As I am writing these words this beautiful artwork that has over the years become the landmark of Berlin is being painted black. All over.
Right now it looks like this:
and by tomorrow it’s going to look like this:
or like this:
or finally like this:
And it is not the city of Berlin doing that, neither it is the real estate developers who want to build a new residential complex at this empty spot.
In fact, it is being done by the people related to BLU — the artist who made this painting.
With his consent.
Sort of a desperate statement: having learned that a new house would be built at that spot with a panning view on the paintings (that would be preserved on the wall), the artists decided to paint them all black, so that nobody can take advantage of the original work… A “fuck you” gesture towards the city, towards the real estate company, but most of all – to all the people who love this artwork and everything that it’s come to represent. And especially – the piece of the empty land next to the painting – one of the few empty spots left on the river Spree. After the painting is gone, there’s nothing left to save it from real estate developers. Only a sad “your city” pitch-black pessimistic statement that admits the loss…
The argument of the people who are doing that is that Berlin is not the same anymore, that the real estate company will just use the artwork to sell apartments more expensive, that a new statement needs to be made at this new moment of time… In a way, they are doing exactly what the artwork says: “reclaim your city”.
But their way of “reclaiming” Berlin is actually accepting their own loss. Accepting that they cannot win the fight. Losing hope. The sailors of the sinking ship decide to take the ship down that is already drowning – even faster – and with a big bang. So that at least, after they sink, they are remembered.
If that is a statement, it is a statement of total despair, pessimistic and negative at its core, devoid of any faith, belief, and hope.
A statement that is full of anguish. Attempting to gain control where it cannot exist anymore. And very symptomatic of street art and contemporary art in general: full of irrelevant ego-driven explosions within the small bubbles that nobody cares about anyway.
A statement that is also full of hypocrisy. The people who are destroying the artwork say that they act with BLU’s consent. They say that he doesn’t want to help real estate companies sell their apartments better. But he does not seem to mind that those same real estate companies inadvertently provide canvases for his own artwork to sell better…
A statement that is completely stupid and pointless, because most people will simply not care. And those few who love this painting and this place will lose the chance to enjoy it and will instead have to face a pitch-black pessimistic statement that’s supposed to be some political gesture but instead suffocates in its own hypocrisy, pointlessness, and despair.
And, most importantly, a statement that deprives Berliners of the last chance to save the beautiful empty piece of land next to the painting. The special status of this artwork and its popularity could help revert the decision to build houses there. However, it’s going to be very easy to cover up the desperate pitch-black “fuck off” gesture and no one will even complain. This work had a chance to use the fact that it has been used and, literally, reclaim the city, at least the little piece of land it was next to. However, they chose to give up on their own work, on their city, and on that little chance they had to actually make the painting do what it (now) used to say…
UPDATE
There has been quite a lively discussion on this page, so I think it’s necessary to express my point of view in a more concise way to avoid misinterpretation:
This action is hypocritical because the street artists who claim that the city’s surfaces are for everyone just cannot get possessive about their work – otherwise, they contradict themselves.
The action is desperate and defeatist because it simply reveals what is going to happen before it actually happens. Like spoiling the end of the movie and thus depriving us of the experience, which would generate a stronger debate with a longer timespan (i.e. the duration of construction) about the empty spaces in Berlin and the commodification of street art. It would make much more sense to lose this art piece to the real estate developers in order to win in the long term.
With all due respect, but I think that the author is projecting a lot of his own pessimism, despair and hipocrisy on the action he criticizes. As context: I have been living a few blocks away from the piece for years. It was alright I guess, a good, interesting piece, but I never understood all the fuzz about it. I certainly didn´t like the hype or how it has become this symbol for the hippness of Berlin, beeing on cover of tose obnoxious street art books and everything.. And yes, the neighbourhood is changing fast and it´s freedom, combativeness and lightheartedness are beeing displaced by money and authority. until a few months ago there was a squat in the terrain infront of the piece, now lofts or some other nice clean and profitable thingy like that´s coming. By destroying the piece Blu admitts that he has been used and pocketed by those ransacking the culture of a city. I have always been of the opinion that once you put something on the street it ain´t yours anymore, still, considering the circumstances I love the action, by destroying it in such a way he somehow reclaims sovereignity. The fact that he also makes it imposible to cash in on it is a welcome side effect in my opinion. Unfortunately the rest of the “street” art establishment doesn´t seem to have the spine to act similarly determined and refuse their stuff to be engrossed.
This was not an act of resignation, this was a call to battle.
This is not a call to battle, sorry.
The fact that the work was so well-known could actually save the empty piece of land (petition was under way, politicians could get involved and revert the decision).
But the artist sacrificed this last chance for the sake of making this lousy statement that he does not want his work to be “decoration” in somebody’s lofts.
He was OK to have it as decoration of the area, because, obviously, that sells better… (check out his DVDs on sale and his popular YouTube channel)
And, ironically, to make this statement he used exactly the same mechanisms used by the “money” and “authority” you so despise: fences, legal permits from the landlords, machines, and cameras – filming the whole thing, so it can make him a bit more notorious with his little “fuck you” gesture…
Is this what you call reclaiming sovereignty? And whose sovereignty exactly?
Are you saying that an artist should do everything for free? What is wrong with you, pointing us to his DVDs on sale? I’m happy he’s making money, that means he’s going to continue creating art. You envy his succes, you are bitter and your opinion doesn’t matter… thank god! And yes it is his right to decide what the purpose of his art should be! Who the fuck do you think you are…?
oh no i’m completely fine with the fact he’s making money.
but then let’s be honest: it’s not about sovereignty and neither it is a call to battle. it’s just a very egoistic gesture on his part because he’s getting publicity out of it.
the rest of us get an ugly black wall with a “fuck you” at us and a new housing complex with lofts in a few months.
“{…}
this lousy statement that he does not want his work to be “decoration”
in somebody’s lofts.
He was OK to have it as decoration of the
area, because, obviously, that sells better… (check out his DVDs on
sale and his popular YouTube channel)”
what are you even trying to say?
look, dude, I think that you´ll agree that art can be political. The (political) statement of a piece does not only lie in the piece itself but also in the context of it´s setting and it´s creation. I think you also can agree to the latter. I think that blu saw his piece as a political one, the changing of the setting would have been a shift in context that blu aparently (and imho rightly so) found unbearable, so he destroyed it. again a political act, and a statement as a artist. This piece, because of it´s context, in my view was not intended as some aesthetic little eyecandy for your consumption, the new context however was turning it into that. The destuction was legitimate.
conscerning your hope in politics:
a) it would be very very difficult for any german politician, even if he was willing, to stop such a project. In the german legal system the right to property trumps on allmost every other right. The petition was sort of ridiculous in the first place, not just because it had diminishingly small chances for success, also because by putting the piece under monument protection it wouldn´t have neccesarily stopped the construction. Also putting it under monument protection would have reinforced this, at least in my view, reproachable worshiping static aproach to art (which is criticable enough in art in general but completely comtemptible when it comes to street art)
b) no offence, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I think you have spent no significant amount of time at all with any berlin anti gentirification/”stadteilarbeit”-projects of any sort, if you did you´d know better. Especially in XB & Friedrichshain.
Conscerning the sovereignity:
Sovereignity might have been a very poor choice of words, allow me to apologize for that. I wanted to say “Deutungshoheit”, a german word for which I don´t know (and didn´t find) a definition. literally translated it means (and that ones tricky, cause you can´t literally translate “Deutung” neither) “sovereignity of construction/exegesis/evaluation”. Of course everybody can interpret a piece the way they want. They should however not expect other people, much less the artist, to agree on that. As I was trying to lay pout earlyer: the piece does not consist of the paint alone, context is essential in any kind of art done in the street. this goes from train bombings to stencils on cop stations or crossings to just give you a few very obvious examples. The canvas is determined by the context. And the context matters. The piece was basically already modified beyond recognition. Blu just prevented people from hanging it on their wall like a hunting trophy. It´s sort of like that scene in Style Wars (putting obligatory 50 cents in the jar for mentioning Style wars in a discussion about graffiti, really sorry about that 🙂 ) where that gallery sells bombed sheds of subway coats – only worse, much worse, cause socu a loft is exactly what the piece explicitly attacks (I mean, uhm, you did look at the left one, didn´t you?)
About the money and authority:
I really don´t understand what you mean with that “using the exact same mechanisms” thingy you wrote. You mean that he sells his little DVDs, that he (I suppose) pays money for paint, that he might do some sort of consultation with landlords prior to painting? To clarify: by “money” I meant the fact that large segments of the population of kreuzberg are driven out of their neighborhood because of an market to which politics has capitulated, and the project of turning Kreuzberg into a profitable, apoliticized higher middle class & party neighborhood. With “authority” I mean the overwhelming and constant presence of police (and to a lesser extent private security) in the hood. I hope this clarified my previous point.
@disqus_qcyYhe8W7B:disqus this piece has always been an “aesthetic eyecandy for your consumption”, since a long time already. the only difference is that it used to be public and now it was going to become private.
however, it would be much more effective to leave the piece there to be gradually built up and obstructed by the new construction site – it would be a slow and painful display of disappearance… disappearance of the public piece of land, disappearance of the beautiful artwork… leaving the piece there as it is would send a much more profound message that would last much longer… that would initiate a longer-lasting debate…
that black wall, however, is going to be forgotten after the next issue of Zitty is out. it will just loom over the residents as a frustrated statement of a frustrated artist… and there are already too many frustrated artists in that world (and in Berlin after it became harder to buy weed in the Goerli), so most people will just get annoyed about that black wall and eagerly wait for it to be covered up by the new residential building.
to make it clear:
if they kept the painting, then the construction of the new building would appear as a destructive act, because it would be gradually, slowly and painfully destroying the symbol of the neighborhood.
after they painted it black, then the construction of the new building will actually appear constructive because it will be going over something that is destructive already.
P.S. If you are keen to save that piece of land or to prevent the construction there are things that you can do. Both completely legal and hazard free and stuff that might be a bit riskier. Ask around, see what has been done at other unpopular building sites. Get active. Do not project your passivity on someone who actually did something, I mean the publicity and anger (as far as I have noted so far mostly directed against the right recipient {protip: not blu 🙂 }) this generated is not to be underestimated.
You are trying to distort blu’s gesture. His works never was just about beauty or some kind of aesthetic comfort. Good street art have to activate urban space, even if, for this, have to be erased.
It’s not about his work, it’s about his gesture. That action deprived us of the last chance to save the empty piece of land (petition was underway). Now it’s going to be very easy to build some new lofts there and nobody will complain. The fact that the work was so well-known could actually save the empty piece of land, but the artist sacrificed this last chance for the sake of making a statement to the city that nobody cares about anyway. Only maybe his YouTube channel subscribers and fanboys who’ll think it’s “cool”.
ask all the fan boys in Italy what’s being active in squats for 20 years, where there’s a high demand of social housing while our cities are full of empty buildings kept like that just to rise up prices, don’t jugde a mindset if you have no fucking clue about it, you’re here whining because you don’t know Blu as an activist and that’s just sad
if you want to save a place from being exploited get up and do something meaningful (an artsy blog does not count at all)
you see, @robertodormepoco:disqus there are some things that we can do better than others, so it’s better to choose what you’re good at to have the most efficient impact.
i won’t go and chain myself to the fence to protect this land. i’m not so good at that and neither i’m interested to talk to the german police because i’m not german and if you’re not german your rights and abilities are next to nothing in this country, unfortunately.
what i can do, however, is to raise awareness of this issue, to report what is happening, to make the story go viral, and to initiate a debate. that’s what i did on this “artsy blog”… so, after all, unlike you, i was the one to get up, go to the place, talk to the people, try to stop them from painting over the wall and I only backed off when police came and told me the guys showed them the papers and that i cannot and should not stop them from doing what they were doing…
so, please, follow your own advice and don’t judge something that you don’t know about and stop whining.
your first statement is totally true, and your blog is not worthless
what i was trying to say is, Blu is an artist with a cause, the cause is spread awareness about social and political problems, believe me i grew up like him in the same fucked up region, i now live in Rome (which is fucked up too) where there are tons of Blu’s stuff, one of them is hanging over my bed too, but they are meaningless if they don’t give you any value
so he’s not giving up at all, he just made a statement “i don’t want my work to have any tourist/commercial value anymore”, just that, they lost their political value, it happened before it will happen again
search for “blu xm24 bologna wu ming” is a video of the Wu Ming Foundation (you can find more on wiki) explaining a Blu piece on the outside wall of one of the oldest squat in Bologna, Ex Mercati generali 24 AKA XM-24, in the “leftiest” city in Italy, Bologna, places like that are not welcome anymore and Blu’s art was a media to carry a message, not protect the building, but the value inside that building
or search for the piece in the San Basilio area in Rome, where 40 years ago there was a riot by squatters (mainly from the same region where me and Blu grew up) for the right to have a place to live, and a 19yo boy was shoot to death by the police, Blu painted Saint Basilio, smashing the police and the municipality covered with white paint what was pointed as “inappropriate”
i’m telling you this to give you the chance to understand the value of his actions, he has a vision and people must respect that
As if a petition was ever going to stop this land being turned into apartments and realestate profits, get real!!! Berlin is changing and you’re doing nothing to help stop it. In fact you’re working against it by dividing the opposition by criticising others who long ago started the fight of opposition and they did so by doing so how about following their lead and doing something instead of just writing about it, hiding behind your Mac Book Air while sitting in your local cafe for hours on end with a cold, single cup of lonely coffee (symbolic of you) sits futile and unwanted.
Yes, this is a personal attack on your asshole attitude!!!
What sort of dream land do you live in, son? This world right now is a pretty fucking pessimistic place, full of despair. People who think like you are poison. People are thirsty, hungry, they are dying, we still look at women as less than human and most (all) of these things are the fault of capitalism. The prices of real estate in Berlin are a fucking joke. The rich are a fucking joke. The privileged are a fucking joke and THIS is what this gesture says. Life is not a series of techno parties and cool street art, overloading on pleasure. Life is disappointment and not letting them have the last word. Do you honestly believe that some silly petition would have had a chance against MONEY? everyone and their mother wants to live in Berlin and they are going to walk over everything in their way to get there. You should be ashamed of yourself for writing this article… When shit like this surfaces I know Berlin is OVER. And not because the art was painted over but because of people like you…
I totally agree! A superficial and naive article. The petition is going on since september and it seems like there are not even 8000 people who feel the necessity to reclaim this city..it’s not the job of BLU.
so in your opinion, anna, if people did not manage to organize themselves to protect this land, it’s much better to write “fuck off” and to leave it at that than to try to do something?
If you were right, then – for instance – the referendum on Tempelhof wouldn’t have had any chance to get through. Instead it was a huge success against all odds, and it stopped one of the biggest real estate speculations this city would have ever known. If you were right, then it would not be worth fighting for anything, since we don’t have any chance against the oh-so-powerful armies of greed, money and evil. And yet lots of people keep courageously fighting on, day after day, pushing forwards many small projects and initiatives, trying to stop the seemingly unstoppable avalanche of gentrification: founding new housing projects, establishing cooperatives, organizing all kinds of protest and resistance actions. If Berlin has tought me something, it’s that everything, literally everything can be changed, and that you should never stop fighting for what you believe in. But sure, it’s easier to rant about how the world is shit and hipsters and tourists are destroying Berlin and so on.
the world is inherently filled with pessimism, melancholy, difficulty, suffering, but that doesn’t make it necessary to carry all the weight on your shoulders. all these things existed before capitalism, and will continue afterwards, they are inherent of life and the human condition. all i can i say is i’m sorry that you feel that Berlin is over for you, because it still is an amazing place with lots of amazing people and communities, even if the secret is out about the city.
Berlin is not “over”. You can probably come up with a hundred reasons why it is. Life is a matter of perspective. Is the glass half full or half empty?
Dear Dmitry,
you choose not wanting to understand and therefore are a hopeless case. blu clearly makes street art in given contexts like in this case the neighbourhood at the time around cuvrystr. if the context changes dramatically – as it does here from squatted territory to luxurious lofts – the original meaning is no longer existent and the piece of art therefore pointless. you don’t want to understand that to blu this mural STANDS FOR SOMETHING specific that he wanted to communicate that would now be taken hostage for the exact opposite purpose. obviously his narcissism to be famous forever is not stronger than the original intent that included the life of cuvrystr into the art. the fact that it was given to the people of the neighbourhood for free doesn’t give anyone the right to make blu’s art part of their (commercial)brand.
even in an open source philosophy there is author’s intent.
Patrick, it’s interesting how street artists suddenly become very possessive about their art as soon as they lose control of the context. It’s a very hypocritical stance, don’t you find? To complain about being arrested for changing the context of somebody else’s property, but as soon as what they think is their property gets in the danger of being recontextualized, they quickly get the same forces – lawyers, police, fences, and money – on their side… and what for? to make a “fuck you” statement…
I’d like to see them try to do the same they did 6 months ago when the area was not repossessed by the landlord. They would be simply kicked out!
And by the way, it’s more important for me what the work represents FOR ME than what it represents for BLU himself. As I said, this work had a chance to “reclaim the city”, literally, as it said – to protect the piece of land. But no, they chose to destroy this chance and the work itself for the sake of being heard with their lousy statement that will be forgotten in 24 hours…
” It’s a very hypocritical stance, don’t you find? ” no i don’t.
sorry, but you completely missed the point. your comment on this awesome gesture is shallow and offensive. this art work could not save cuvrybrache. it belongs to one of the richest men in germany, artur süsskind. if u look around, citizen initiatives and movements to stop gentrification have been mostly ignored by the city, when it comes to private properties. in this case, they had apartments for sale, even before they set fire to the occupation in september (the forced eviction). this gesture does bring more attention to the subject, it is fully legitimate and an act of dignity. we should paint all the buildings black, and write fickt eusch allee in front of every real estate project that is oppressive, opulent and ignores the local wishes and necessities. berlin is becoming a sad city. like all other cities that have already been eaten by this unstoppable army of desperate obsessive money junkies. results are, police everywhere, everything forbidden to guarantee safety (which by the way does not lack here), stupidity and ignorance build up around status, which actually comes from stupidity and ignorance. so it is a very closed circle and an unscrupulous one. do not criticize a movement, do something substantial to give it more force. the first thing u can do is to inform urself.
Totally agree tjago san !
You are totally wrong. In fact, there is in fact something in this world that can fight both money and private property: it’s called politics.
Those people who painted it with black put some effort to make the arrangement with the landlord, to pay for renting painting equipment, etc. – they could as well put their energy to make that painting classified and then use some other legal means to protect that piece of land. In that case they would actually make use of the fact that the painting was used by the city to use the city itself with the painting.
But you know, this is exactly what the point of this article is. People like you choose to be pessimists, accept that their ship sinks, sink with it, and the only thing you can do is to say “fuckt eusch allee” – otherwise, fart into nothingness, really. Some other people choose to be optimists and choose to believe that they could actually fight for what they love – in that case a piece of empty land that could be protected with this artwork….
Making a legal arrangement with the city to protect the status of the painting would be mingling with the establishment. What would be the point? The land itself is not worth saving, it’s the original context that made the artwork what it was and what would it make worth saving. The original context is gone, trying to “preserve” or “protect” at least some of it would be trying to put lipstick on a pig. He did the right thing.
so it’s ok to mingle with the establishment to get the official permits and to get behind the fence to do their ridiculous gesture, but it’s not ok to mingle with it to protect the land?
Yes. The land has become worthless for their cause. There is no point in saving it.
i rather find this article to be stupid and pointless (and utterly naive), to use your language. but to each his own opinion. this was a show of art done with a piece of art he created. you shouldn’t project your own view on others as this is not a “fuck you”-gesture to people who love his artwork. on the contrary, this is a much-needed statement.
what else should i do and should i not do? i mean, come on, of course i have my point of view and i share it. their “fuck you” is a statement that i hear everyday from people like you: who gave up on everything and try to be relevant by farting into the darkness…
you are absolutely absolutely clueless. write about something you have more experience with
that’s all you could say? looks like you don’t even have a clue about what you’re writing about in this small comment of yours… care to elaborate?
thumbs up people who have overwritten blu’s work! it’s a sign against the commodification of everything. the “fuck you” of the artist and his pals is well deserved.
in that sign of commodification they are merely attempting to keep that work a commodity. the artist can say as much “fuck yous” as he wishes, but not at the expense of me seeing his stupid statement on the wall, and surely not at the expense of the empty piece of land that had a chance to be saved and now will have none.
well there is absolutely no panning view planned:
http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/planen/b-planverfahren/de/fruehbb/2-40/download/2_40ve_studie_cuvryhoefe.pdf
Anyone wants cheese? Looks like there is more than enough whine so far.
I can understand why Blu wants or gave permission to erase his work, but I still think street art – once it’s out there , the artist gave to the society and shouldn’t take it back !
Way to utterly miss the point. You remember the double page in Banksy’s book about the broken window theory? One one page, there is a statement about graffiti being similar to broken windows – once there are a few, people will think nobody cares about an area anymore and will see it as an invitation to run it down further. On the other side, there is an email to Banksy from a person complaining that Banksys graffitis are actually driving up property values because they attract a faux-hip bourgeoisie.
This is exactly the same issue here. Street art that was meant to criticize the establishment, is being transformed and twisted to become part of the establishment and even represent it. Keeping this from happening is an act of dignity and I am fully on Blu’s side.
The establishment doesn’t give a shit about this kind of criticism: instead, they use your taxpayers’ money to wipe it over with fresh paint the next day. The most that this kind of political street art achieves is to increase the sales of paint and give work to the city cleaning office…
A more interesting action would be to use the position that this work gained within the city and protect the piece of land through getting a listed status for this artwork. That would be a truly efficient way to criticize the establishment and to not let the “hip bourgeoisie” get a loft at that beautiful empty piece of land on the river…
Doing this would be reactionary and against the spirit in which the original piece was made. It’s akin to becoming part of what the artwork are criticizing. The change that is coming over Berlin cannot be stopped, accepting this fact is not pessimistic or defeatist. One’s energy is better spent in criticizing the process through art statements, which is exactly what happened here.
Dear Dmitry,
Thanks for the article and the interesting take on the action. But what is your argument exactly? Is it that they deprived us of a work that was public? And that a piece of private land would preserve this for the benefit of everyone?
You say that BLU is/are hypocritical. They are. I agree with that. But by setting up the hypocrisy and fallibility of one group of people, or an artist, against institutions, a speculative faceless property market or the interests of people in positions of more power than themselves, it seems that you’re suggesting that the latter is somehow more morally pure simply because they are barefaced in using the media, law enforcement and the state to carry out their aims.
Firstly, individuals are hypocritical. That isn’t a moral defect in their character as you suggest. Institutions are also hypocritical. But there’s more to shout about when institutions are, because more is at stake, and it affects more people in more serious ways. A petition and action may have saved the piece and the land, like in the case of Tempelhofer Feld, but maybe not considering the plot was vacant and unused. We simply don’t know. But stating that a way for people to ‘reclaim a city’ is by preserving large murals on a wall as part of a wider struggle trivializes some very important processes that are at work, in Berlin and around the world.
If your argument is that the land should be preserved for a better purpose than expensive property, then make that argument. Calling out an individual for moral clarity because they put what they did on social media with the help of an official fence and they might have said in the past that they wouldn’t do that, is a very pedantic, wishy-washy argument.
Besides, don’t you find the fact they’ve made a massive ‘fuck you’ message to authorities with the help of said authorities absolutely hilarious? And maybe a little hypocritical on the authorities part too?
Best,
Jack
Dear Jack, you are completely right. There are two arguments here. One is that this action is hypocritical. Another one is that the piece of land could be preserved.
I would find it much more hilarious and interesting if they actually used the fact that the work was commodified by the city: make it an officially listed protected Berlin landmark through some populist politician (Klaus could do that before leaving the office) and then use the new legal means to stop real estate development. That would be much more clever and a much longer-lasting “fuck you” to everybody. What they did now, however, is a kind of “fuck you” I hear from an occasional drunken guy on Schlessisches strasse – the effect lasts only a few seconds and if it ever makes me think anything, it’s usually “what an idiot…”
That would be. There was a real missed opportunity here, but in the main I’m supportive of what they’ve done. Besides, doing futile things lends that whole melancholic, under-dog beauty to it all…
Whoever wrote this obviously has no idea about gentrification.
The space would be built over. Thus obscurring the view for the public to see BLUS work.
He chose that space for a reason.
And who would enjoy it even if it was not painted over by the real estate developers?
Only those who who afford to buy property there. And most of them probably wouldn’t want to anyway.
Logic.
It would be much more effective to leave that piece there and let it be covered up slowly, gradually by the construction site.
It would generate a much longer-lasting debate, it would be much more painful for everybody to see, and the anger would be rightfully directed to the real-estate developers and the city officials that allow this to happen.
by painting the wall overnight with black, the artists created a short viral story that will be forgotten tomorrow and left a sad statement with no lifetime at all. when they start constructing nobody will care, because the statement has already been made. so it is good for the artist, but not good for everybody else.
Whatever his intentions were, it was his piece and he can do whatever he pleases with it. There is quite a lack of understanding in Berlin local politics of what then special appeal of this city is. Free spaces and unregulated areas are certainly part of it. Reminding politicians of the transformation process is a good thing. And maybe some day they will find out that Berlin can not and will not function on the same level as cities like Paris or London because it is simply not as pretty and that’s never where its appeal came from originally. But that’s what the city planners in their delusions seem to think.
interesting. so the city is for everybody when it comes to painting on the wall, but suddenly those same street artists get very possessive about their work as soon as somebody appropriates it the same way they appropriated the city’s surfaces?
blu’s work for him is probably connected to a certain space in a certain time. good street art is something the artist “lends” to the public, under certain conditions that she / he defines. so when the space changes, the circumstances change – maybe the people change- he can retract it from public display. why shouldnt they? its not a work they sold to someone and later they discover they don’t like the buyers attitude or personality. maybe his overpainting action was not even so much intended as a political as you make it, but more of a decision that under the circumstances he doesnt want the piece to be there anymore. which is ok by me.
Since when saying “fuck you” is being pessimist? The piece became stronger in my opinion.
Cheesy messages like “reclaim your city” don’t raise consciousness.
Now the update is more provocative. It evolved from a passive message to a provocative action.
Blu’s cause is not yours and that’s what you don’t like.
If the construction project is ON, your petition won’t do shit.
This article is so naive and superficial.
It would be much more effective if they left that painting up and let it be covered up by the construction site, slowly and painfully destroying the empty piece of land and the artwork. That would send a message that would have a much longer-lasting impact.
By painting it black overnight, they created a provocation with a short life-span. When the construction occurs against this new backdrop, nobody will care, because the statement has already been made.
It’s like revealing the end of the movie before you have actually seen it. The effect is much less powerful. We know what we know, but we won’t be able to really EXPERIENCE it.
Frankly the arguments of this piece are absolutely risible. Even no point to lose time repeating what many comments have pointed out already, just MAXIMUM RESPECT BLU, well done.
I really suffer from the disappearing of one great street art pieces, but the point is that the context in which this work has been done had already disappeared: a real artwork does not exist in itself as a monad and a commodity, it is the product of a social context and an historical moment. To destroy this artwork has not been Blu or his friends, but the forces who are taking over on (this part of) Berlin distorting its identity. They maybe in their right, but do not deserve to profit from poetics that do not belong to them. And a painful absence is in artistic and political sense much more useful than a comforting image subsumed into the commercial beautification of the neighbourhood. Remember only few weeks ago the police eviction a lot of poor people from the Cuvry Brache, and very little discussion about that happened in the media. So, if to destroy a beautiful work of art is the way to get people upset about what happens in Berlin, probably Blu is really touching the nerve…
However, thanks for the discussion. I developed my arguments n a post on my Blog here http://www.oginoknauss.org/urbandermatologist/?p=165
I do not agree at all. I don’t see it as accepting defeat, but as using one’s assets quite cleverly. Blu’s artistry and creativity will go on. He’s just moving his pieces on this strategy board game called life. If the lot is already sold – and by the absence of squatters i’d say it iy – he’s truly just owning up to the painting itself – not tying himself to the ties of gold of especulation-capitalism.
I also don’t think it’s hyprocritical. It’s one different thing using an existing building as a canvas for street art and Nothrr building a private building with a view to a famous street art, obviously profiting from it.
And furthermore, commenting your own update, there’s no evidence whatsoever, that the construction company would build a house that covers the art work. They might as well do a glass-façade so as to capitalize over it. In that way, Blu’s signal is clear: “your not capitalizing on this piece anti-capitalism!”
Blu’s action is capitalist at its core: he is reclaiming his private property because he wants to be the one who’s making profit on it (profit doesn’t have to be only money, it can also be free publicity that he was getting through numerous graffiti books). As soon as there was a possibility that somebody else would profit on something that he things belongs to him (which is not the case, because street art does not belong to anybody, sorry – maybe only legally to the owners of the building). So it is capitalistic and in that it is also full of hypocrisy, because it pretends to be anti- when in fact it is pro.
Besides, there could be so many more clever ways to deal with the situation: modify the painting in such a way that the glass wall in front of them would not be possible. For example, draw something small enough that would only be visible through the windows but that wouldn’t affect the view of the painting from far away. That would be much more powerful and subversive: the painting is left there for the people who love it and at the same time it disrupts the plans of the real-estate developers to use it as a backdrop for their expensive lofts…
In many ways, Berlin is over. I mean this free, alternative Berlin, the cheap rents, the free spaces for artists. I don’t know when this happened but a few monthes ago, I felt that it’s time for me to move to another, less superficial city. Today, the “Berlin Touch” is just a marketing tool. Commercial bars use flea market furniture to give their space the “alternative feel” the former non commercial (and now disappeared) bars had. Today’s Berlin pretend to be yesterday’s Berlin just because this is what the tourists expect it to be. But don’t be silly: nowadays, Kreuzberg is one of the most expensive places in Germany to leave. Artist’s ateliers were replaced by start-up openspaces or short-term rental flats. I won’t even speak about the neo-bourgeois, bad taste Prenzlauer Berg. Tourists and newcomers still buy this “special berlin touch”, but it’s sadly an alternative Disneyland. So I believe it’s OK for an artist to refuse that his work to illustrate a spirit, a state of mind that has (unfortunately) vanished.
I think that is the most pretentious thing over put into writing…well done
Of course they can get possessive, they are artists – the chose to provide work to the public, not private developers.
Let’s get real here for a moment, ok? Ok. Gentrification, like racism or feminism, is a nice little word that many people shield themselves against justified (in their minds) by the “I don’t have time to think about that, I have to work/support my child/get a promotion” mindset.
But gravity does not need you to believe on it to affect you: it just does.
And it so happens that art around the world has reached it’s tipping point: art detached itself from any type of content because white people told the rest of the world that the struggles were over… but if you just paid atention in the right spots, you could see the accumulation of hurt and garbage. They pushed the Delusion Bubbles until the started collapsing together. And here we are now, 12 yrs later.
Every single day for the last two years I’ve seen the tipping point manifesting themselves. The more artists struggle with words (posmodernism, anyone?) to justify their living bubbles, the more they hit the wall of reality and crack some teeth on the way down. So yeah, the best art needs content&context, it has been MADE that way. And the people borne between 1980 and 2001 are the largets living Social Experiment of the past centuries: genetically modified, gentrified, racially and socially segregated, and hiperconnected with misinformation.
Therefore, you CANNOT say the work of current artists and the reaction they have to this reality is hypocritical, since artists are working in the space that the world provides. Should they work only in the monitored and disinfected internet, so you are not bothered at home? Should they wait for people to sign a petition, instead of WAKING them UP about the inmediate color of the future (Pitch Black or Concrete Grey, btw)? Should they avoid facing the reality of PHYSICAL SPACE, not MENTAL SPACE, that is being f*cked up daily by politicians and Real State Moguls?
People demand from artists: “Be Saints, Enlighten Us! Be Martyrs, Starve Yourselves! Be Ethereal, Do Not Affect The World!”
But more and more artists are saying it to the people’s faces: if you wanted something different, you can tell us about it now and CREATE with us. If you wished it to be in a less stratified art-world, you are going to need to step up and join our work and learn useful stuff, not Realitiy Shows. If you want so much from us, you need to get your head out of your colon and help us recycle the cultural trash we’re living in. If you say it’s all vanity, maybe you should feed your Twitter Feed and Facebook Feed with content that matters and not f*cking Buzzfeed or Vice… before, you know, speaking about a posracial, posgender, posclasses world.
Do not blame us, image creators, for the amount of pornographic reality you are not willing to face: you devalued yourselves happily, yet you demand… what? Aside from “be famous so I can acknowledge your thoughts”, I don’t see any other clear demand.
We are hitting the Restart Button as a Race, whether we are ready for it or not. So, shame on you for writing this piece of crap, and I invite you cordially to plant your feet on the ground, because you need to grow some roots son, and stop the “it should be” game.
P.s.: Berlin is feeding from a huge LatinAmerican exile due to violence, making the city more “exotic&colorful”. Yet, the German Gvt is SELLING GUNS to the corrupt policeforce that fuels the exile. See: #Ayotzinapa, #Buenaventura, #Mapuche. Food for thought…
What bullshit planet are you from? And what winning in the long-term would there be?
You’re just another snob who wants his cake and can eat it.
Go stick your opinion where the sun don’t shine! And please keep any future ones to yourself. How about trying to do something instead of criticising others for their actions and decisions.