Work of art, with out a
doubt! Not everyone's thing I guess, but he did it in the DARK for goodness
sake! The world is a better place for individuals like Mr. Hughes, for
sure. - Su - Earith, Cambridge - England Its seems to me that is vandalism, the contrary of art - g et g leclerc
- France Art, definitely. Building such a mural without painting it, that´s
vandalism. - Danile, Hückeswagen, Germany Those who would label it vandalism would probably also call the modernist 'beton brut' (raw concrete) architecture of Le Corbusier and his followers 'ugly carbuncles'...etc. Here's someone covering up something far uglier and less carefully designed than that - and even blending it into an otherwise unspoilt view of the landscape. You can't win! Some folk just don't like change and bluster about so much that they lose the critical faculty to judge what is good and bad. I think if it had been designed as a visible, above-ground concrete
wall to be seen as part of the architectural statement (however brutal)
of the car-park, then to cover it in painted lines, (however well-done)
would have been an act of vandalism - like repainting with an expressionist
brush, someone else's minimalist canvas. But it looks like this this
is going to be, and by now has probably already been a temporary exhibition,
left only for the worms to appreciate. People should just view it for
what it is, an cleverly placed decorative panel with an interesting,
if slightly mannered style, which nevertheless takes the eye on some
kind of enjoyable journey, see it against their own familiar landscape
and enjoy the commotion it has caused. - Nick Pearson -London, England Well I'm no artist, I just take photographs for a hobby! but it looks to me like ART! Its too regular to be vandalism, and I'm sure it will weather down well with the passing of time! We have a lot worse examples of art in UK. If ti doesnt look too out of place then I think its art. If it was a mess and disorganised then its vandalism - Chris, England
Arte, sicuramente arte. Se fate una petizione per non interrare il muro vengo a mettere la mia firma! - Alessandro, Italy
L'opera di Aiden Hughes e' sicuramente Arte, per una molteplicita' di
motivi. Faccio i miei entusiasti complimenti all'artista e spero che
Barga sappia fare Tesoro di questa sua opera. - Giacomo Verde .. Italy
E' il parcheggio che fa schifo! - Paolo, Firenze, Italy
If it sells, it's art. - If it doesn't, it's vandalism. - Tony, Firenze, Italy
It certainly seems artistic to me. And since it's slated to be covered with earth I can't see how it's vandalism. - Michael Bluejay, England
they're still arguing about whether or not warhol was art.- Atman, USA I guess it's hard to call it vandalism considering that no damage has
been made to a concrete wall that in any case is bound to be covered
by earth The other works by the same artists on your site look rather
good, and I guess the guy may be defined an artist. I own a wall not
too far from the leaning tower, and perhaps a graffiti
VANDALISM! - Bert Beach - USA
ARTALISM! - Filippo Bertolli . Barga Italy
I am sure the original Vandals were not such a bad lot but I guess Roman propaganda was fairly efffective. Dictionary defines the word as to ruin destroy damage etc. I though the mural quite fetching and none of these words came to mind - Andrew, London, England
Definitely ART! - John, Italy It seems rather good to me! If the retaining wall is going to be covered by earth it can't matter if anything appears on it in the interim can it? If the plan was just to leave it as a retaining wall surely anything is better than bare concrete. Is there any chance you could start a campaign to protect this treasure for the "Citta del Arte?". - Jules, www.toscanaverde.co.uk OF COURSE IT IS VANDALISM OR IT WOULDN'T BE GOOD ART - Frank Viviano, France This is a classic act of vandalism, or art-terrorism. Surely art belongs in galleries protected by men in paper suits? But, as you know, trying to get people into galleries these days to see newly commissioned work isn't easy. - Roberto - Brighton, England
Personally I would have said it was art because it looks one hell of a lot better than a plain old wall! I also noted the other stuff that Aiden had done and have to say I rather like it - don't know how he managed to do it without getting caught! - Linda, England
I believe that Aidan should be encouraged for maintaining a family tradition.
His father was 'a landscape painter' while Aidan paints the Technically, because he didn't ask for permission or wasn't commissioned
to do the work, it's classed as vandalism. That said, I have to say it
is an exceptional piece of art and if it was my car park I'd be more
than happy to have that art work on a wall. - David - England Art can be illegal but not necessay vandalism like vandalism often can
be perfectly legal ( try to walk near Arno in Pisa during the summer
and smell Definition of art = the conscious use of skill and creative imagination
especially in the production of aesthetic objects.
I marvel at the wonderful masterpiece that has now been sent into the
darkness of the earth never to be seen again.
For me, for something to cross the line into vandalism it would have
to be in some way destructive. I cannot see how this has done anything
other than improve the scenery! Now, personally, I think this is actually
quite interesting art ...it's going to be covered up. Sort of a temporary
thing... Kind of going along with the Japanese fascination with delicacy.
Only with a twist it's not really temporary - it's hidden. Some day it
may be viewed again. I think that's exciting and I wonder... what does I like the painting, it's art for sure, to me anyway. Actually, it's
a pity if it is covered. - Sanna - Finland I liked the idea of the work and the others he's produced around Europe
and thought the whole clandestine activity was a very clever plot. How
can it be vandalism if the wall is interesting to look at and has obviously
had a great deal of thought put into it It isn't ugly or crude or offensive
- and does have a certain rhythm to the piece.
DA QUELLO CHE HO POTUTO CAPIRE DEI VANDALI HANNO DANNEGGIATO IL
Mi dispiace, ma io non mi sento in grado di dirti se ritengo il lavoro
di Brute! arte o vandalismo. Anche perchè non me ne frega nulla
di fare questa distinzione.
Credo proprio che sia arte! un vandalo distrugge e non crea! Adesso il problema si porrà alle autorità che dovranno decidere se conservare o distruggere un'opera DI UN ARTISTA CHE DOMANI POTREBBE ANCHE ESSERE RICONOSCIUTO COME UN GRANDE. - Enrico Rabassini
Is this Art or Vandalism? The latest public exhibit from Aiden Hughes, a mural on the concrete wall beside the car park below Barga Vecchia, prompted some newspapers to pose a familiar question recently. Whether gratuitous displays of “creativity” constitute acts of vandalism or works of art has been a favourite topic of debate in the past and will surely continue to occupy the minds of the philosophically inclined for as long as the fundamental questions of existence remain unresolved. However, to ask the onlooker to make this judgement, vandalism or art, is surely to offer a misleading and unrepresentative choice in situations like these. The fact is that art and vandalism are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The Oxford Dictionary defines Vandalism as “causing damage to personal or public property”. We more usually think of it as an act that results in the defacing of public property. The same reference source, defines art as “the creation of works of beauty or other special significance”. If the first part of that definition didn’t offer sufficient scope for subjective interpretation on its own, then the last phrase certainly makes sure of it. Clearly, an act of vandalism can have an artistic result. At the same time, not all acts of vandalism would be said to fall into that category. To many, spray-painted graffiti on the side of the carriages of the New York subway are widely regarded as works of art and not acts of vandalism, although there are others who view the practice as destructive and anti-social. Conversely, in Britain, adorning a statue of Winston Churchill with the most colourful and imaginative decoration is virtually certain to invite the sternest condemnation from the majority of onlookers. These two extreme examples suggest that making the distinction between art and graffiti might necessarily take into consideration: a) The site of the act With respect to a), modifying any structure or artefact which is already held in great esteem or reverence by a society is likely to cause outrage and earn a negative reaction, while a commonly-held public eyesore can be defaced significantly, without causing widespread annoyance, depending on perceptions related to c), for graffiti that contains obscenity, or other distasteful content, will offend and cause distress wherever it is portrayed. As far as b) is concerned, most people may well be influenced by the identity of the person or persons responsible for the act, should they become known. A gang of youths might creatively modify a statue and receive howls of disgust, while an acknowledged “artist” might perform exactly the same act and not experience anything like the same degree of criticism. Opinions related to c), lead naturally to a consideration of some of the fundamental questions of philosophy when opinions concerning the quality of the work are under the microscope. These questions include: What is Right and Wrong? Many people regard the answers to these questions as unavoidably subjective. To this group, the question of differentiating between a piece of music by Mozart and a pop-song from Kylie Minogue is irrelevant. Quite simply, they see this question as merely a matter of opinion. Platonists, on the other hand, subscribe to the theory of underlying forms, which puts forward the idea that everything in existence has a “perfect form” in essence and that physical manifestations conform in varying degrees to this model of perfection. The closer a representation is, the more true it is and thus, the more qualitative it is as a work of art. Considerations emanating from c), should also embrace the question of how different people might be affected by the result of the work. Daubing murals or slogans on World War 1 cemeteries will certainly be viewed as insensitive and disgusting, whatever their artistic quality. But perhaps all of this speculation is to generalise too much. Maybe each act of vandalism” should be judged individually. If we address Aiden Hughes’ most recent creation in isolation and ask the questions of it that I’ve posed above, then we might get the following outcome: In answer to a), the site of the act, well the site was a car park wall and therefore probably not held in particular affection by the Barga public. With respect to b), the originator of the work, this was Aiden Hughes, a man who has become known for similar acts elsewhere. With such a reputation he’s likely to receive a more tolerable reaction from the public. Regarding c), the result of the act, with respect to a qualitative interpretation, this will invariably depend on a), that is, what was in existence before the act of vandalism or artistic creation was committed. In this case, we have a pretty unremarkable car park wall and Mr Hughes work would consequently seem to have decorated rather than degraded. Then again, can or should annoyance and personal reaction to the work disqualify it as a piece of art anyway? In conclusion, perhaps it is consideration a), the site of the act, and specifically the fact that this work was committed on a car park wall that has crucial relevance. Here in particular, I am also thinking of the second part of consideration c), the affect of the result of the act on specific onlookers. Those who were fans of Douglas Adams’s Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy will recall that the robot, Marvin, was once heard to complain bitterly of being left in charge of a car park. Now, with Aiden Hughes’ contributions, the wall of this particular car park is under consideration as a work of art. Had Marvin been left in charge of this car park then, the work of Aiden Hughes would surely result in the promotion of Marvin from mere car park attendant to Art Museum Curator, surely much more fitting and acceptable to one with “a brain the size of a planet”. With that in mind, I’m sure that Marvin, at least, would vote the mural a work of art and not an act of vandalism. So perhaps it is all unavoidably subjective and inextricably linked
to the site of the artistic defamation. The American author, Robert Pirsig,
once had a character he called Phaedrus pursue the question of whether
there ever can be an objectively defined Quality. This question is pursued
in the novel Zen and the Art of Motor Cycle Maintenance, another suitable
artistic literary vehicle for a car park? - Peter Roberts - England
ARTIST'S PROFILE - AIDAN HUGHES Aidan Hughes was born on Merseyside in 1956 and was formally trained
by his father, a noted landscape painter. After a brief sojourn at Liscard
School of Art, Aidan began his commercial life as an artist by designing
greetings cards and T-shirts. In the late 70's he launched his own art
movement,
called simply e, whose manifesto demanded a new modernist approach to
art, eschewing
private displays of emotion for a 'plastic' response to
every day life via the new medias of sound and film.
Undeterred, Hughes has plans for an entire housing project in southern
Spain later this year. 'I don't necessarily go along with the 'safe'
path in obtaining planning
<back to the main Aidan Hughes
page< <back to barganews.com> |