Any comments on the point that every face defaced was female? (Or so the photos show.)

Baby has some momma issues, baby hates his female heart.

Enough already!

So if the owner of a building that has been defaced decided to paint over the "street art", is the owner then a "Splasher" as well?

Besides, a lot of the art is in the form print-outs or what-not that can be reproduced. Can't the artist just print out another copy & paste it again? Common sense would tell a person whose a "street artist" that if they're defacing buildings & such that someone just might deface their art as well. It makes little sense to get upset over someone doing what you did yourself.

It's all a bit too ironic, I guess.

Both wrong only one's a bit more visually attractive than the other... I guess.

Oh and one last thing. Websters defines art as:

the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful or appealing

What elements or principles of art are used here? How is this asthetically pleasing? It's not art based on the definition of art that the objective members humanity decided on. If you want to be taken seriously in the art world don't be an art school stereotype. Don't be agressive or petty. Create something beautiful of your own that says something.

Splashes of paint do not take skill or practice or talent. Fuck you and Jackson Pollock.

He's an idealist. Someone once defined idealists as cynics in the making. I just wonder when this guy is going to realize he's exactly like the people he's criticizing and become cynically depressed. Finally he'll either give in and become the white middle class swine or kill himself.

You're not special guy. You're just another asshole who thinks he knows how to run the world. All these people thought they would change art forever or make some big impact, just like you. But the world is fickle and we will forget you and you mean nothing.

Oh and Marxism doesn't work. Ever.

It finally looks like graff again.

HOORAY!

I have to say that i would be extreamly pissed off if i saw my work destroyed like that! i view graffiti as a form of expression and i hate to see work that good picked apart by what socity. there are many of us who are not the norm or fit into the whole jive of normal every day life and i think that graffiti is a way for that small group of people to express themselves and find comfort in their surroundings.

Why doesn't this guy splash some paint on the schools and on the parks, the places that really could use a few coats? I'd love for this miscreant to get caught and have to do community service painting things that really need it.

What the fuck? Street art is art, and by splashing paint over other peoples art....he must be some psycho loner with nothing left to do in the world. Sure, street art is never permanent and can get written over, but what the splasher is doing..he's starting a war.

I bet he's just trying to be cool with his "oh, look! I splashed paint on someones art! Check out the profound meanings & the uber-cool glass wheatpaste behind it!" Fuck. What a loser.

If you really want to make a statement, then do it on a different wall! Not over someone else's.

I love the splasher. I love paint. I love drips. Bring back anarchy to the streets.

The Splasher is a loser and so is anyone who defends his practices. I bet someone will take him out soon.

Come on JW, that attitude of "keeping it simple" is ridiculous. Ed Koch was talking over your head.

The street art that's getting splashed look like magazine illustrations. They pretty up the neighborhood for the trust fund kids and the yuppies, who price out the older families, immigrants, etc. The act of splashing is political, believe it.

also, there seems to be this ongoing fascination with identifying the authenticity, or lack thereof, of people's status as "intellectual". That bothers me, and seems especially troubling in a discussion about "art" and "bourgeois culture."

what if we actually looked at it. "disinterested contemplation" here people, get your roller skates.

Yo Ed Koch,

I don't know what kind of dope you were on when you wrote that crap I just read... Holy mother of God!

And by the way you might want to check your grammar here and there... Spotted a couple of primary school mistakes... But that's beside the point, I know.

What is the point here, to me at least, is that cunts like you with their pseudo-intellectual horse shit really seem to be missing the point by quite some distance! People like yourself shouldn't get too carried away with the fact they read of couple of books and know some fancy words and are able to knit together some seemingly interesting theory on the matter... Fuck off!

Just use some real intelligence instead of all that fabricated smartness... Keep it simple! Just keep it fuckin' simple!

Assholes like the Splasher just get a kick out of fucking up other people's party... I mean graffiti/street art/fine art/performing art/etc. etc. what does it matter, really?

If you like it - great! If you hate it - fine too! If you want to stir up some dust - by all means! But just come up with a decent alternative! Say what you really want to say! Make it clear!

Put another piece against it!

For instance - One person makes a really bad record that you don't like - fine, then just don't buy it, don't listen to it OR make your own record and prove your point/make your statement.

This goes for all forms of art of course.

Show your thoughts, show your skills, show your talent!

Go and find your own wall - or maybe a whole new medium all together.

But don't just be an asshole and plainly fuck up other people's work... This "splashing" shit is just too easy... The work of a true wanker... a with an abolute lack of character and espeacially talent...

So Ed, next time some issue doesn't mean much to you, do yourself and a lot of other people a favour and keep that pseudo-intellectual crap to yourself.

Are you by the way a somewhat frustrated writer? At least you came across as one... Sorry.

Yours truly,

JW

This whole debate doesnt mean much to me but, as it turns out I had a lot to say. Werid...

Splasher™ is onto something here. Im not discrediting street art, or siding with Splasher™. I will say that street art has gotten way out of control. It rivals sneaker culture in over saturation. However, street artists have a leg up on the sneaker-necks, as they are generally more invested in creative ideas and executions than your average sneaker-neck who is only risking his hourly wage (or his allowance) on the newest "hype" (but you can always flip 'em on eBay if you're strapped, duh).

History is filled with art "beef", and the reactions, and reactions to reactions. Street art, is in part a reaction to the saturation of corporate advertising, and Splasher™ is a reaction to the reaction (wiki Dada if you get a chance). There is no doubt that the act of destruction is just as artistic as the act of creation, but thats merely semantics.

"Art, is the process of the destruction of sameness... Such oddness — based on the destruction of sameness — is the hallmark of the true artist; such oddness is worthy of the name creation" — Bobby Matherne

The controversy is not about if this guy is creating art (or even if he wants to) but it is about who he is "creating" over (and, in effect "destroying"). Its beef, plain and simple. The street artists who have beef act like its their right to display their art on the street anyways. It is not. Dont get me wrong, I love graffiti and in some cases street art to, but what I like about graffiti is that it is illegal. It takes a special kind of person to actually call themselves a "writer". The different is that you have to make a serious effort to be a "writer". In a most cases you're risking life and limb on the regular. Graffiti is a medium for boarder line criminals and maniacs who insist on testing every limit (I say that in the most respectful way). Street art (in most cases) is to relaxed. Its for frustrated graphic designers with to much time on their hands and not enough creative control at their day jobs (in advertising. IRONY!).

There is a strong argument that graffiti is more about the act itself, than the actual product. Style and quantity are always a plus, but in the end thats just aesthetics. The act is the concept. The concept is the art. It is the act that makes graffiti so romantic. It is the romance that makes it art.

Bottom line is, the dudes who have beef with Splasher™ are hypocrites. Least we forget when it comes down to it, graffiti is all about getting up, going over, fighting, and fame and more than anything, the beef. And whats missing from street art is beef. Splasher™ is shaping up to be a modern day CAP. Instead of doing throw ups on the 2s and the 5s hes splashing the walls of the LES and Williamsburg. Splasher™ is just bringing some much needed drama to the street art scene. It would not surprise me one bit if Splasher™ was actually a street artist himself/herself trying to bring some attention to the art form and simultaneously immortalize this time period. Its like Fleetwood Mac, they had some good jams and all, but what really makes them still relevant is all that fucking drama. If you look back in 20 years and there was some OK art and no drama, this whole street art thing will look like a total snooze. Henry Chalfant will be the first to tell you that every good story needs a good antogonist. I only hope that Spalsher™ has half as much charisma that CAP had, and none of the "Lucille Ball hairdo".

what a pussy.

any street artist complaining about what 'sthe splasher' is doing may as well quit.

it seems the people most concerned about what's happening are viewers rather than artists themselves..

if one places art in the street illegally, one should never think that it will, or deserves to, remain there untouched for any given period of time.

if anyone out there has half a brain they'll use this to their advantage and start collaborating with the splasher. create work that will look appealing and striking even if it's been 'splashed'

personally i prefer the splashed look.

I was enjoying the new Obey mural on my block until high-minded jerkwater here got to ruining it and putting up his incomprehensible glass-shards mainfesto.

Let's hear it for self-righteous hobbyist-anarchist white hipsterey Ivy League dudes with upper middle class suburban backgrounds (seriously... who else would it be?!) who whine anonymously about gentrification and the bourgeoisie.

What a douche. I hope he's cannibalized by a rabid mob of drunken hipster artists with ridiculous haircuts.

so this "splasher" is ruininig good art work..its pathetic.all he can do is splash the paint wow how artistic.i wanna see him do a bomb cause i know if someone splashed paint on my work id be hella mad.all i can say is that graffiti is art..splashing paint is also art to some extent..