There has been a lot in the press this year about a piece of work by Banksy. Called ‘Slave Labour’. It was removed from a wall near Turnpike Lane tube station only to then appear in a new York auction house. It caused a little bit of upset at the time and never actually got sold. Instead it reappeared later in an auction house closer to home in Covent Garden.
The piece arrived as satirical response to the diamond jubilee in London. Eventually lasting for about 8 months. It was protected with perspex such is the esteem in which Banksys work is held these days. The perspex however did not protect it from the wholesale removal of the image complete with the plaster from the wall. Its not the first time this has happened. A Banksy near Clerkenwell also suffered the same fate a few years ago. Removed to be bought by the highest bidder.
Street Art Removal
This removal of public art, held in high esteem by the local community poses an interesting ethical dilemma. I’m sure the owner of the wall never asked for the image to be painted so could the image have been considered vandalism? In fact when does street art become graffiti and vice versa? The asking price at auction in America was around $450,000. Regardless of the ethical debate it would appear that Banksy, if it ever sells, has made the lucky owner of the wall he painted very rich indeed.
There are other reasons why art might be destroyed. Petty vandalism borne out of envy or jealousy. Political reaction to an image which doesn’t suit the narrative. Corporate vandalism or even plain old graffiti and low grade taggers randomly drawing over an image. This blog post will explore examples from each.
The petty vandalism example was best demonstrated over the early part of 2013. Then pieces from renowned international artists Alice Pasquini and C215 were callously defaced. There would seem to be no good reason for this other than some form of vendetta which seemed to be taking place. C215’s elaborate portraits suffered blue paint being daubed over their eyes. Alice’s portrait on Brick Lane was simply scrubbed out. Luckily in the case of C215 the artist was able to come back to London and restore the work which I blogged about here.
It’s a shame that since the restoration these works by C215 were vandalised again. This was alongside more of his portraits around the Shoreditch area. These have not been restored and it is unlikely that they will be.
American artist Mear One was the victim of art falling foul of political sensibilities. His piece on Hanbury Street was one of the most famous. Depicting bankers playing monopoly on the banks of the working classes. It was deemed anti semitic. Complaints were made to Tower Hamlets council who ordered it to be removed. What seemed at the time to have been a satirical response to banker greed was whitewashed. The image has however since come to symbolise anti-semitism. This was due to the depiction of the bankers in the mural. The facial characteristics of them were seen as adding to negative racial stereotypes of Jewish people.
Another example of whitewashing happened at the Heygate Estate in Elephant and Castle. People there were unhappy with the way the estate was being left to decay by the council. As such they chose art as a way of expressing themselves. The council initially whitewashed the art on the walls of this now virtually derelict estate only for the art to almost immediately reappear.
Of all the pieces of art that I’ve seen destroyed. Perhaps one of the most infuriating examples was an example of the destruction of an elaborate piece by ROA. This was entirely painted over so that a corporate entity, Puma, could advertise a one off event. At the time someone in that company must have thought that painting a giant logo in the East End would have really endeared themselves to the street art loving locals. I can imagine the conversations in the board room. A lot of corporate back slapping and delighted congratulations of each other for having such a great idea. No one will notice if we paint over this crazy drawing of a dissected pig right? Who’s it by anyway? ROA? Who’s that? Some Belgian dude? Nah! Never heard of him.
Finally tagging is probably the most common form of art destruction. Many a piece has fallen foul of the plain old tag. There are lots of different reasons for this and indeed types of tag. Some are more elaborate than others. At the higher end they become pieces in their own right. Tagging though can offer a different purpose. A sort of rule of the street. If an artwork is seen to have had a good run or to have outlived its time. Then tagging might signal a time for it to be replaced.
Tagging can also be pure vandalism though. Recently a piece from Stik was damaged. Created in 2012 it was part of the Dulwich art festival. Based on the portrait of Mrs Elizabeth Moody hanging in the Dulwich Picture Gallery. It was tagged over just before the same event in 2013. It was restored soon afterwards but even in leafy Dulwich does show the attitudes of some people to public art.
Bigger and Better
Of course despite all this a lot of street art does get painted over. Some great pieces get replaced with other great pieces. When that happens you mourn the passing of the original but then celebrate the newcomer. Street art after all is all about reinventing itself and should be reflective of the environment around it. A superb example of this in action is on the prime Sclater Street car park wall. Here a hugely impressive Jimmy C piece was replaced by a hugely impressive DALeast piece. So on this occasion one piece at least respects the other in terms of it’s undoubted quality.
You seem to totally misunderstand graffiti culture. These artists operate on the streets. While most of them now do legal-only permission work they are co-opting an aesthetic movement that is illegal in nature. Graffiti is a reflection of a truly democratic society. While you may not agree with someone going over a piece, they have just as much of a right to do so as the person whose paint they are going over. Transience is the nature of the medium.
And that is fair enough, my argument though isn’t that work should never be painted over quite the contrary (look at my comments about the jimmy c vs DALeast piece at the end if the article). To me I just don’t see a big difference between tagging (see the stik example), which doesn’t seem to have much merit, and vandalism (the c215 example). But it is true, I don’t really get ‘graffiti’ as such, in fact when I write about street art I try to avoid the term because to me it’s not graffiti at all, I just have a different understanding of what that is. That said I suspect others may have different perceptions and one mans tag is another mans masterpiece and that, I suppose, I do understand.
I don’t think street artists have any other expectations than to give to the world their art for free.
Grafitti is art in itself, IMHO it’s pure expression and that for me is art
Beautiful piece of writting btw…I love your posts, they’re very informative!
Thanks very much I’m glad you are enjoying them 🙂