So that article we were talking about at PN last week...I really want to write for Bostonist. Maybe I should add that to the resolutions list I still have to post for you all...
I hadn't noticed until he was commenting on the follow-up in his blog, but it was written by the guy who sits next to me in the office, an A&E producer who also does some music reviews and writes for the music blog. I find his writing kind of impenetrable, though I do admire his ambition and enormous work ethic -- he's even writing for Slate now on occasion.
Personally, I find the whole debate kind of pretentious. I think graffiti is almost never art, and the outlaw nature that defines it rarely gives it any additional cred in my estimation. The exception that proves the rule, of course, being Banksy, but his stuff makes a real commentary or satire on public space, using the location as part of the message, not just as a canvas.
The best of this, the stuff on the Israeli/Palestine barrier wall, puts this chick's random wallpaper stencils to shame. And other of his stuff works just fine in a gallery, and doesn't need any additional cred from being illegal and subversive.
Eh, I just get so tired of people with no talent giving themselves a false importance, and graffiti "artists" are some of the worst offenders.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Globe and Maggie have a Love/Hate Relationship with Street Art
Why, just a few days ago, I pontificated to the Lumberjack on why I hate graffiti and prefer street art, though I claimed that Pixnit isn't much of an artist either, more of a wallpaper designer: