Above is a shot of one of Shepard Fairey's infamous graffiti installations on a Montgomery Street fence in Boston's South End.The street art-- along with a slew of other Institute of Contemporary Art-commissioned pieces scattered throughout the city including Grand boutique in Somerville's Union Square, the red brick wall outside the Gap at 15 Brattle Street and Central Kitchen in Cambridge's Central Square--has been under fire by anti-Fairey critics.
In fact, a South End couple, Fritz Klaetke and Susan Battista, had to combat a complaint from the South End Landmark District Commission on Tuesday, March 3. Avoiding a $500 fine, the Boston couple must remove the peace sign mural plastered outside of their row house on Aug. 17, the day after Fairey's exhibit ends at the ICA.
Now, another Fairey mural in the South End may be under fire. Is it me, or does the above Fairey piece on Montgomery Street look vandalized? How ironic ... vandalizing the work of a so-called vandal.
Click here for more photos from the "Loaded Gun Random Shots" series.
UPDATE: Shepard Fairey, a renegade-turned-celeb street artist known for his red, white and blue "Hope" and "Change" posters that became a national symbol of the Barack Obama presidency, is facing 30 additional graffiti charges filed against him today.
The artist is slotted to appear in the Roxbury District Court tomorrow to combat the new charges including placing five additional "Obey the Giant" posters on a Mass Pike building.
Photo by Sam Baltrusis
Posts
5 comments:
Sam - I wrote about the Fairey exhibit at the ICA and believe his work to be public art. Any thoughts on how people who appreciate the work can have their voice heard at "city hall" to help people like Fritz Klaetke and Susan Battista feel supported so they are not facing this alone?
BosGuy
Hi BosGuy!
While I agree with your sentiment, and strongly believe in Shepard Fairey's subversive style of public art, I feel like Fritz and Susan via Fairey's work are fueling discourse on the whole "what is art?" debate.
It's subjective.
Because they're taking a public stand, they have to deal with the status quo and what goes along with "shaking the bush."
Does it mean that they should be fined for allowing Fairey to construct a mixed-media mural in front of their row house? Absolutely not.
I feel like we are supporting Fritz and Susan by talking about it. Fairey's public displays of graffiti have shaken our Puritanical core ... and I love every minute of it.
Reminds me of the whole Robert Mapplethorpe/Andres Serrano uproar when I was in college.
With that said, I feel like the mural is meant to be temporary (the Montgomery Street piece is a perfect example). So, I personally believe it's OK to dismantle the work in August.
However, if Fritz and Susan continue to be threatened by neighbors or the status quo in general, the artistic community should take a stand.
Maybe a Fairey-a-thon?
I think it's ironic how he goes around laws for the sake of his art, while back at the ranch his lawyers are going after the little guys. Look who he sued last week, and for what:
http://www.pittsburghcitypaper.ws/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A59932
He is just as much a part of the corporate machine he claims to fight against.
I don't care about his political statements or fueling discourse about art debates.
I, along with many South End residents, want the return of our beautiful Historic District. We will be celebrating the removal on August 17th!
Post a Comment