Hey, there! Log in / Register
Probably not a pipe, either
By adamg on Sun, 09/15/2013 - 1:05pm
Max Grinnell spotted this statement on Somerville Avenue in Porter Square.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Not Art
There are some of these stencils in Allston and Mission Hill as well (surprise surprise.)
Is it a response to the graffiti?
Is this a response to the graffiti or to the blue box?
"Not Art"
I've tended to assume that the "Not Art" stencil is self-referential, to be honest. As in "Ha ha, my work of art lies in making the preemptive move of declaring my stencil 'Not Art.' I am such a Bad Ass."
How would artists like it if
How would artists like it if someone stenciled "Not Art" on there artwork? Stay off my property D-Bag!!!
Inman
There is a good one in Inman Sq where someone defaced a "Your business is appreciated..." sign outside a closed connivence store and changed the wording with the stencil.
Like most graffiti, I normal agree with the sentiment but don't like the idea of defacing things that aren't advertising to begin with. The thing above looks like a door to empty soot the not art stencil is just defacing a practical device used for centuries.
A worse defacement
As posted further along in the twitter thread, there's a blue Cambridge historical plaque in front of a private residenceon Kirkland St. opposite from Memorial Hall. Stencil-dick here has tagged the plaque, painting over the historical information. To me this is several degrees worse because they didn't tag a blank canvas, but damaged someone else's work based on their own estimation of its worth versus their fucking spray paint.
Decontextualised cleverness based on stoner-level misunderstanding of Foucault is bad enough, but this has risen/sunk to the level of simple vandalism.
Blue historical plaque
FYI, NOT ART did not paint over the historical information on that blue sign in Harvard. That had already been painted over by Harvard, presumably when that property was converted to a private residence. They simply left the blue sign, blank and useless, which he used as a canvas for his piece.
A Canvas for his Art…Good God
A Canvas for his Art…Good God this is just stupidity.
Another unemployed art critic
Another unemployed art critic who can't get a job writing for a newspaper or even a blog.
Is choosing to paint something utilitarian a pleasing color mean its intended as art? Frankly, I find beauty in the underlying iron casting. Perhaps the blue color does distract viewers from it, more than the usual black.
These are all over Somerville
Including one on a parking sign at a funeral home.
Yup
I see these about every other block. It is correct that it's not art, it's obnoxious. We don't need attempted wit spray painted all over the city. Banksy, this one is not.
There's a very tiny one next
There's a very tiny one next to the new micro museum in union square...
There's a very tiny one next
There's a very tiny one next to the new micro museum in union square...
But it is an artifact.
But it is an artifact.
Door To An Old Coal Chute
It's a door to an old coal chute; Majestic was a popular brand name. When people heated their homes with coal, a delivery man would attach a trough from the coal truck into these little doors. Coal would flow down the chute to a bin in the cellar. From there, people would shovel the coal into their furnace, or lug it in a coal hod upstairs to be used in stoves and fireplaces. After burning, the coal ashes were spread on icy sidewalks to to make them less slippery.
First year art student perhaps?
I was made to read this my first year in art school :http://www.amazon.com/Believing-Is-Seeing-Creating.... There is a chapter in the middle, with pictures of paintings sculptures etc. which are all labeled "art." or "NOT ART" The authors argument was that art is only art, when it is done for art sake. Like, so art didn't exist until the 19th century. So, the blue door and tag are not art, because they were created for another purpose.
Magritte reference
Nice one, Adam.
Not Art
Weird, I just saw a trashcan outside the Deluxe Town Diner with this stencil.
My all-time favorite stencil was of someone's face (dude wearing a ball-cap) and the words "Have you seen this douchebag?"
Her it is: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5318/5835659279_6de2...
Proper credit, please
I took that photo. The canonical URL is http://www.flickr.com/photos/cdevers/5835659279, rather than linking to the raw JPG image, please.
(Glad you liked the photo. I know nothing about the story behind the graffiti it shows.)
Barf.
Was amusing the first time I saw. I have to pass it on my commute every day and imagine the "artist" chuckling to him/herself on how witty he/she is.
Old campaign, taking off recently for some reason
I saw this photo of “not art” graffiti — which had itself already been defaced — back in June 2011:
(Is it still possible to embed images in Universal Hub comments? I can’t get the BBCode or HTML (img) tag syntax to work. I’ve never understood why we can’t just use standard HTML syntax, but that’s a different topic…)
"NOT ART" Pereson or people.
It's one thing to do this very boring and unimaginative defacing of property in public places but to come on my property and do it there…if I find you I will spray paint "NOT ART" on your face.