Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Man Injured By Tree Limb Files Suit Against City
Charles Barron Will Run For Council Speaker
Alleged Tiger Mistress Is Unrecognizable To Dead Fiancee's Dad
New Jersey State Senate To Vote On Gay Marriage
With the opening of the first section of the High Line park oh so achingly close (June, the say!), there's been an increasing flurry of activity up on the section between Gansevoort Street and 20th Street. We last checked in on the progress in December, and today comes word that workers have been "cleaning" the High Line of graffiti, or "destroying" long-lived street art, depending on your point of view.
A tipster writes: "I noticed this morning that a worker on the new Highline is in the process of painting over the graffiti that has forever been a part of the Roxy's structure. I think what makes the Highline so special is its attempt to claim urban decay as a feature of beauty... not about painting over any former features of the city." An architect associated with the Highline rehabilitation tells our source, "We fought to save it but the mayor and the Parks authority have a zero tolerance policy. Really really sucks." Our tipster continues:
I just heard from the director of planning at the Friends of the Highline. He says that the Highline organization does not consider itself responsible for protecting the historic graffiti that adorns the buildings adjacent to the highline. He also said that the mayor's office made private decisions with the property owners without consulting the public. This unilateral decision is troublesome. I hope you agree with me that they should have run public conversations about whether to preserve any of this stuff."
We're also waiting to hear back from the Friends of the High Line for details on what's in store (if anything) for the newly blank space. But for context we turned to our resident graffiti expert Jake Dobkin, who says, "I wouldn't consider this to be a very iconic piece, but if they touch the Revs/Cost Mural at 23rd Street, it's war." Photos of that piece, where the line in the sand has now been drawn, are here.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
^
|
|
not art
yeah Jake, like they give a shit about Revs/Cost roll ups. Count on them buffing it.
And someone will put up something fresh. The circle of life goes on.
Would have been more useful as an extension of the 7 train.
So some vandalism should be saved. Some vandalism should be removed. I pity the person who has to determine the difference.
They will "clean up" the graffiti, but you know they'll leave up all the awful billboards.
Unfortunately, they'll probably place an ad on the wall that they're painting over in that photo.
Clean that shit up. All graffiti is an eyesore. All.
That revs/cost waste of paint and space is in no way a mural, nor is it art. Some graffiti most definitely is, but that couldn't be less so.
"This unilateral decision is troublesome. I hope you agree with me that they should have run public conversations about whether to preserve any of this stuff."
Unilateral decisions from the property owner?
Stupidest statement I've heard this year and a sign of the twisted mentality of the vandals and their admirers. Did the vandals ask the owners before making their own unilateral decision to paint their garbage on the walls?
Revs has moved on to far better stuff. This piece has been adequately preserved on the Wikipedia 'revs' page. I think that's enough.
Erasing ALL the graffiti is a bad idea. Why over manicure the place when the whole point is to merge raw urban aesthetics with a quaint park. Otherwise, why take over the existing structure?
So instead we have to look at ugly billboards (paid for eyesores) or douchey meatpacking tourists?
Then again, you can give me the graffiti you remove. I'm sure I can resell it in 20 years.
I appreciate art, even graffiti, but what is iconic (or special) about the 23rd Street mural?...
Historical context.
Still, not a piece I'll miss horribly.
Ahhh, the endless battle that is the graffiti argument. I do love how polarized a discussion this always becomes. I have my own views on whether graffiti is art or not, but I'd like to pose a new train of thought for the discussion.
I think that certain layers of urban strata are what give a neighborhood, or a city for that matter, it's sense of place. There would be a huge public outcry if the cube at Astor Place was removed, not because it is considered a beautiful object but because it gives that place an identity.
Just because some people think Graffiti is ugly doesn't mean it can't bring value to someone elses experience of living in the city.
Graffiti doesn't work when it's domesticated -- when it's preserved or taken to an art gallery. It's supposed to be in contested territory, open, free of charge, subversive and temporary. The function of rich dullards like Bloomberg is to remove aging graffiti in the belief that only other rich dullards, like advertising people and those who employ them, should control visual space. Then new graffiti can be written over the cleared surfaces -- and the cycle goes on.
How the other half lives
Who cares about the stupid tags
Everyone should still be furious they turned this into a park for worthless rich people to make the real estate skyrocket even more in chelsea instead of just making this a west side extension of the 7 train for the common man.
Do you really think that Chelsea residents would have allowed a new elevated train to be routed through their hood? Pretty unlikely. Not to mention that fact that the way the MTA is currently managed we're lucky that we have the service we do. How long has that 2nd ave subway plan been on the books?
The Highline Park is publicly open to all classes by the way, including the common man.
Yeah, on paper, it's "open to the common man" the same way Lincoln Center, MoMA and the Met are - but, sociologically speaking, those are classed spaces, that "belong" to people from particular class backgrounds (something that somebody who is NOT from that class would pick up on in a fraction of a second)!
And you know that as well as I do!
The only thing the High Line will preserve is greedy developers rights to build bland yuppie condos along its entire route. Parts of that route (upper 20s) look like post-war Berlin. They cant tear the buildings down fast enough. Ultimately the High Line will simply line a canyon of boring buildings filled w/ people who only want to see 'nice' everywhere they go. Such a shame.
Those buildings would be coming down whether the Highline became a park or not. The West side has been ripe for development for years and the gentrifying of the Meatpacking district predates any serious plans to see the elevated rail become a public space.
At least now there will be publicly accessible park space where previously there was none.
I hate the bland new construction that is sprouting up all over the city as much as the next person, but the design of the Highline itself does not fall into that category. I think a lot of the nay sayers will change their tune once they check it out.
I say leave the ruins alone and bomb the condos.
I'm all for good attractive graffiti...but I think my dog could come up with something more interesting.
"if they touch the Revs/Cost Mural at 23rd Street, it's war."
And I hope any taggers who wade into the combat will be taken as prisoners of war and sent to a NY version of Gitmo, there to be detained indefinitely.
Spoken like a true republican asshat.
Written like a true judgmental prick.
If any of my friends, acquaintances or co-workers ever heard you calling me a Republican, they'd laugh their heads off.
You sir, are a douchebag!
Spirit of 76?
I don't think so - more like Spirit of March 1933 [wikipedia it if you don't know]!
Its not that the REVS/COST piece is art, its a piece of NYC history, along with the Tower's Warehouse sign that the work obscures. Like graff or not, its a part of our history, and its pretty short sighted to allow it to be scrubbed. Its not the best REVS/COST that exists, but its a great example of how they incorportated their innovative roller style with historical advertising.
If we considered anything history just because it ever existed in the city, nothing could ever be torn down and nothing could ever be built. Why don't we leave the Gowanus Canal the way it is because it defines the industrial history of the canal? History isn't just existing. It's having some kind of merit, which almost no graffiti does. You want your stuff to be permanent? Paint it on your property.
And frankly, I don't see any "innovative roller style." What I see is someone who has no skill and therefore created something crude and meaningless that any 10-year-old could have made. Just what is Revs? What is Cost? Aside from somebody's ego.
$$
More trees, less concrete & asphalt!
Why doesn't someone just tag spray pain/tag Jake Dobkin's face already?
Why doesn't someone just spray paint/tag Jake Dobkin's face already?
People get attached to the weirdest things.