Boe, one of the artists behind Friday's Turnpike Foxy mural has told Harringay Online that the Boe and Irony are planning to revisit the area to paint a second picture soon.
I started by asking Boe whether it was the Banksy controversy that had brought them up this way:
Boe: We tend to paint around the east of London where there is a great attitude towards street art in general. People like to see nice work on the streets around there, more so than a lot of places around London..... Because of Banksys work bringing it to peoples attention around Harringay, and because of the great reaction its removal had, bringing people to the streets to protest for its return (i've never heard of that happening before!), we thought we'd pop up there and see what the vibe was to painting at that scale.
And then I asked if they planned to be up this way again:
"I have to say we had a fantastic reaction from people, everyone who spoke to us was very friendly and very interested in what we were doing. Its great to get a reaction like that, and we both hope to be up there again soon to do another piece somewhere."
Tags for Forum Posts: street art
Much as I feared.
An unintended but not too difficult to see consequence of the Save the Banksy campaign.
Walls across the borough painted with good, bad and ugly graffiti whether "art" or tagging. So it'll cost us all more for the Council to clean it off.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
I'm not so keen on tagging or ugly grafitti myself but I for one hope the council leave this one well alone, it's a tonic for the eyes amongst the garish plastic legal commercial signage on Turnpike Lane. And don't forget a short stroll away we have Envision Peace by Shepard Fairey. Wouldn't it be something if Turnpike Lane began to attract art of this quality?
So how, Eugene, do you propose to sort quality from crap? Who decides? And what if that decision is ignored by the taggers and ugly graffiti sprayers?
I agree about garish commercial signs. I also find large - and legal - billboards ugly and oppressive. But does that justify anyone spraying ugly graffiti down your, mine, or anyone else's streets?
Every time I walk down the street I don't want to be forced to view garish signs; nor estate agent's "indefinite" signs; nor giant light polluting illuminated billboards; nor the constant defacement of attractive buildings; and of fences, bridges and walls. I don't want to see property developers putting up banners above an attractive part of a local river.
But of course lots of other people think this is all perfectly okay. Perhaps even in some of the most beautiful places on the planet. (Piazza San Marco in Venice comes to mind.)
It seems to me that we need some sensible, broadly agreed new guidelines and new laws to enforce them. Which would balance competing interests. Plus a licensing arrangement where the polluters pay. And if they break the rules - pay very heavily.
It may be that other towns and cities - possibly in other countries - have developed these. So if someone would like to post some helpful links that'd be great!
(Tottenham Hale wad councillor)
(P.S A few years back I think I posted links to videos from Vancouver. The city then insisted on removal of graffiti. But at the same time ran competitions with prizes for street artists painting on designated sites - as I remember it may have been on part of a major bridge.)
You surely can't be grumpy about something so amazing which brightens up a pretty dismal area. To be fair, I can't say the same for the giant willy of Wood Green...
That's one of my points, Soo.
A "Come All Ye!" invitation can mean that everyone and anyone starts arriving.
Suppose you're an immensely talented artist and want to paint a huge beautiful mural on a wall opposite my home. Should you assume I will love your painting and want it to brighten up my day? Then suppose you and I have talked about it and agree on the quality of your "amazing" art, do our other neighbours get a say?
And surely neither of us will be grumpy when someone else insists on painting a giant penis over your work?
True Alan, but I still hope the Council leaves this alone.
But, very seriously, Eugene, on what basis do the jet-sprayers make their artistic selection?
Leave that, it's art. But clean that one off, it's crap. Oh, and the stuff over there? Leave it for the time being, Off-Wash are visiting next week."
Hi Alan
Just wondering whether you'd had any contact with those running the Save the Banksy campaign at the council? Are most councillors 'for' it or do some, like you, see some negative consequences? Most of the press I've seen for the campaign seems to be positive so I was just wondering if anyone at the council had an opposing view?
Thanks
Sarah
Hi Sarah, I'm not aware of a 'Save the Banksy' campaign at the Council. That's not how "the Council" works. Like you, I've seen reports in the media about what Cllrs Alan Strickland and Claire Kober have said or written. I like and respect Alan and I'm sure he's genuine in his views. As one of the Noel Park ward councillors he'll have listened to a wide range of local people.
Just to make it clear, I'm not pro or anti Banksy. I'm anti what I see as the disfigurement of cities. But of course I entirely accept that people have widely different tastes. And as Liz says, some people like bad graffiti.
Maybe the best parallel for me is music. I listen with pleasure to a wide range. (Though there's also some which doesn't do it for me.) It's great when somebody introduces me to enjoyable music which is new to me. But that doesn't mean my next door neighbours or the other people on the bus have to listen to my current favourite singer or composer.
It's another application of the Golden Rule.
© 2024 Created by Hugh. Powered by
© Copyright Harringay Online Created by Hugh