anti:freeze

I like this specifically because, in this instance, you're dealing with a building that has only been "vandalized" by fingers along a dusty surface. You've got me thinking about these types of markings vs. those done with a spray-can. And what about graffiti done with a ballpoint pen or pencil? Would the people who write "nasty chicken shits" in dust spray it in paint if they happened to have a can? Or is there something too inviting about a wall or window thick with dust to walk by it without leaving your mark? Dust can be wiped away. Doesn't this represent a safe way to be naughty? To rebel ...but only temporarily? Is pencil a little more bold than dust? Ballpoint pen a little more gutsy than pencil? Or is it a matter of convenience? I'm a pretty big wuss, I know I could do dust and maybe pencil ...but I top out there. Also, I'm not much of an artist, and my political beliefs don't generally translate well into catchy phrases ...so I tend to avoid the graffiti arts all together. I wonder if the author of "nasty chicken shits" would have taken a bit more care in his/her message if he or she would have been holding a can of spray paint. Wouldn't there have been a bit more pressure to create something ...I don't know, more aesthetically pleasing?

I love your questions, Dewi. This is one of the major issues in art history, as it wrestles with ideas like Arte Povera, Fluxus, performance art, video art, digital images, etc. What does it mean when art doesn't last? When it's not even necessarily an aesthetic object? Or even an object? When it has no intention of lasting? From a museum standpoint, it's also a practical question, a preservation nightmare. When I was working at the U of Iowa Museum of Art, dealing with the Lil Picard estate and Fluxus collection, there was always a sense of urgency, a race against time. The art wasn't made of lasting materials. It wasn't even meant to be preserved at all. It was falling apart. (And then, of course, there was the ethcial question of whether we were actually harming the art/artists by going against their intentions).

Anyway, thanks for your post. I love the way you take it through different levels of permanence, and what that might mean for aesthetics (pencil v pen v spray paint).

http://seaofclouds.typepad.com/photos/grafitti/