusted-out floor in the front passenger seat.
He sure got his money's worth out of that car, though.
Lemon curry?
Oddly, authorities never cleaned it up. It's like it's become an unofficial but implicitly sanctioned public forum.
But perhaps the state is now going too far
I'm sorry, but did I miss a meeting? Is this now an obligatory inclusion in all articles? Must all articles now declare the state is going too far, our rights are trounced, or privacy is at dire risk?!?
I won't even attempt to argue the rights of property owners, the state's responsiblity to protect property, social mores, etc...
davejenkins.com |
There are two kinds of graffiti. I'll call the first one 'artcrime' since I'm not sure what other people call it. The second is tagging.
Artcrime is where someone makes an effort to do something that is interesting or beautiful, or at least puts some love into the work. It may or may not be a tag. If it isn't a tag, then the artist would be fine with using a designated wall like this.
Taggers, on the other hand, just like to put their name on shit for whatever reason - territory marking or some sort of rush that comes from vandalizing things. These folks are not going to bother with a designated wall because using one of those entirely defeats the purpose of the graffiti for them.
So I guess it's not a big problem if the only folks that bother you are the artists. Me, I'm the other way around - I normally don't mind graffiti that's had some love put into it because there was love put into it, whereas tagging is the equivalent of making it known you were somewhere by ejaculating all over the place.
I've been graffing (its an industry term) for the last 5 years. I never leave my name, so its not really a tag. However I feel that using a designated wall is useless. The point of Graffing to me, at least, is to subject (as infringe on others) the unwary to art. Putting a 3 foot Venus DeMilo on a wall in a grubby factory is a much more fufilling act than putting that same stencil on a wall thats designated for art. Two distinct demographics really.
sig? its spelled syg.
Taggers, on the other hand, just like to put their name on shit for whatever reason - territory marking or some sort of rush that comes from vandalizing things.
The description you're looking for is "pissing on fireplugs." That's all it is. Taggers are bladder-challenged dogs with spray cans.
I think it is quite clever creating a message by removing rather than adding.
Whether you perceive it as an advertisement or not seems irrelevant to me; it's brilliant to me because it's a message that doesn't actually exist. It's the lack of the existence that makes you perceive it.
So, please
"They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
No. (IANAL)
You can read about it
Overview
PREMISES WHERE DRUGS USED UNLAWFULLY (closing 'em & stuff)
HOUSING (Noise I guess)
PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES ( Truancy (parents can get taken to court for letting kids play truant)
DISPERSAL OF GROUPS ETC. (This sounds "evil", but walking to work with a gang of 20 10yrs chucking stuff at you is not fun. You can't retailate else you will be in the dock).
FIREARMS (Illegal in the UK anyway, I think it aso covers fakes)
THE ENVIRONMENT (Noise, graffiti, fly-posting, Waste and litter)
PUBLIC ORDER AND TRESPASS
HIGH HEDGES (again sounds evil, but a cause of a number of neighberly wars)
This is normal done with ASBOs (Anti-social behaviour orders), if you are a twat X number of times, you have an ASBO stapped on you (spray paint loads or something), then if you break the ASBO (they can be farily "open ended", such as going into the area your last victem lived, owning spray paint), you break that you get taken to court.
Wow, I should not post when knackered.
Actually, I rate top-quality graffiti as better art than you'll often find in galleries.
Take Banksy (check the website at http://www.banksy.co.uk/ ) - total vandalistic anti-socialism but at the same time valid social commentary, truely genius artistic vision and inspired execution.
~Cederic is a fan.
Take Banksy
"Banksy" poored tins of coloured paint all over statues outside a lovely building near where I live here in Barcelona. The council have had to spend tens of thousands of tax payers (my!) euros to clean it up.
Inspired execution? Genius artistic vision? Give me a break. The guy is an antisocial wanker.
They did that here in the UK in my town. The next step was to get all the schools to give the police photocopies of every single schoolbook that has got any sort of doodles on it. Lo and behold, almost every kid under 18 who had done grafitti had tagged all their schoolbooks and the police were able to tie most tags down to kids by name, and either give them warnings or punishments. The best bit was most actually stopped and grafitti dropped by at least 70%
Warhammer forums
Brit jargon? Isn't that called english?
Szo
Red Leader Standing By!
Another sadly misguided perception of "fundamentalist christian fanaticism". If you would rely on the source of christian beliefs (the bible - not google) you would see that yes, the Old Testament is a scarry book. It starts at the beginning of time and follows the heritage, lineage, and imperfections of God's chosen people - the Jews.
...you insensitive Clod.
The Old Testament is a historically accurate account of wars, kings, death, and life. It paints a portrait of a people who loved God, but could not adhere to His laws, and in need of a Messiah. Indeed, it would be frightful if anyone actually lived by the Old Testament, today. It calls for the sacrifice of animals as an atonement for sin - and the whole "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" thing.
Fortunately, we fundamental christian fanatics do not live by the old testament. We live by the new testament. You know, the part where God sends his son to earth to die for the foriveness of sins... At that point in history (yes, Jesus' existance is a historically verified fact) a relationship with God became available to everyone. The laws were reduced from the massive list of micromanaged rules from the Old Testament, to two commands - love the Lord your God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.
These are the beliefs that are founding fathers based the laws of this country on. They were not based on "any religion that believes in a higher power", they were based on the God of the bible.