Is just me or does it seem as though street art is being talked about everywhere in American art world? Is the oeuvre of the street now hip or is the art truly being appreciated? Does street art belong in the canon of art history? It can easily be shown that "street art" has been around as long as man. One could argue it has existed longer than any other art form if you were to take into consideration Eypgtian hieroglyphics or older still, Paleolithic petroglyphs in the Chauvet caves in France.
The only petrogylphs I have personally seen are the rock drawings of Olowalu, Maui.
The only petrogylphs I have personally seen are the rock drawings of Olowalu, Maui.
Located behing the Olowalu General Store, these ancient drawings have existed as man's attempt to record daily life and his relation to it.
Fastforwarding to present time, how does our attempts to curate street change it? Does the mere act of curation transform it from an honest yet often illegal record of life to a more codified version? You could then argue that merely looking at it then changes its intention. We then go from there to discussions of Saussure and Pierce's semiotics regarding signs and perhaps we're just not meant to go that deep.
Perhaps we just ingest at a street level and decide for ourselves if Street art is reflective of life, and is so, whose?
No comments:
Post a Comment