Two Wheel Fix - Art critics

Two Wheel Fix (http://www.twowheelfix.com/index.php)

- News Desk (http://www.twowheelfix.com/forumdisplay.php?f=97)

- - Art critics (http://www.twowheelfix.com/showthread.php?t=18805)

Serious bidness.

Being told you can't have art on YOUR OWN PROPERTY in America.

What? You complied with the complaint by removing the "offending word"? [sic]

We'll just charge you with something else! Who the fuck do you think you are; a free citizen, living in a free country?

Ha!

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,5744040.story

Everyone's a fucking art critic...

Wait, what?

Quote:

Black, who lives on a fixed income, used a donation from her church to pay the $360 fine and had a half-dozen young artists repaint parts of the mural, eliminating the offensive word — "like."

And from what I can see, that sure looks like public property to me. :shrug:

Zoning... The same reason I can't have a 100ft sign marking the coming of Christ in my front yard...

I'm as anti-'the man' as the next person, but this is retarded... it's not like this was some super secret law or anything... it's not like the local government has some sort of personal vendetta against this person...

Quote:

Originally Posted by CasterTroy (Post 462190)

That's just stupid :td:

But having said that.....

I hate to say it...but the blame falls partly on the "artists"

So many people hide behind "it's art" these days that it's hard to really define "art" any more.

So who is to say someone is an "artist" and who's not?

My example would be someone taking a shit on the sidewalk, roping it off and calling it "art"

Change gears for the sake of an example......

As someone who's worked in music.......would you consider Rebecca Black an "artist"? Or just some stupid twit with a song that's infecting the ears of our youth and watering down what is true "music"

Hard to say. Art is purely subjective - some people would consider the taking a shit on a sidewalk art (ever heard of a type of art called Dada?).

Not having a clear look at the entire compilation itself makes it hard to make a judgment. What I can see from the photo in the article really isn't an eyesore, in my opinion - that is, the abstraction works for me. And that is where subjectivity falls into play.

What the artists (or, more accurately, the woman commissioning the work) should have done is check into the rules about that sort of thing. Just like photographers in Texas have to abide by a law that covers "improper photography" (which, in some cases, has been enforced ridiculously), artists who want to paint in common/public areas (or anything in view of the public) need to make sure they do it the right way.. or risk exactly what happened.

Quote:

commissioned the artwork to brighten an alley next to her home.

Doesn't seem like it was her property. Need more facts

Quote:

Originally Posted by CasterTroy (Post 462190)

As someone who's worked in music.......would you consider Rebecca Black an "artist"? Or just some stupid twit with a song that's infecting the ears of our youth and watering down what is true "music"

Just because I think it sucks, I wouldn't prevent anyone else from listening to it.

You can't have "good music" if there's no "bad music" to compare it to.

;)

What I think sucks may make you happy...art is personal.

I personally think that shit looks like fucking graffiti...but I'm a 50 year old fucking white guy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho (Post 462195)

Sure they did. Clearly they fucking did.

They charged her with one thing, she changed it, they charged her with something else.

Sounds like a vendetta to me....

Payed a little bit more attention to the article

Quote:

Black's wooden alley fence

Yep, her property.

If I were her, I'd get the kids to paint my fucking house. That'll teach the fucking cunts.

Let them try to find an ordinance to fuck her with then...(they will, but by then, public opinion will have taken away all their jobs).

Law means shit anymore. Battles are won in the press.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avatard (Post 462203)

Sure they did. Clearly they fucking did.

They charged her with one thing, she changed it, they charged her with something else.

Sounds like a vendetta to me....

They charged her with one thing and asked her to remove it... she removed it and added something else... they came back around to check to see if she had complied... she hadn't and now was in violation of something else...

I'm pretty sure they didn't have a meeting and say, "you know that bitch with the colorful wall in the low income area? Let's make her life a living hell..."

http://theinsanityreport.com/home/wp...tinfoilhat.jpg