England's
Mobstr does street art in the vein of
Banksian rhetoric. He's a master of double entendre and subversion. His words are emblazoned in my mind instantly, like in this staircase, saying something we already know but rarely consider.
It gets better.
Last month a "Mobstr vs. Newscastle City Council" series sprouted up across the blogosphere. It's good to see a street artist/human send messages that keep councils wearing chicken outfits. If councils can routinely lull their voters into consenting to "good ideas" that serve the public good/election campaigns, surely voters can launch their own messages back at the council, right?
Graffiti writing is illegal, of course, and might get you
banned from driving, but what about messages written in the public domain that are of public interest? As a voter, i'd like to see more of it.
Just because advertising is "sanctioned" for conforming to a "code of conduct", "does" "that" "mean" artists' own forms of mass communication are less deserving of attention? Let's see:
(Newcastle, England)
I like how this piece looks like a big fucking mess. The infantile disregard for symmetry and proportion, the aggressive splashing of unmixed colours (colors, for the Americans xoxo).
(ibid.)
Paint was applied sparingly to the wall; only where it was needed. But the job was done.
(ibid.)
"OI, NEWCASSIE COUNCIL, GO FUCK YOURSELF. LUV U."
- Mobstr.
Posts
