The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

On 21 Feb, 21:46, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

Wheres John Band to argue that deep down they're just misunderstood
artists wot 'ave a golden 'art an all luv their mums....

Isnt LU in charge of barbican station, not FCC? Perhaps it was just a
message to the idiot kids that their mess will just be painted over in
minutes rather than someone spending half an hour trying to remove it
(not always successfully) so theres no point bothering as no one will
get to see it.

B2003

On 22 Feb, 13:34, Boltar wrote:
On 21 Feb, 21:46, "Jack Taylor" wrote:

The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

Wheres John Band to argue that deep down they're just misunderstood
artists wot 'ave a golden 'art an all luv their mums....

No one who changes someone else's design (even just a brick wall)
without permission is an artist.



Isnt LU in charge of barbican station, not FCC? Perhaps it was just a
message to the idiot kids that their mess will just be painted over in
minutes rather than someone spending half an hour trying to remove it
(not always successfully) so theres no point bothering as no one will
get to see it.

B2003

On 22 Feb, 14:31, MIG wrote:
The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

Wheres John Band to argue that deep down they're just misunderstood
artists wot 'ave a golden 'art an all luv their mums....

*Whatever*. Banksy's work /is/ art; if you can't appreciate that
you're a ****wit. Tox06 is a mindless vandal with no artistic merit at
all.

Most grafitiists lean towards the Tox06 model than the Banksy model,
but not all. And even the Tox06-ists are hardly up there with brick-
throwers and knife-wielding thugs in the whole "really bad people it's
worth getting upset about and throwing in jail for ages" stakes.

No one who changes someone else's design (even just a brick wall)
without permission is an artist.

That's an interesting contribution to the philosophy of art. Shame
about Andy Warhol though (at least, I don't think he got permission
from Campbell Soup). In fact, you lose most 20th and 21st century art
based on that criterion... perhaps you don't view that as much of a
loss.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 22 Feb, 15:13, John B wrote:
On 22 Feb, 14:31, MIG wrote:

The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

Wheres John Band to argue that deep down they're just misunderstood
artists wot 'ave a golden 'art an all luv their mums....

*Whatever*. Banksy's work /is/ art; if you can't appreciate that
you're a ****wit. Tox06 is a mindless vandal with no artistic merit at
all.

Most grafitiists lean towards the Tox06 model than the Banksy model,
but not all. And even the Tox06-ists are hardly up there with brick-
throwers and knife-wielding thugs in the whole "really bad people it's
worth getting upset about and throwing in jail for ages" stakes.

No one who changes someone else's design (even just a brick wall)
without permission is an artist.

That's an interesting contribution to the philosophy of art. Shame
about Andy Warhol though (at least, I don't think he got permission
from Campbell Soup). In fact, you lose most 20th and 21st century art
based on that criterion... perhaps you don't view that as much of a
loss.

When did he change someone's design? He may have copied it, which is
of no concern to me. Possibly copying of design is what you are
talking about with respect to most 20th and 21st century art.

I wasn't aware that he painted over a load of existing soup tins with
his own design. I am talking about someone changing a specific wall/
train/painting/whatever that someone has designed, however badly in
one's opinion.

If I don't like the Mona Lisa and paint a moustache on it without
permission, I am imposing something on someone else's design when I
have no business to do so.

On 22 Feb, 15:43, MIG wrote:
I wasn't aware that he painted over a load of existing soup tins with
his own design. I am talking about someone changing a specific wall/
train/painting/whatever that someone has designed, however badly in
one's opinion.

Sorry, misunderstood. Does that apply to prints as well, or just
originals?

If I don't like the Mona Lisa and paint a moustache on it without
permission, I am imposing something on someone else's design when I
have no business to do so.

So you're not a fan of the Chapmans, then?
http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/turne...03/chapman.htm

[I still don't really see where you're coming from here - it seems
you're conflating artistic merit and morality, which can't be right.
Even if the paint in the Mona Lisa were made from the blood of
children Da Vinci had murdered, it would still be an artwork and he an
artist - he'd just *also* be a child-murderer. Or, to put it less
sensationally, what if he'd nicked a lesser artist's painting and used
it as the canvass for the the Mona Lisa?]

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 22 Feb, 15:13, John B wrote:
*Whatever*. Banksy's work /is/ art; if you can't appreciate that
you're a ****wit. Tox06 is a mindless vandal with no artistic merit at
all.

Its art yes, personally I don't think its great art but it has a
certain amount of street cred so the chattering classes can pretend to
be down-wid-da-kids.. Having said that , vandalism is vandalism
however much talent the vandal may have otherwise you might as well
say murder isn't murder if the murderer killed the victim with a
certain amount of panache and creativity. Using that line of thought
probably half of the gestapo qualified as "artists".

B2003

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:13:23 -0800 (PST), John B
wrote:

On 22 Feb, 14:31, MIG wrote:
The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

Wheres John Band to argue that deep down they're just misunderstood
artists wot 'ave a golden 'art an all luv their mums....

*Whatever*. Banksy's work /is/ art; if you can't appreciate that
you're a ****wit.

So anyone who disagrees with your subjective judgement is a ****wit? I
love you too, pal.

On 22 Feb, 18:08, James Farrar wrote:

*Whatever*. Banksy's work /is/ art; if you can't appreciate that
you're a ****wit.

So anyone who disagrees with your subjective judgement is a ****wit? I
love you too, pal.

No, anyone who knows sufficiently little about aesthetic theory to
understand that under any sane definition that would be used by any
critic, curator or philosopher of art for the last 100 years, Banksy's
work counts as art - but who still also believes they are capable of
making a meaningful contribution to a debate about art, is a ****wit.

That isn't to say Banksy's work is necessarily *good* art, which is
indeed a subjective judgement.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 22 Feb, 13:34, Boltar wrote:
On 21 Feb, 21:46, "Jack Taylor" wrote:

The little ******* were recently active on the westbound FCC platform walls
at Barbican, tagging the brickwork again. Bad in itself - but TPTB have seen
fit to remove the "artwork", not with a high-pressure hose but with a
liberal application of cream paint, which looks equally as bad. Considering
the fine brick retaining walls at the station, it's a shame that the job
couldn't have been done with a little more sympathy. It looks bloody awful!

Wheres John Band to argue that deep down they're just misunderstood
artists wot 'ave a golden 'art an all luv their mums....


Well come on, you're hardly acting your part in this either - where's
the call for all potentially graffiti-able walls to be wired up to the
national grid, the subsequent frying being videotaped and made
available for all the maladjusted freaks of the internet to view at
their twisted pleasure?

(I can't speak for John Band, but I'm pretty certain you've
misrepresented his views quite significantly. It's quite possible he
won't deem your unconsidered comments above worthy of a considered
response.)


Isnt LU in charge of barbican station, not FCC? Perhaps it was just a
message to the idiot kids that their mess will just be painted over in
minutes rather than someone spending half an hour trying to remove it
(not always successfully) so theres no point bothering as no one will
get to see it.

B2003


LU is indeed in charge of Barbican station, and so I presume would
have been behind this (well, specifically Metronet, the infraco for
the SSL lines). I think your analysis above makes a lot of sense - get
rid of the graffiti ASAP by whatever means. However I understand that
there is an approved range of paints for covering up graffiti, and the
paint colour is supposed to broadly match the normal colour of that
surface (i.e. brown for brick walls), so it seems like something has
gone wrong here - maybe they simply had the wrong paint that night,
and it will change colour when it's painted over again soon.

I can't see why Network Rail or their contractors would have touched
the wall, given that it is an LU station - and even though FCC
Thameslink trains don't stop on the westbound Barbican platform at all
- it is out of use for the public, and just an emergency
disembarkation point - it is still part of the LU station, as can be
seen from the LU style signs next to the emergency exit.