Cycling graffiti or public art?

[shootingstar]

If you didn't understand the background of this "public art", does it look like grafitti or public art to you?

http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Amateur+artists+colour+Burrard+Bridge+bike+lane/1821941/story.html

A well-known group, Vancouver Public Space Network organized a cycling public art session at night when there was less traffic to draw washable art of friendly images to show their support for a reallocated bike lane on a road bridge. The amateur washable paint session was publicly advertised by the group. It is a group made up of all sorts of people, including artists, architects, etc. Cycling public art was to show support the bike lane initiative.

This is an important bike lane initiative which was mentioned a few wks. ago.
http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=32322

In contrast last night, some friends were telling me about a building resident who had since left their building. He graffitied parts of their building without permission. And other adjacent buildings, without anyone's permission.

What is vandalism vs. public art vs. graffiti:)

[MartianDestiny]

It's going to wash off next time it rains, so I think it's a cute way to "inaugurate" the new bike lane. If it were permanent I think I'd feel differently about it (not that I have any strong feelings since I don't live there) since it does look cluttered and unprofessional (but I suspect that was part of the point).

It's not vandalism if you have permission (the article is unclear on that point). I'd say this particular instance, even if it wasn't sanctioned, would be on shaky footing for any legal vandalism proceedings: there's no malicious intent, it washes off with water (so if someone's really unhappy, take a hose to it and it's clean in what, 30min? Bet the people that did it in the first place would wash it off if it was an issue), and I doubt it could be argued that it caused significant damage to the property (there's a dollar amount that you have to reach before it's vandalism).

IMO public art is art that's in public view. Typically with the connotation that it's sanctioned and wanted (that doesn't mean it's good, or that everyone is happy it's there, etc. I walk through parks all the time with metal "art" (done by artists) that I wouldn't mind in front of some modern building, but I just can't bring myself to like in the middle of nature, but that's my problem.). Graffiti can be public art (it's not always scrawled on back alley walls without permission) or it can be vandalism.

I'd call this Graffiti that is much more towards the public art side. I just can't imagine someone that's not already angry and unhappy with life being horribly upset by purple dinosaurs and "thank you" messages that will be gone shortly anyway.

[alpinerabbit]

What is vandalism vs. public art vs. graffiti:)

back in the 80's - Switzerland was just waking up from being a rather backwards and very conservative little place - a guy in Zurich commited the abominable act of creating art on public walls with spray cans. He was arrested, I think he even spent some time in jail.

These days, his originals are being "curated" and he does new ones:

Harald Nägeli

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/thumb/2/29/SBertalan_Harald_Naegeli_Dusseldorf_2006.JPG/200px-SBertalan_Harald_Naegeli_Dusseldorf_2006.JPG
http://www.literaturmueller.de/Images/grossebilder/Naegeli1.jpg

[salsabike]

I think quite a lot of graffiti is art; see this website---

http://www.woostercollective.com/

[Grog]

"Parusel said the group had hoped to paint the Kitsilano half of the barrier too, but ran out of paint."

Cute. :)

and: "Heavy animal presence!"

I think it's a sweet idea. I just hope there isn't too much paint on the pavement, it will be slippery when it rains.

[sfa]

I don't think it really counts as either graffiti or public art. It *looks* more like graffiti, and not even very good graffiti at that (some graffiti is gorgeous and would absolutely be considered public art if the artist had the permission of the property owner to put it up). But since it's not permanent and since it may have been done with permission, I wouldn't put it in the graffiti category.

But I also wouldn't call it public art, not by a long shot. There's nothing really artistic about it. I'd just call it public decoration, kind of along the same lines as twinkle lights and potted plants, or those fire hydrants (http://www.waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx?f=1&guid=9d20dc53-f63c-452f-8d01-ae2a434f0d4e)painted to look like people or animals.

Sarah

[shootingstar]

"Parusel said the group had hoped to paint the Kitsilano half of the barrier too, but ran out of paint."

Cute. :)


Noticed that too. :) The group is probably sensitive that visual public perception of the bike lane, barriers and the success/failure of the bike lane reallocation..will affect the City of Vancouver mayor's political credibility/public support.

I've been to some meetings organized by this group who have actually recently organized a full-fledged design competition on a professional standard that invited and had several architectural firms submit design proposals for a downtown Vancouver civic public square/commons/public meeting space. But the general public wouldn't even know that the group members did some super/slick professional work vs. this informal 'art' jam on the bridge.

This group has tenuous overlapping membership with the local cycling advocacy group. But the 2 groups have different mandates. However, it is interesting how a non-cycling advocacy group approaches cycling issues.