Bansky rat, Hoxton; sadly now gone |
Banksy
was on the charge in New York last month, with the aim of creating a new art
work every day – although it didn’t start well, with the first one painted over
within 24 hours.
But
it provoked the usual sort of outbursts from some on news websites, calling for
that city’s “finest” to arrest and deport Banksy (if they could find him) and
then have him scrub any of his works off walls in the UK.
Goodness:
how tedious some people can be.
You
might not like street art, but it’s not the same as daubing ‘I woz ere’ on the
local bus shelter. And neither are we talking about people stenciling something
on the outside of St Paul’s.
In
some areas, it brightens up rather drab and tatty surroundings. And it has the
added economic advantage of being an increasing draw for visitors who want both
to look and photograph.
Not
that the objectors are just daft individuals trying to out conservative each
other on a website.
ROA rabbit, Hackney Road |
Two
years ago, Hackney council decided that it would tell the owners of a building
on Hackney Road to get rid of a piece of artwork from the side.
This
was a rabbit by Belgian street artist ROA, who creates almost Düreresque
pieces, and it was done with permission. He’s done a rat further down what is,
in essence, a not very picturesque street, so such works help to give the area a welcome lift.
I
actually emailed the council telling them to sort their priorities out – I like
to think that that effort was influential, because the rabbit is still there,
lighting up a street that is otherwise pretty dire on the eye.
In
an interesting contrast to this particularly democratic art form, I’ve noticed
in the last day or so that my Facebook timeline now getting spammed by Saatchi,
which wants me to “invest in art”.
It
amounts to them having decided what artists to promote, telling you that
there’s a chance that these artists’ work might sell for lots of cash sometime
in the future and wouldn’t that be a good investment?
Peeblitz; Blair – war criminal. Now painted over |
It’s
possibly a fairly good career move for the artists concerned, but it’s also
difficult to budge the feeling that the prime motive of Saatchi isn’t one of
promoting good art or actually convincing people to enjoy art more.
This
is far more about Saatchi making money.
Of
course, in the past, artists were at the mercy of patrons.
The
19th can 20th centuries saw the growth in importance of galleries and agents,
and also of individual collectors who wielded influence – for instance, Leo and
Gertrude Stein in Paris in the early 20th century.
But
if we then return to street art, we can see that people can enjoy it and share
it (it’s easy enough to buy Banksy prints for instance, or to print up your own
photos), without some vast outlay.
Art
sometimes seems to suffer from an idea of stuffiness and, of course, cost.
It’s
worth noting that many of the UK’s major galleries are generally free, except
for specific and temporary exhibitions.
This
applies at such national institutions as the National Gallery and the Tate
Modern, both in London, but also at plenty of regional galleries too.
But
appreciating street art is not incompatible with admiring Rembrandt or van Gogh
– and it could be argued that, as fine art has appeared to become more
abstracted and, therefore, more difficult to read, the likes of Bansky fill a
vacuum of artistic expression in a modern way.
Christ; crown of thorns. Brighton beach, artist unknown |
Banksy
isn’t alone in using street art to make political points – and street art as a
whole hardly invented political and satirical art: think Hoggarth for starters
(several of his works are on display in the National Gallery), but that
probably upsets some of the naysayers, since the politics generally displayed
in street art are hardly conservative or pastoral in nature – see the picture
of Peeblitz’s Tony Blair stencil, taken on Hackney Road in 2007 and sadly
painted over fairly soon after.
Although there are moments when those who are conservative about street art in general change their tune if it suits them.
My parents, for instance, thought that the Peeblitz/Blair piece was wonderful – and there was a companion piece featuring his fellow war-monger, George W Bush.
Although there are moments when those who are conservative about street art in general change their tune if it suits them.
My parents, for instance, thought that the Peeblitz/Blair piece was wonderful – and there was a companion piece featuring his fellow war-monger, George W Bush.
The
inventiveness and quality of some street art is excellent. And to pretend
otherwise is frankly churlish.
Mind,
the entire New York outing included a stall set up in Central park selling
original Bansky canvases for under £40.
Now
that, Saatchis, is an investment. And so too are my Barry Blends – except that I have bought them for no other reason than pleasure and to lift my life on a daily basis.
And I would suggest that Banksy has far more in common, in terms of a philosophy of art as for everyone, with the likes of Matisse, who very much believed in art being for everyone, than do the Saatchis.
And I would suggest that Banksy has far more in common, in terms of a philosophy of art as for everyone, with the likes of Matisse, who very much believed in art being for everyone, than do the Saatchis.
And that, my friends, is art.
No comments:
Post a Comment