I remember being impressed by recognizing not only that the visitor was a sailor by his sway, but also that he had tabes dorsalis, of tertiary syphilis by virtue of his high steps when he walked and the distinctive sound of the soles of his shoes slapping against the floor.
One of my treasured possessions is the First Prize I was handed by the Headmaster of Kilburn Grammar School in London*, a Swedish Red linen bound book, "The Complete works of Sherlock Holmes". I loved the skill at which he judged the background and attainments of each client or visitor to his rooms. He would look at their clothes, demeanor, posture, cadence of speech, logical construction os speech and dissect everything from the list on their shoes to the weight on the heals or the height of each foot as the person walked in.
I remember being impressed by recognizing not only that the visitor was a sailor by his sway, but also that he had tabes dorsalis, of tertiary syphilis by virtue of his high steps when he walked and the distinctive sound of the soles of his shoes slapping against the floor. Given that the poor fellow had no proprioception sensation left in his joints to know where his limbs were in space, he simply lifted his feet high and the slap down informed him from the sound that he was safe to take another step.
*Now closed as, to the Labor party socialists, "Grammar Schools" for those with the best academic achievement in an exam at age 11, created elitism. To the socialists, such schools for the very brightest kids, seemed too much like the very exclusive, landed gentry-dominated "Public Schools" of Eaton and Harrow, which probably bred conservative voters!
I had the curiosity to check about tabes dorsalis. Did you know that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle completed his doctorate on that exact disease?
So who is their audience, Jerome? Is this seen from a passing highway, railway yard or what? What kind of math is there in the investment of energy - the more isolated the place is, the less likely the artist will be stopped in the process of painting but the less chance he/she has of being appreciated!
That is a very good question.
Banksy said: "the people who run our cities dont understand graffiti because they think nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit".
Your question above is actually "what profit are these artists making?" (a "profit" can be defined in terms of money but also in terms of appreciation, growing reputation, etc...). The answer appears to be that these artists are not making much "profit", yet keep producing paintings. Therefore, the answer is that these people are motivated by something else than profit.
Coming back to Banksy citation, since the people who run our cities place profit at the center of their interests, they will systematically chose whatever lines maximises profit. It helps that they get their cut of the profit, of course. Since there is little profit in graffiti, they will not allow it. Since Coca-cola pays well, they will allow billboards.
The reasoning can be applied to any art form.
I meant benefit to themselves as an artist. For example, a prisoner might amuse himself making art on his cell walls. But what does the graffiti artist consider in his choice of place to spend so much effort.
Let me phrase it in more direct terms, then: if you are not making a profit for us, do not litter our walls with your paint or we'll get the police after you. But since we are magnanimous, you may play with paint where nobody cares. We will be so amused to watch you fight to paint over someone's else creation to get some space for a new one.
What are the rules? They wait until that artist no longer is seen around town, intimidate him/her or what? It would seem to me a risky proposition to paint over such a lot of intensive artwork and then just hope that wouldn't be itself painted over the next week!
So is this near some freeway or other passthrough that allows the work to be seen by a lot of people?
Did you talk to the people you met?
I only had brief contact to some (not from Munich) through flickr, but it would be interesting to have some ties here.
Could be interesting at a given time - thanks.I could try to activate some contacts.
I have started to read about Los Angeles wall art and Graffitti and realize that there are a lot of different reasons for the work. Some are gang-tagging, marking territory and representing power, others are statements of some sort and then there's art representing some community aspiration or pride and much more. Some artist's have risen to gallery fame with works selling for handsome amounts, elevating the painter from struggling artist to gallery darlings. I have so much to learn, but at least I know that!
As an observer, Jerome, do you get attached to certain works and then get some personal stake in wishing and hoping for its survival?
These guys seem oblivious of retribution or consequences? I know I'd be pretty miffed if my 30 hours of painting had been wiped out in a morning coat of white!
I wonder what their logic is. After all, they know full well that their picture is not going to stay their long. Are they just playing a game with each other and do this with equanimity?