Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Thursday, July 15, 2010

There Is No Street Art in Seattle

Posted by on Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 2:16 PM

As Cienna's reported, the City of Seattle says there's not one work of art on the streets of Seattle. You know, because it's graffiti. Meritless, meritless graffiti.

Here's one of those meritless spectacles, this one on Second Avenue between Virginia and Stewart. The horror. Get it down immediately before it lowers somebody's property values.

diamond_cut.jpg

H/t Laura Castellanos.

 

Comments (35) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Josh Bomb 1
graffiti!!! VANDALISM!!! the horror!! the horror!!
Posted by Josh Bomb http://www.satanosphere.com on July 15, 2010 at 3:01 PM
34x42 2
a blight on my lovely city.

bump, snide.
Posted by 34x42 on July 15, 2010 at 3:04 PM
3
I'm sure a Seattle native will blame it one a "transplant."
Posted by CommonKnowledge on July 15, 2010 at 3:06 PM
Fnarf 4
Yes, clearly this "artwork" means that I am obligated to acknowledge the genius of the piece of shit who tagged "SEB" all over Wallingford recently. I mean, my god, look at it, it's a masterpiece. And so is SEB. It's all art, and all art is good.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on July 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM
5
Interestingly, when I opened up the slog just now, I momentarily lamented on how little coverage of Natives there is on the slog, and this ain't much more than nothing, but it's something. Hm.
Posted by My Great-Great Grandmother was a Cherokee Princess on July 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM
34x42 6
@ 4, it's zeb.
Posted by 34x42 on July 15, 2010 at 3:11 PM
Banna 7
It's easy to find one nice example to fit your argument, but the reality is that most "street art" looks like this. Unless you want to hire and payroll a "graffiti judge" or start some kind of "graffiti bureaucracy" to decide what stays and goes, it all should be treated the same, And since most of it is crap the guys with the turpentine and white paint rollers should remove/cover it.
Posted by Banna http://www.ucp.org on July 15, 2010 at 3:14 PM
Fnarf 8
@5, I too lament the lack of Indian coverage here and elsewhere, but your great-great-grandmother most definitely was not a Cherokee princess.

@6, I would enjoy killing him.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on July 15, 2010 at 3:24 PM
Packeteer 9
Regardless of if it is without merit if it was not requested by the owner then it has to go. How would you feel if someone broke into the office you worked at and scribbled beautiful drawings all over your paperwork? Would that piss you off? Would it be ok as long as it was artistic?
Posted by Packeteer on July 15, 2010 at 3:33 PM
10
I read the PDF Cienna provided with her post, and the page about art walls was corrupted. The report did seem to be about territorial tagging more than art/murals.
Posted by Patti on July 15, 2010 at 3:47 PM
Dee 11
@9 - it would be absolutely fine by me, but then again I don't like paperwork much. A question re:"if it was not requested by the owner then it has to go" - what if it is on public property?
Posted by Dee on July 15, 2010 at 3:54 PM
12
@11,

Well, the majority of the people don't like graffiti. So there's your answer. That something belongs to the "public" doesn't mean that any individual person can do whatever he/she wants with it.
Posted by keshmeshi on July 15, 2010 at 3:56 PM
Fistique 13
Oh, appealing to "the majority" is so much nonsense. The majority think I'm vandalizing my boyfriend's ass by coming on it. Fuck their opinion.
Posted by Fistique on July 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM
14
@8 It's a fucking joke, thanks for making me explain it.
Posted by My Great-Great Grandmother was a Cherokee Princess on July 15, 2010 at 4:08 PM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 15
The "majority" own the property, dude. Deal with it.

And oh, by the way, that Indian is not art.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on July 15, 2010 at 4:10 PM
16
This has actually been up for a while, a month or longer. I walk by it twice a day.
Posted by erly on July 15, 2010 at 4:17 PM
17
I think the indian would look better with my initials scrawled across it--thanks for pointing it out, I'll be by later this evening.

In related news, today I saw two "Henry" murals in Ballard were heavily tagged last night.
Posted by tiktok on July 15, 2010 at 4:30 PM
Fnarf 18
@15, of course it's art. Art doesn't mean "good". It frequently means "crappy". For instance.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on July 15, 2010 at 4:40 PM
19
@13,

Oh really? Your boyfriend's ass belongs to the public? I have to agree that you need the public's permission before you can vandalize it.
Posted by keshmeshi on July 15, 2010 at 4:52 PM
elenchos 20
But the whole point of illicit street art is that you're an outsider artist. Isn't it?

Why does an outsider artist want to recognition from some government bureaucrats? They should be thrilled to hear that the authorities don't consider their work art. And if the lackeys of state power come along and routinely paint it over, well that proves the are bona fide outsiders.

Jen? Help me understand. Should somebody collect these works and put them in a gallery? The artist didn't want them preserved in a gallery, did they? Did they seek official recognition? Doesn't your little crack about property values underscore how this type of outsider art actually needs the hostility of the establishment in order to exist?

If capitalists liked this art, the artist and its fans would die of embarrassment. Like being seen in the mall with your mom when you're 14.
Posted by elenchos on July 15, 2010 at 5:13 PM
Will in Seattle 21
If the people who tag artwork and walls and windows in Seattle did stuff like that - which they don't - it wouldn't be a problem.

But they tag over OTHER people's ART with lame tags that went out with the 1970s.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on July 15, 2010 at 5:19 PM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 22
Fnarf, "good" isn't art. "Crappy" isn't art. Art offers me some sort of insight into the human condition. That piece of shit doesn't.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on July 15, 2010 at 5:50 PM
Womyn2me 23
street art happens when the artist gets permission of the owner of the wall it is going on.

graffiti is when it happens without permission.

the Henry murals are street art. I think they are crappy. but he gets permission.

if he ever did it without permission, it is crappy GRAFFITI.

Posted by Womyn2me http://http:\\www.shelleyandlaura.com on July 15, 2010 at 6:18 PM
34x42 24
@ fnarf, so you'd really enjoy killing a young kid i know, who can't be more than 20 years old, because of paint. wow.
Posted by 34x42 on July 15, 2010 at 6:54 PM
25
wall murals are wall murals. street art is not necessarily legal or permitted by anyone, nor is it simply "vandalism", graffiti is not necessarily street art, and sloppy, amateur tagging is barely graffiti. graffiti is a world-recognized and accepted form of art with wide-ranging styles and complexities that only some appreciate, as artistic value is of course in the eye of the beholder. no one can just say, "i hate 'rock' music" and make any sort of valid point right?

to either write off or accept art based on the public legality of its canvas is lazy and uninformed, as is lumping taggers with all other street artists. personally, the shameless bombardment of consumer ads that i encounter daily (all the way down to what makes its way onto my personal computer screen) is more offensive than much of the "vandalism" that is street art (and especially far more offensive than the example shown in this post)...

Posted by sugart on July 15, 2010 at 7:00 PM
Fnarf 26
@24, yup. It would take a while, too. He'd be ingesting quite a lot of paint in the process. I don't like people who attack my city.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on July 15, 2010 at 7:13 PM
Roma 27
A good portion of the graffiti I see is more interesting than most of what passes for public art in Seattle. Olympic Sculpture Park would have been a far more interesting and colorful place -- and would be drawing many more visitors, both locals and tourists -- had it been created as Olympic Art Garden and filled with a series of walls, towers and platforms covered with spray-painted art along with great landscaping (including lots of flowers.)

In fact, as it stands, there's an existing canvas at the park just waiting for some cool, colorful spray paint art. But will that ever happen? No. Seattle prefers bland.
Posted by Roma on July 15, 2010 at 7:17 PM
34x42 28
@ 26, you'll never understand. that's alright though, some people are just daft. in your case, by choice.
Posted by 34x42 on July 15, 2010 at 7:39 PM
Roma 29
22/Fifty-Two-Eighty: Fnarf, "good" isn't art. "Crappy" isn't art. Art offers me some sort of insight into the human condition. That piece of shit doesn't.

That may not be art to you, if art needs to offer you that insight and that piece doesn't do that. But that doesn't mean it's not art to someone else.
Posted by Roma on July 15, 2010 at 7:46 PM
30
@26 have you checked out the seattle crime blog recently? there are far better examples of "people attacking (your) city" over there, updated in real time.

if any of the local victims of violent crimes were wishing death upon their attackers, i'd understand at least due to the psychological trauma they may be dealing with, but in this case, it seems that all signs point towards Drama Queen.
Posted by sugart on July 15, 2010 at 7:51 PM
31
Theres street art painted with some sort of skill on blank walls and derilict buildings and warehouses. The point of graffing was to make something ugly that was thrust upon the city turn into something at least close to interesting.

And then there's spoiled douchey teenagers from the south end spraying ZEB on every other building in our city. Even some of the really nice old apartments where people fucking LIVE. I will fucking buy him a sketch pad and let him first learn to draw by tracing, and maybe teach him basic stick-figure drawing skills.
Posted by JesseJB on July 15, 2010 at 10:02 PM
32
Then I will take a dump on his white pimply chest.
Posted by JesseJB on July 15, 2010 at 10:03 PM
giffy 33
God that is fucking awful.
Posted by giffy on July 15, 2010 at 10:05 PM
34
Banna said it best- one good piece of graffiti doesn't justify all of the ugly crap.
Posted by anchor on July 16, 2010 at 7:41 AM
35
@28 What exactly are you kids attempting to accomplish by tagging 'ZEB' all over the city? And why are you targeting small/local businesses and for sale/lease buildings? Why would you tag some guys taco truck sign? Why a small coffee shop next door to Nordstrom Rack, but not Nordstrom Rack?

My guess is that you think you are tearing down the system, is that correct? Please help me understand so I won't be considered 'daft' Thanks.
Posted by greenman on July 16, 2010 at 9:52 AM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy

1M!