This is an alleged new Banksy piece in London. I liked it immediately because of it's play off of a street sign that oen could pass without noticing it. My interpretation of this is that Banksy is making a statement about the fast paced, rat race lifestyle of the city, where no stopping is allowed. The text below implies that people may only truly stop on Sundays, the semi-universal day of rest. During 8-6 on the other days, however, 5 of which of the most common work days, people must keep working relentlessly. The circle the rat is in is representative on running but getting nowhere. This reflects the fast, stressful pace of the city, where though people are always rushing, it's work asking oneself if they are truly getting anywhere by doing so. Ironically, the people who need this message most probably won't stop long enough to see it when they race by on the street.
Hana Nobel
3 comments:
This is so great, I'm so glad that you posted it! I find that my tastes lean more towards what would be classified as street art as opposed to graffiti. Why? I guess this has a lot to do with the "inside/outside" nature of graffiti, which is geared towards writers, and street art which operates more for the general public. I love when something artistic blends into the backdrop of everyday life. Noticing then becomes the task instead of just deciphering. I feel as though the city in particular is the perfect place for a style and commentary like Banksy's because the city is composite of several nooks, surfaces, opportunities.
I've noticed however that street art and graffiti differ also with how they are tolerated. "Art" is trendy and more likely to be kept if it keeps in tune with an ironic commentary even if it is provocative whereas "classic" graffiti though provocative in nature is seen as a blight. Perhaps this difference harkens back to street art's increased mass appeal over graffiti?
- Alexis Brinkman
I definitely agree with Alexis's observations about street art vs. graffiti. Simply categorizing one form of street art as "art" automatically takes away the negative connotations about its illegality and such. I think that each movement has a very separate message that is sent though the various works.
Graffiti, as we read in the graffiti manifesto, is meant to give visibility to a population of people that often feel either marginalized or even completely voiceless in the modern city. Though the direct messages inscribed in graffiti may not be meant for all to understand, the fact that people write on what is considered to be public property is a statement in and of itself.
Street art, on the other hand, conjures up more the idea of urban play than of an urban subculture. Like the photo Hanna posted, street art is a way of pointing out society's flaws in a public and often satyrical manner (like the Onion, but in the form of pictures spray painted onto buildings). It's more kitschy, and doesn't seem as exclusive as graffiti does.
Contrary to Alexis, however, I find myself more drawn to the first graffiti than to street art. I think it is much more emotionally charged and less decorative, and I think it is also more aesthetically intriguing. It's clear that when people write, they don't care if the public approves. With street art, I feel as though it's all about generating public interest and approval.
^ Naomi L-Z (I forgot to put my name on the above comment)
Post a Comment