2008 Woodie Awards
Art Shmart: Splashes for Everyone
Nikki Sansone
Issue date: 9/27/07 Section: Arts & Features
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Art Shmart was just involved in a heated debate at 1:30 a.m. regarding the legitimacy of The Splasher. For those of you unaware of whom or what The Splasher is, you need only look at the art section of this summer's New York Times to get the story. Or you could keep reading.
The Splasher is the name given to what is presumed to be a collaborating group of individuals acting out against graffiti and public works. These individuals are guilty of - surprise! - splashing public artworks with paint and essentially ruining the pieces.
The point of these bully episodes is explicitly outlined in The Splasher's 16-page manifesto that is usually attached close to the site of the scene with a rudimentary paste made from wheat and glass. The paste, according to The Splasher, is just a vulgar and frivolous act of disrespect to the works, embodying the general sentiment subsequently vocalized in their manifesto.
The manifesto itself is an extensive work of multiple points addressing specific and nonspecific street artists among many insults.
"You truly pioneer nothing but your own decay," the manifesto claims in reference to the artists. "Your work is cheap feed for grotesque swine."
The manifesto is especially critical of those street artists who are backed by sponsorship from consumer brands such as Vans. They claim that they are hoping to "take the wind out of some people's sails."
It is, at the end of a very long night of reading, yet another lament about the merging worlds of consumer culture and art.
So what was this heated, late-night argument about, you may ask? It was as simple an argument that there could be given for the topic: Is The Splasher an absolutely pretentious jerk, or is this art?
The question of consumer culture and art is not a new one, and although reports of people systematically destroying works in protest are few and far spread, The Splasher's position on the matter is nothing groundbreaking. We at Art Shmart maintained at 1:30 a.m., in the spirit of virtuous critique, that The Splasher's actions were a valid reaction to art. Our belligerent and bumbling fool of an opponent had other thoughts on the matter, finding The Splasher pretentious.
The Splasher is the name given to what is presumed to be a collaborating group of individuals acting out against graffiti and public works. These individuals are guilty of - surprise! - splashing public artworks with paint and essentially ruining the pieces.
The point of these bully episodes is explicitly outlined in The Splasher's 16-page manifesto that is usually attached close to the site of the scene with a rudimentary paste made from wheat and glass. The paste, according to The Splasher, is just a vulgar and frivolous act of disrespect to the works, embodying the general sentiment subsequently vocalized in their manifesto.
The manifesto itself is an extensive work of multiple points addressing specific and nonspecific street artists among many insults.
"You truly pioneer nothing but your own decay," the manifesto claims in reference to the artists. "Your work is cheap feed for grotesque swine."
The manifesto is especially critical of those street artists who are backed by sponsorship from consumer brands such as Vans. They claim that they are hoping to "take the wind out of some people's sails."
It is, at the end of a very long night of reading, yet another lament about the merging worlds of consumer culture and art.
So what was this heated, late-night argument about, you may ask? It was as simple an argument that there could be given for the topic: Is The Splasher an absolutely pretentious jerk, or is this art?
The question of consumer culture and art is not a new one, and although reports of people systematically destroying works in protest are few and far spread, The Splasher's position on the matter is nothing groundbreaking. We at Art Shmart maintained at 1:30 a.m., in the spirit of virtuous critique, that The Splasher's actions were a valid reaction to art. Our belligerent and bumbling fool of an opponent had other thoughts on the matter, finding The Splasher pretentious.
Be the first to comment on this story