The Steampunk Forum at Brass Goggles
February 19, 2019, 06:22:17 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Support BrassGoggles! Donate once or $3/mo.
 See details here.
 
   Home   Blog Help Rules Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Graffiti art  (Read 22254 times)
selectedgrub
Guest
« Reply #75 on: November 09, 2014, 07:05:55 am »


« Last Edit: February 09, 2015, 07:16:53 am by selectedgrub » Logged
Maets
Immortal
**
United States United States

Gravatar

Airship Builder


WWW
« Reply #76 on: December 21, 2014, 12:55:21 am »

Scottish Castle







See more at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/19/graffiti-castle-_n_6349386.html
Logged

jonb
Snr. Officer
****
England England



« Reply #77 on: December 21, 2014, 10:48:11 am »

A nice one by By Dome, from Germany.


Rizzi house
« Last Edit: December 21, 2014, 10:50:53 am by jonb » Logged
selectedgrub
Guest
« Reply #78 on: December 25, 2014, 08:22:59 am »

Very nice epic pieces.
Thank you both for sharing.
Logged
Maxwell Grantly
Deck Hand
*
United Kingdom United Kingdom


Author and Illustrator

@MaxwellGrantly
WWW
« Reply #79 on: December 29, 2014, 07:01:50 pm »

Many of these pictures look incredibly beautiful. Thank you for finding them and posting them here.
Logged

Vagabond GentleMan
Zeppelin Captain
*****
United States United States


Clockwork Sepia


WWW
« Reply #80 on: December 29, 2014, 07:29:47 pm »

You know, in general I like the graffiti philosophy, and have a number of graffiti artist friends...in fact, my former apprentice (now a journeyman tattoo artist) is one of them, and he's dear to me and I'm proud of him.  But a good portion of that philosophy is about beautifying that which is ugly...throwing color and shape onto thuggish steel-and-cement industrial blocks of cold grey architectural drudgery.

I have to say that I'm not a fan of what's been done to that "Scottish Castle"...I'm an American, so I know our sense of what is 'historical' is oftentimes considered fairly silly to those of y'all across the pond, but to me that building is a beautiful old historic building, and WAS a lovely and romantic image against the backdrop of steely grey Scottish skies...now it's garish, gaudy, cartoonish...icky.  Call me naiive or old-fashioned, I suppose, but it sits ill with me.  Sad

Architecture of course is an Art unto itself, but to me there's a not-too-ambiguous line between architecture designed by artistic individuals who lovingly mapped-out, engineered, and built their work on the one side, and industrially-produced, mass-produced, quickly-built, purely functional, cost-effective corporate-built work on the other.  The former group of architects oughta be respected, and their structures oughta be treated like the art it is, such that in the same way you wouldn't tag a sculpture, statue, or someone's painting, you shouldn't blithely throw your art on top of theirs, as if they hadn't lovingly labored to manifest it.

Am I splitting hairs?  Am I off-base?  Or ARE there thin red ethical lines that should be given closer scrutiny by the graffiti artist community?
« Last Edit: December 30, 2014, 01:25:41 am by Vagabond GentleMan » Logged

Well that wolf has a dimber bonebox, and he'll flash it all milky and red.  But you won't see our Red Jack's spit, nug, cuz he's pinked ya, and yer dead.
Drew P
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


« Reply #81 on: December 30, 2014, 12:16:08 am »

Agreed. The actual images are very well done,  but they have used a most unappropriate canvas.
If I was on a trip there, I feel like I would have been wasting my time. I came to see a castle in it's surroundings, not that.
Logged

Never ask 'Why?'
Always ask 'Why not!?'
Inflatable Friend
Zeppelin Admiral
******
Italy Italy



« Reply #82 on: December 30, 2014, 01:00:39 am »

But the story of how and why that art got onto that castle makes it clear that it was far from poorly intended daubings...

If the 1950s hadn't have given it a dull uniform cement overcoat then the building wrecking render wouldn't have needed to have been removed and wouldn't have had this temporary redecoration of art.

Personally I can't help but feel that it's their property to decorate as they wish, the castle was hardly a stand out must-see architectural masterpiece before and their are plenty of other much more winsome and romantic castles available for awed agogging. Even with the redecoration of that smallish section at the rear of the property the frontal approach is barely changed from it's 1950s poorly aging grey blandness (one assumes the dull grey is an attempt to camouflage the property against the stereotypical Glaswegian weather), just a single peering face looking out over the slate roof.



I can't help but feel it's better for properties to be loved, used and developed as time goes on rather than being slowly abandoned as to expensive to live in or operate before they slide into being another yet another exclusive private day-spa and retreat, left to slowly rot and decay like sacred relics of some half imagined age of distant glory. Or, worse somehow, sold to developers to be crammed full of ill suited apartments and their gardens crammed with 'inspired' new-build houses with charming names like 'The Orchard' 'The Stables' 'The Orangery' like tomb stones for whatever was demolished to make way for them.

Inspiring thread though, I'll attempt to get some pictures of some of the art-work located near here. Bristol has a reasonable fame for such things and there are more than a few lovely large scale pieces in town from the See No Evil event held a couple of years ago (although many of the works have been lost as the buildings have been torn down) and UpFest.
Logged
Vagabond GentleMan
Zeppelin Captain
*****
United States United States


Clockwork Sepia


WWW
« Reply #83 on: December 30, 2014, 02:07:49 am »

Hmmm...very interesting, InflatableFriend.  I agree with a great deal of what you said, and especially find curious the fact that the 50's had it coated with cement.  That seems defacement more so than spraypaint.

There is one point of disagreement, though, and I was anticipating it, so I'm very glad you brought it up. 

You said: "I can't help but feel that it's their property to decorate as they wish".

This is a valid point, and one where the Law and what is Ethical do not necessarily converge.

Here's my metaphor, which I realize is hyperbole:  If I owned an original Rembrandt, and it were my personal property, bought and paid for, is it ok for me to spraypaint over it?  I suppose legally it would be, but I will stand steadfast that ethically it's a travesty, and I think most would agree.  Owning a Thing of historical relevance includes the responsibility to preserve it as is to the best of one's ability.
This castle might not be a Rembrandt or even a Warhol (despite the new colors), but if architecture is art (and it is) then what's the difference?

But otherwise, if there is any difference of opinion, it is indubitably cultural, as I mentioned in my post above.  We Americans don't HAVE castles, so to many of us, all of YOUR European castles are magically precious.  We're a young Nation, and thus in many of our cities our Victorian age buildings (or even whole neighborhoods) are often governmentally protected as historical landmarks and no matter who owns it, no real cosmetic changes are allowed without a great deal of bureaucracy and headache...graffiti-ing a castle has me kinda horror-struck.

To be fair, I admit that all of your complaints as to what could potentially (have) happen(ed) to the building are also horrible...day spas?  Apartments crammed into the gardens? WTF?!?  ...the graffiti is still worse to me, but these are almost equally icky options...it's hard for my Yankee sensibilities to imagine this sort of thing is tolerated. >aghast< But again, it's quite possible I'm simply being naiive.

Ultimately it seems that the issue is economic, am I right?  Owning a thing like a castle is expensive, and if you don't have the funds to upkeep it as is, then it either withers or you find a way to deface it profitably.  What a world, what a world.  Cry

But thank you, Inflatable Friend.  Your post was amazingly enlightening to me...I really had no idea!
Logged
jonb
Snr. Officer
****
England England



« Reply #84 on: December 30, 2014, 02:35:40 am »

It might not be that clear cut VG. If we were to colour the ancient Greek statues, as they were originally we would find they would be far too gaudy for modern tastes, they actually look plastic to my eye in that condition. As for castles they were all originally rendered and many had depictions of events, or coats of arms etc on the outside walls, in fact anything to impress. It is only because they are old and the colours have faded, and plaster has fallen away that we have got used to seeing these things in their naked condition.
The Scottish Castle might just represent a closer depiction of the mediaeval experience than the Romantic ruin than the nineteenth century portrayed these things.
Anyway a coat of paint is easily removed. I personally love people expressing themselves even when the result does not appeal to me or even when I actively don't like it for me it is still better than the bland uniformity of life in suburban cities.
Anyway how about some classical style street art.

« Last Edit: December 30, 2014, 02:39:03 am by jonb » Logged
Drew P
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


« Reply #85 on: December 30, 2014, 04:41:35 am »

Maybe painting the castle to look like...a castle?

Awesome street art!
Logged
Inflatable Friend
Zeppelin Admiral
******
Italy Italy



« Reply #86 on: December 30, 2014, 11:57:34 am »

Ultimately it seems that the issue is economic, am I right?  Owning a thing like a castle is expensive, and if you don't have the funds to upkeep it as is, then it either withers or you find a way to deface it profitably.  What a world, what a world.  :'(

But thank you, Inflatable Friend.  Your post was amazingly enlightening to me...I really had no idea!


Sadly it is economics that leads the way with the loss of the castles and estates to companies that specialise in their re-purposing. In many cases the properties themselves are listed and therefore safe from any overly dramatic external reconfiguration or extension but often the gardens and/or ancillary buildings aren't protected and are therefore ripe picking for developers looking to add value to conversions by cramming new buildings in where old features once were.

Companies such as City and Country specialise in this sort of thing, their various developments list the many projects they've started, completed or planned. On the one side I suppose we can be glad the buildings are being saved in some form, better that I guess than being torn down or left to rot. In fact I can probably hardly complain having lived or worked in various properties that have been redeveloped from defunct historical use into modern buildings or offices.

As for the painted castle, that render is supposed to be coming off this year and was only ever temporary. While the owner has stated that he hopes to hold a competition to redecorate the new render with new art the current stuff was only permitted on account of it being a temporary feature for three years and he's probably not helped his cause by keeping it for longer than than that period. I'd be surprised if Historic Scotland and the local Council let him put up anything half as bold as that again. They'll just have to rely on the gardens, museum, petting zoo, camping and glamping areas, outdoor laser-tag, castle tours, and event hire services to keep them going Cheesy
Logged
jonb
Snr. Officer
****
England England



« Reply #87 on: December 30, 2014, 01:33:02 pm »

There is a point being missed here I think, should a building once put up remain that way forever? Or should it evolve over generations changing to suit the needs of each generation. I would say steampunks should be aware of the merits of recycling. It might seem great to slap preservation orders on old buildings, but the problem is these orders are administered by civil servants who often have no visual sense at all and just follow orders which often leads to more harm than if they just left things alone.
I had a friend who was renovating a cottage, when it was grade two listed and as he had taken down the lead windows to fix them, the council would not let him put them back because they had not been in place when the order was made. 
Logged
Vagabond GentleMan
Zeppelin Captain
*****
United States United States


Clockwork Sepia


WWW
« Reply #88 on: December 31, 2014, 07:48:43 pm »

I do understand that point, but my counterpoint remains the same:  Architecture is art, and as we don't spraypaint over a Van Gogh, neither do we spraypaint over a Frank Lloyd Wright.

But then cometh some quintessential questions about art...is a particular work of art (painting, sculpture, building) REALLY "art"?  Or, is it art of "value"? Or, is it art of "historical relevance"?  I know an artist who buys up old forgotten paintings of ships at sea from coastal antique shops, paints krakens attacking the ships, matching the style, onto these works realistically and believably, and sells them as re-purposed art, and therefore her work.  I'm havey-cavey about this process.  On the one hand, these no-name forgotten ship-painters mass produced these things more for profit than for the sake of creating art, they're a dime a dozen, and there's very little market for them.  They're just not museum pieces, as it were. They WOULD just rot away and decay if it weren't for this artist's re-purposing.  On the other hand, I don't like the idea of painting over someone else's original work (original being a key word for the most part, cuz Dada), finding it both tasteless and disrespectful.  However, in this case, her art often does bring a smile to my face in a way that the original work did not (and hey, I LIKE old paintings of ships at sea), and "It's not like she's painting a kraken on a John Waterhouse".

So I suppose I'm just imagining some fine red lines here; some perpetually arguable characteristics that determine THIS building as one that should be preserved, when THIS one from the same era is one that should evolve to suit the needs of the current socio-cultural climate.  I admit I feel there's room for both; I suppose every individual would have their own lines drawn in the sand.

I just don't like graffiti on a castle.  I'm glad it was only temporary. >shrugs<
Logged
Sorontar
Zeppelin Admiral
******
Australia Australia


All ideas should have wings


WWW
« Reply #89 on: January 01, 2015, 03:54:33 am »

The concept of design (including art) being permanent is always doubtful, especially in a steampunk community, where we regularly repurpose the functionality of the design or modify the design for new purposes. While design may be treasured for what it is, that design must be placed in the context for which it was created and judged for that context. Over time, the context will change, as will the judgement, allowing us to find new reasons to love something that once was insignificant.

Street art has the nature of being temporary. It is open to the effects of weather and man-made conditions. It is open to modification, directly or indirectly. The location in which it is found will change its own purpose over time.

Therefore, always consider that any design, whether art, architecture, engineering, fashion, dance or literature, will never have a permanent form or purpose, but we should appreciate it for what forms and purposes it has.

Sorontar
Logged

Sorontar, Captain of 'The Aethereal Dancer'
Advisor to HM Engineers on matters aethereal, aeronautic and cosmographic
http://eyrie.sorontar.com
Maets
Immortal
**
United States United States

Gravatar

Airship Builder


WWW
« Reply #90 on: January 01, 2015, 01:39:58 pm »

Vagabond Gentleman raises some interesting questions.  Not sure where you draw the line, no pun intended.  I repurpose all sorts of things and that is part of Steampunk as Sorontar points out. 

As to more street art.  Huffington Post just released their pick for the top street art of 2015 at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/30/best-street-art-2014_n_6390450.html

Below are a couple of examples, but many more at the above link.





Logged
jonb
Snr. Officer
****
England England



« Reply #91 on: January 01, 2015, 01:50:47 pm »

V.G when you say you don't like to see these images plastered over a beautiful building, how about thinking of it this way- the body of the structure has a beautiful and divine form, so therefore to add decoration to it is in many eyes (and yours presumably) a sacrilege which only masks and detracts from the pure exquisite shape envisioned by the creator. So the question is should we allow men to puncture the skin of these wondrous forms inking them marks of love and hate?
Logged
Vagabond GentleMan
Zeppelin Captain
*****
United States United States


Clockwork Sepia


WWW
« Reply #92 on: January 02, 2015, 08:17:20 pm »

Yeah, something like that! Smiley

To briefly reiterate, one of the most common defenses graffiti artists make to justify their often illegal creations is that we are forced to live in an ugly steel-and-concrete world of pragmatic but ugly urban constructs, and throwing color and shape onto it is ultimately beneficial.  Acts of rebellious beautification, so to speak.
And with this I agree, and therefore support.

Where I might tentatively draw my own line is where and when the structure being painted upon is "better" artistically than the work being put upon it.  And as that is purely opinion, I ultimately have no more than opinion on which to stand.  But, here I stand, ya know?

I suppose one of the fundamental issues here is that graffiti art, though on the rise when it comes to socio-cultural recognition (e.g. this thread) and recognition by the Art community (thanks to Banksy and Banksy's ilk), it is still for the most part considered a "folk art".  That means that every whippersnapper with a sketchbook and a spraycan and a dash of "dash" feels that they're an Artiste of the street.  Artists being artists, the ones who ain't so great often over-estimate their abilities and we all end up with a lot of slop that defaces rather than beautifies and only a small handful of Artist-Philosophers with anti-heroic self-imposed codes of conduct actually manifesting the beautification that benefits all.

It's not a clear-cut topic...in truth I WANT to really stand behind the meritocratic nature of graffiti art.  That is, in theory there's a level playing field; it is an art Of the People.  But I can't shake my own artistic pomposity; I'm a classically trained professional artist and part of that training is critique, and (this will date me somewhat) in the days of my education we were taught that though opinions DO vary, there IS objectively good and objectively bad art.  There is objectively better art and worse art.  So I suppose that in the specific example of the castle, the architecture of the castle itself is "better" art than the paintings upon it, making the art upon it defacement rather than beautification. 
But this is only a single example...I don't remember any other piece on this thread that had me raising both my nose and a single, critical eyebrow.  >shrugs<
Logged
selectedgrub
Guest
« Reply #93 on: January 02, 2015, 08:39:01 pm »

Thread has done it's dash.
Here is my ever growing collection.
http://selectedgrub.blogspot.co.nz/p/blog-page_1.html



I Guess not...

























Logged
Drew P
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


« Reply #94 on: January 02, 2015, 11:24:22 pm »

 Smiley
Logged
selectedgrub
Guest
« Reply #95 on: January 03, 2015, 01:22:12 am »

A couple more wildlife ones






Logged
Drew P
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


« Reply #96 on: January 03, 2015, 02:18:58 pm »

Aww, fishy.
 :oSCARY KITTY!!!! Shocked
Aww, fishy.
Logged
selectedgrub
Guest
« Reply #97 on: January 17, 2015, 11:51:22 pm »

Haven't been out for a while.








Logged
selectedgrub
Guest
« Reply #98 on: January 26, 2015, 05:40:42 am »

Another epic one going up.
I like to capture progress shots.





Logged
Maets
Immortal
**
United States United States

Gravatar

Airship Builder


WWW
« Reply #99 on: January 26, 2015, 03:23:16 pm »

That is wonderful.  Quite a contrast in your last two posts.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.169 seconds with 15 queries.