NationStates Jolt Archive

I am a huge fan of 'guerrilla art', including guerrilla performances...that is to say, unsanctioned, spontanous art. I think it's facinating, the intent, the message, and the response. Take for example this little stunt (http://www.maniacworld.com/frozen-in-grand-central-station.html), and imagine what your reaction would be to something similar.

What do you think about this sort of thing? From what is commonly referred to as 'graffitti (http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/Graffiti1.jpg)' to more complex (http://www.redjellyfish.com/images/STREET%20ART%2011.jpg) or interesting (http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2006/07/taipai.jpg) pieces, and on to spontaneous street plays...does any of it tickle your fancy, piss you off or otherwise? What is your opinion, and do you have any guerrilla art to share?

i love gorilla art!

http://www.koko.org/world/images/dinosaur.jpg (http://www.koko.org/world/art.html)

I love Banksy

http://www.banksy.co.uk/

http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/landscapes/pissingguard.jpg

I am a huge fan of 'guerrilla art', including guerrilla performances...that is to say, unsanctioned, spontanous art. I think it's facinating, the intent, the message, and the response. Take for example this little stunt (http://www.maniacworld.com/frozen-in-grand-central-station.html), and imagine what your reaction would be to something similar.

What do you think about this sort of thing? From what is commonly referred to as 'graffitti (http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/Graffiti1.jpg)' to more complex (http://www.redjellyfish.com/images/STREET%20ART%2011.jpg) or interesting (http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2006/07/taipai.jpg) pieces, and on to spontaneous street plays...does any of it tickle your fancy, piss you off or otherwise? What is your opinion, and do you have any guerrilla art to share?I dislike certain forms, though I doubt they can be considered guerrilla art. Graffiti, for instance, when used on trains and public transportation in Germany is often well planned and organized. It's only vandalism in my mind.

Group spontaneity renews my faith in humanity. *nod*

You know, it really does. It gives me the sense that there are still people out there who are not so terrified to step outside the norm, and willing to look a bit silly in order to 'wake' people up. As weird as it can be to see someone doing something unusual, that bit of discomfort is good, it shakes you out of your mundane routine. I think that's what I like the most about guerilla art...you don't set up a specific time to go view it...you simply go about your regular day and come across little wonders.

Group spontaneity renews my faith in humanity. *nod*

I dislike certain forms, though I doubt they can be considered guerrilla art. Graffiti, for instance, when used on trains and public transportation in Germany is often well planned and organized. It's only vandalism in my mind.

So when does it cross the line from being vandalism, to being art? For example, in the OP I provided a link to a 'modified' public telephone. Is that vandalism, or art?

The thing is, I'm not a huge fan of traditional graffiti per se, but I can at least see when it's been done well or not. Some people like pictures of dogs playing poker, others only like impressionist paintings. What is art to me may not be art to others, and I'm willing to concede that graffiti might not spark my fancy, while causing others to salivate.

I don't find train cars to be particularly beautiful in their own right, so perhaps I don't mind a little defacement :D

Does this qualify?

http://m3.entitea.com/piles/?s=kmartban

So when does it cross the line from being vandalism, to being art? For example, in the OP I provided a link to a 'modified' public telephone. Is that vandalism, or art? Vandalism. That I think its funny and wouldn't mind it staying doesn't really change that.
The thing is, I'm not a huge fan of traditional graffiti per se, but I can at least see when it's been done well or not. Some people like pictures of dogs playing poker, others only like impressionist paintings. What is art to me may not be art to others, and I'm willing to concede that graffiti might not spark my fancy, while causing others to salivate.Whether it was well done or not is largely irrelevant, though. Where its been done is the important thing. It probably wouldn't be so much of a problem if there wasn't a massive amount of unappealing graffiti, though.
On a side note, the chalk street painting would not be vandalism, since its not a permanent defacing of the sidewalk (despite being awesome to look at).
I don't find train cars to be particularly beautiful in their own right, so perhaps I don't mind a little defacement :DIf the artist has been hired to do so by the people that own the trains, then its alright. Though I doubt scratching the windows will ever be something train companies will encourage.

Does this qualify?

http://m3.entitea.com/piles/?s=kmartban

Hahahahahaaa....well well, once again, where is the line drawn? Does art have to have a purpose? I sort of believe that there should be some point to it, some reason behind it, not just random acts of weirdness. Having said that, well I can't really decide if this is art or not, not knowing if the man was trying to convey some sort of message or not, or if he was just bored :D

http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/landscapes/windowlovers.jpg


http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/landscapes/cones-sinking.jpg

http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/landscapes/londonphonebox.jpg

oh you might like this one from Banksy
I like that he takes risks with his work...I like the amount of detail and effort that goes into his outdoor work, knowing full well it could be painted over or destroyed. I like his anti-consumerism, and his skill.

I prefer gorilla art

oh you might like this one from Banksy
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5335400.stm

A life-size replica of a Guantanamo Bay detainee has been placed in Disneyland by "guerrilla artist" Banksy.

The hooded figure was placed inside the Big Thunder Mountain Railroad ride at the California theme park last weekend.

It is understood to have remained in place for 90 minutes before the ride was closed down and the figure removed.

A spokeswoman for Banksy said the stunt was intended to highlight the plight of terror suspects at the controversial detention centre in Cuba.

http://www.gluemeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/banksy_disneyland.jpg

This had to be LG

You have to admit it was good.

Vandalism. That I think its funny and wouldn't mind it staying doesn't really change that. Fair enough, though I suppose that being vandalism doesn't necessarily mean it isn't art. Sort of a false dichotomy, sorry.
Whether it was well done or not is largely irrelevant, though. Where its been done is the important thing. It probably wouldn't be so much of a problem if there wasn't a massive amount of unappealing graffiti, though. It does tend to be a bit repetitious, especially when people just tag their names.
On a side note, the chalk street painting would not be vandalism, since its not a permanent defacing of the sidewalk (despite being awesome to look at). I don't think permanence is a good way to define what is vandalism and what is not. You can paint over spray paint on the side of a building...it isn't permanent.
If the artist has been hired to do so by the people that own the trains, then its alright. Though I doubt scratching the windows will ever be something train companies will encourage.
I shouldn't have phrased it as an art or vandalism duality...

Should art only be carried on in sanctioned forms, and in sanctioned places?

I prefer gorilla art

Joke already made :P

Joke already made :P

what joke?

And, may I add, bite me.

I love Banksy
[/IMG]

Me too! I got a big book of his for Christmas, 'twas a great present. Strange that we are still uncertain about who he actually is.

Does this qualify?

http://m3.entitea.com/piles/?s=kmartban


This had to be LG

Fair enough, though I suppose that being vandalism doesn't necessarily mean it isn't art. Sort of a false dichotomy, sorry.And the art factor won't make it any less vandalism. It's the vandalism that makes it wrong.
It does tend to be a bit repetitious, especially when people just tag their names.Depends. There are some nicely done fists that get repeated along the tracks that I head into Berlin on.
I don't think permanence is a good way to define what is vandalism and what is not. You can paint over spray paint on the side of a building...it isn't permanent. Wrong. A chalk painting is not permanent, since it will wash away with the next rain. A spray painting is permanent, because it must either be cleaned with extensive effort or painted over, both of which rarely if ever cost the "artist" anything.

I shouldn't have phrased it as an art or vandalism duality...

Should art only be carried on in sanctioned forms, and in sanctioned places?It depends. Permanent art certainly should have less freedoms than impermanent art on account of the defacing quality it has on property. I also don't like using my personal preference as a means to judge whether spraypainted art should be preserved or not, because it's subjective. What would matter is whether the owner of what is being "vandalized" consents to a particular piece, regardless of how cool it looks.

who is LG?

Me too! I got a big book of his for Christmas, 'twas a great present. Strange that we are still uncertain about who he actually is.

OH I didn't even know about the book. I read some reviews and am now thinking about getting it. Is the image quality poor like some reviewers said?

You have to admit it was good.


I especially liked the part with the tomato sauce.

who is LG?


Lunatic Goofballs.

Stick around - you'll understand in time

This had to be LG

A man has to do something to occupy his time while the wife is trying on shoes. :)

Edit: While that wasn't me, I do admit that I went down that list going, "did it....did it.... gotta try that....did it...did it..."

I think Guerrilla Art is great when done right, gains some positive reaction or inspires change in someone.

Across from my flat someone has written on a wall:

"This is a public space. Time to decorate." And someone has drawn a flower next to it. I just hope more people add to it.

who is LG?

I seem to have developed a bit of a reputation around here for odd behavior.

You duct-tape one person naked to a toilet and you're marked for life. :(

...

Okay, there might have been a couple other incidents too. :p

Does this qualify?

http://m3.entitea.com/piles/?s=kmartban

Wow, that's hilarious.

I am a huge fan of 'guerrilla art', including guerrilla performances...that is to say, unsanctioned, spontanous art. I think it's facinating, the intent, the message, and the response. Take for example this little stunt (http://www.maniacworld.com/frozen-in-grand-central-station.html), and imagine what your reaction would be to something similar.

Really really nice. I wish people would do that kind of stuff more. Some graffiti is nice too although it might be better if they didn't do it on private property.


Guerrilla gardening (http://www.guerrillagardening.org/) can be nice too.

I seem to have developed a bit of a reputation around here for odd behavior.

You duct-tape one person naked to a toilet and you're marked for life. :(

...

Okay, there might have been a couple other incidents too. :p

You're not odd....just different....in a good way. :p

Guerrilla gardening (http://www.guerrillagardening.org/) can be nice too.

Interesting...I'd love to see an abandoned cart 'gardened', or some other symbol of urban decay lovelied up (http://www.21stcenturyhustle.com/2007/06/is-graffiti-dead.html) in this fashion.

Or a little urban decay garden in a posh neighbourhood...you know, diaper trees or something.

Interesting...I'd love to see an abandoned cart 'gardened', or some other symbol of urban decay lovelied up in this fashion.

Or a little urban decay garden in a posh neighbourhood...you know, diaper trees or something.

I like it too. Some parts of the city would look so much better with some trees or flowers. It could help to cool the city too. I don't get why there is so little green in most cities.

I like it too. Some parts of the city would look so much better with some trees or flowers. It could help to cool the city too. I don't get why there is so little green in most cities.Because its currently Winter. :p

Because its currently Winter. :p
Yeah, cuz 'evergreen' is just a euphemism.

Gorilla art...



http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/6269/gorillaartto6.png (http://imageshack.us)

I prefer gorilla artGorilla art...


hi and welcome to the second post in the thread

I like it if its well done, and not too vulgar. For instance, I don't mind seeing some of the stuff posted here. That looks good, and is not offensive. But I would be ticked if someone spray painted a penis on the side of a building or something.

I like it if its well done, and not too vulgar. For instance, I don't mind seeing some of the stuff posted here. That looks good, and is not offensive. But I would be ticked if someone spray painted a penis on the side of a building or something.

Banksy takes that spray painted penis and makes a point

http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/landscapes/nobartiste2.jpg

I think it's quite cool, loved the video you posted on the flashmob in New York. Julian Beever and Banksy do some interesting stuff, great artwork too.

Here's a video of a flashmob in Cambridge - a pokewar:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5925339608073387165

:)

i like graffiti, even the shitty and obscene stuff is better than bare concrete.

I'm a fan of the old fashioned flash dance...once did one to Thriller down in Quincy Market.

We've also had spontaneous parties on Boston's subway (nicknamed the T...get it? Boston T party?

...I hate you all)

*snip

It irritates me that people use public property as a canvas. It is egotistical; they assume that we all want to look at their work, which we do not. If they do not assume that, then they are merely being moon-calves for subjecting us to that which we dislike against our will on an object paid for by our money.

I am a huge fan of 'guerrilla art', including guerrilla performances...that is to say, unsanctioned, spontanous art. I think it's facinating, the intent, the message, and the response. Take for example this little stunt (http://www.maniacworld.com/frozen-in-grand-central-station.html), and imagine what your reaction would be to something similar.

What do you think about this sort of thing? From what is commonly referred to as 'graffitti (http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/Graffiti1.jpg)' to more complex (http://www.redjellyfish.com/images/STREET%20ART%2011.jpg) or interesting (http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2006/07/taipai.jpg) pieces, and on to spontaneous street plays...does any of it tickle your fancy, piss you off or otherwise? What is your opinion, and do you have any guerrilla art to share?

Wow, that thing at the station was very cool. :):cool:

Yeah, cuz 'evergreen' is just a euphemism.The trees in German cities aren't considered evergreens, though =P

Does this qualify?

http://m3.entitea.com/piles/?s=kmartban
If it's not LG, Mrs. LG no doubt has a collection of similar letters from a variety of places. Or shortly will now that LG knows of these things.
Interesting...I'd love to see an abandoned cart 'gardened', or some other symbol of urban decay lovelied up (http://www.21stcenturyhustle.com/2007/06/is-graffiti-dead.html) in this fashion.

Or a little urban decay garden in a posh neighbourhood...you know, diaper trees or something.

Very cool.

If it's not LG, Mrs. LG no doubt has a collection of similar letters from a variety of places. Or shortly will now that LG knows of these things.

Surprisingly few letters, actually. Perhaps it's because I tend to spread such incidents out among more retail outlets and restaurants over a larger period of time. The chap in that k-mart instance seemed to be rather adamant about causing all his mayhem in one place. I'm not so focused.

I was recently asked not to return by a local Taco Bell for encouraging my son to throw food.

I also had a close encounter with a manager at a Wal-mart for walking up to the register with my purchases and a jockstrap on my head. I had the package and was prepared to buy it. I just wanted to wear it out. You can wear shoes out of the store, why not a jockstrap? Apparently Wal-mart doesn't let you wear their shoes out of the store anymore either which was quite embarrassing for me. *nod*

I am a huge fan of 'guerrilla art', including guerrilla performances...that is to say, unsanctioned, spontanous art. I think it's facinating, the intent, the message, and the response. Take for example this little stunt (http://www.maniacworld.com/frozen-in-grand-central-station.html), and imagine what your reaction would be to something similar.

What do you think about this sort of thing? From what is commonly referred to as 'graffitti (http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/Graffiti1.jpg)' to more complex (http://www.redjellyfish.com/images/STREET%20ART%2011.jpg) or interesting (http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2006/07/taipai.jpg) pieces, and on to spontaneous street plays...does any of it tickle your fancy, piss you off or otherwise? What is your opinion, and do you have any guerrilla art to share?

Good question. IMHO, it's a toughy. Guerrilla theater, no probs! Flash mobs? Right on! Hacking my web page and replacing it all with "Daistallia SUCKS!" is right out.

A thought re grafitiests: do it in a manner that doesn't perminantly damage the local. "I won't come to your home and spray paint something objectionable to you on your walls if you don't do mine" seems reasonable to me...

Unless you think it's OK if I, say to reach for an extremely evil example that I know will be a nasty one for you, go out to Pine Ridge Res. and spray-paint pictures depicting the 1890 massacre on various landmarks in an artistic but offensively supportive fashion.

(My apologies for doing so, I hope you understand the purpose and will respond in the spirit intended...)

i love gorilla art!

http://www.koko.org/world/images/dinosaur.jpg (http://www.koko.org/world/art.html)

Indeed. Outsider art at it's most furthest reaches...

OH I didn't even know about the book. I read some reviews and am now thinking about getting it. Is the image quality poor like some reviewers said?

Not at all. Btw, the book I'm referring to is Wall and Piece, in case there is any confusion.

Such stuff is fine provided it doesn't get in the way of people who actually have things to do. Boxing that guy's cart (or whatever) in by standing still and preventing him from going anywhere was not cool, though.

Interesting...I'd love to see an abandoned cart 'gardened', or some other symbol of urban decay lovelied up (http://www.21stcenturyhustle.com/2007/06/is-graffiti-dead.html) in this fashion.

Or a little urban decay garden in a posh neighbourhood...you know, diaper trees or something.
We used to have the Heidelberg Project (http://www.urban75.com/Mag/heidel.html)

Any case of flash mobbing puts a big smile on my face.

Like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PupR5V9aE2s), this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7aI6zhbVtM&feature=related) or this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbyo48Hj39Y&feature=related).

People are ace! :)

Wow, throw a bunch of random crap together and call it art.

I'm in the wrong business.

this little stunt (http://www.maniacworld.com/frozen-in-grand-central-station.html)

Very, very cool. Very, very creative. I have a lot of respect for the degree of coordination that was required to pull that off right.

graffitti (http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/Graffiti1.jpg)

Depending on the circumstances under which it was created, I like it more or less. All the same, I have a lot of respect for the artist who did that. It looks like a professional airbrush job, and if it was done under the appropriate conditions, I think it would be a damn shame if it wasn't near some train tracks or a popular street.

complex (http://www.redjellyfish.com/images/STREET%20ART%2011.jpg)

I daresay that, in my opinion, there is a significant difference between guerrilla art, and public art. I would consider this a more transient form of public art, and a very cool type of art as well.

interesting (http://www.woostercollective.com/images/2006/07/taipai.jpg) pieces, and on to spontaneous street plays...does any of it tickle your fancy, piss you off or otherwise? What is your opinion, and do you have any guerrilla art to share?

I'd think it's a bit clever, but it doesn't represent a significant degree of skill or creativity. I also wouldn't like that it was done without the permission of the owner of the building onto which the phone is attached. It relies too much on the innate human ability to recognize patterns, than with any skill or creativity of the artist. The second one, for instance, took a serious investment of time and effort, as well as a lot of practice and skill. This, didn't. I wouldn't be pissed off to see this done, but I might jack the kid up against the wall and give him a good scare. You can see the beginnings of a good brain there, and if it were focused, they could do some good for society.

I think it's quite cool, loved the video you posted on the flashmob in New York. Julian Beever and Banksy do some interesting stuff, great artwork too.

Here's a video of a flashmob in Cambridge - a pokewar:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5925339608073387165

:)
Awesome! Thanks for the link! And thank you for letting me know what this sort of thing is called...looking up Flash Mob (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_mob) now, and seeing some very interesting things!

Ahhh...I remember this from a while back, a silent disco...interesting...

I'm a fan of the old fashioned flash dance...once did one to Thriller down in Quincy Market.

We've also had spontaneous parties on Boston's subway (nicknamed the T...get it? Boston T party?

...I hate you all)

Fantastic:D It fills me with a weird sense of hope when I see people willing to be silly in public.

It irritates me that people use public property as a canvas. It is egotistical; they assume that we all want to look at their work, which we do not. If they do not assume that, then they are merely being moon-calves for subjecting us to that which we dislike against our will on an object paid for by our money.

I don't want to look at Starbucks signs or WalMart adverts everywhere I turn. But since I don't have the financial clout to compete, my opinion is unimportant. We are forced to view many things without our explicit consent, simply because the person producing said material happens to have the money to do it. I do not import any sense of superiority or inherent rightness into this that would automatically lessen the value of unpaid advertising :P

Unless you think it's OK if I, say to reach for an extremely evil example that I know will be a nasty one for you, go out to Pine Ridge Res. and spray-paint pictures depicting the 1890 massacre on various landmarks in an artistic but offensively supportive fashion.

(My apologies for doing so, I hope you understand the purpose and will respond in the spirit intended...)

Nice :D

Well that's interesting isn't it? Competing interests. On one hand, we have the interests of the property owner, who will have to either put up with the altered state of his or her property, or pay to clean up the mess. You have the interest of the artist who is trying to express something to a wide audience, with the premise that the location of the expression is itself integral to that expression (I mean, take Banksey's stuff out of context and it just loses something essential). You have the interests of the public at large...either wanting to see this sort of thing or not. Because we live in a society that tends to value property above people, and I mean that not necessarily in a derogatory sense though I'm sure you know my views on the subject...the balancing of interests are generally going to weigh the interests of property owners over non-property owners.

What interests me most about guerrilla art, and in that category I include any sort of 'public space reclamation', is the idea that under the property regime paradigm, the people as a whole should be valued as property owners above property owners as individuals.

I'm not exactly sure where the balance should be mind you...I sure as hell wouldn't want my house 'lovelied up' by some random emerging 'artist'. I sympathise with property owners who are forced to incur the expense involved in cleaning up graffitti etc. I know I am biased against larger corporate interests, but recognise that in many cases, it is not the rich that are being discomfited by these acts of vandalism, but rather much smaller business men and women who are not faceless, evil, corporate whores bent on world domination.

Yet, if this sort of art were to completely take place within sanctioned boundaries...certain alleyways designated for the use of street artists etc, then the message would be lost. You can't clean up art and expect it to say what it's meant to say...and I think a lot of guerrilla artists would be horrified to have their work touted and accepted on a wide level.

I don't have an answer...but I'm interested in the process.

in an artistic but offensively supportive fashion.

Ermm... Ninja mod edit? (Not complaining that it was done, but I would have appreciateds it A) have been acknowledged as such and B) and have been done so in a manner that reflected the original wording. "Offensively supportive" =/= the example I gave. Unless one thinks that a message advocating genocide is supportive of the targeted populace...

Nice :D

Well that's interesting isn't it? Competing interests. On one hand, we have the interests of the property owner, who will have to either put up with the altered state of his or her property, or pay to clean up the mess. You have the interest of the artist who is trying to express something to a wide audience, with the premise that the location of the expression is itself integral to that expression (I mean, take Banksey's stuff out of context and it just loses something essential). You have the interests of the public at large...either wanting to see this sort of thing or not. Because we live in a society that tends to value property above people, and I mean that not necessarily in a derogatory sense though I'm sure you know my views on the subject...the balancing of interests are generally going to weigh the interests of property owners over non-property owners.

What interests me most about guerrilla art, and in that category I include any sort of 'public space reclamation', is the idea that under the property regime paradigm, the people as a whole should be valued as property owners above property owners as individuals.

I'm not exactly sure where the balance should be mind you...I sure as hell wouldn't want my house 'lovelied up' by some random emerging 'artist'. I sympathise with property owners who are forced to incur the expense involved in cleaning up graffitti etc. I know I am biased against larger corporate interests, but recognise that in many cases, it is not the rich that are being discomfited by these acts of vandalism, but rather much smaller business men and women who are not faceless, evil, corporate whores bent on world domination.

Yet, if this sort of art were to completely take place within sanctioned boundaries...certain alleyways designated for the use of street artists etc, then the message would be lost. You can't clean up art and expect it to say what it's meant to say...and I think a lot of guerrilla artists would be horrified to have their work touted and accepted on a wide level.

I don't have an answer...but I'm interested in the process.

The best response I can think of at the moment is one of my favorite Zen parables.

A group of meditators are sitting their daily meditation. A strong wind whips up and the prtayer flags start snapping in the wind. The first student comments that the flags are moving. The second says "no, it's the wind that's moving." The teacher says "Ah, mind is moving..."

I don't really see much disagreement with you here. Just a question of where one draws the line. :)

Have a look at these for a different type of Art:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcR7U2tuNoY - simply beautiful

They're called kinetic sculptures and make us of natural earth force to do whatever they do.

This one, for example, is on Pendle Hill, where they put witches on trail - the wind vibrates the pipes to create a weird wailing noise:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B0hGyKV9qs - correct link

Incidentally, here's (http://youtube.com/watch?v=PupR5V9aE2s) another example of what we saw in the first link. Love it.