He has real cred. He came from the streets. For me, the repetition of his work has taken away any power the images once had for me. I see his work and I instantly recognize the style and I think, brand, and then I think Target/t-shirt. I know some guys who he's brought up and I love him for that. He's like any other art superbrand these days I guess. A reflection of the vacuous disposable brand conscious culture we are immersed in.
@trickytoro Isn't that the way with all artists? Don't you look at a Dali piece and think istantly of melting clocks and any advertising related to his work? Or even with music, when you hear a rolling stones song, do you think of the car commercials that used one of their songs. Artists that get famous enough to be part of pop culture will be exploited and become a signature style. If Shepard Fairey ever decided to pursue making fine art, he would no longer be Shepard Fairey.
@neil104 Yet collectors are the only ones buying art. Don't be jealous of the artists who are selling. Maybe someday, if you work at it long enough and provided you have any talent at all, a collector may buy your stuff.
anything can be classified as art. There are all kinds of art, car art, painting, sculpture comics, film, etc... People are confused by semantics. Some people think that in order for something to be "ART" it has to be good. No so. there is plenty of BAD art , crap art, and junk art. The point of contention is that most of this work is communicating IDEAS that have already been talked about in history and art history. This is why the work, in my opinion, isnt very interesting
When you think of the riots in London and what actual human protest is about. It makes these posters with consumerist posterized images of earlier iconic political figures look like DISNEY CARTOON CHARACTERS... This is so meaningless and to sell the images on stickers and tshirts so suburban kids can pretend to acknowledge the bleeding edge of human struggle from the comforts of their bedrooms seems so TRITE and CHEAP and WORTHELSS... In reality these are just GIMMICKS to make some CASH!!!.
Its 2011comerades lets stop bickering! Everything in life is Art!....Some beautiful, some disturbing, some functional and some destructive! its up to you the viewer to pick your poison! Living=Art!
how can fairey's stuff NOT be art!? so much modern art will fulfil most definitions of art but maybe not in 1 or 2 areas. How can that guy gleason say it's not art because it's a brand!? um hello, van gogh's selling for 10s of millions!? people buying fine because it's an investment or to make them look good not because they like it!? welcome to the modern, money obsessed world. Gleason also said art should increase consciousness, this totally does that. plus, it looks amazing.
1000 people could take the same image and turn it into an original piece. It doesn't mean that taking someone else's image is plagiarism it means he's taking what someone else has done and turning it into something original.
found vallen's article interesting, but fundamentally flawed. The only point i agreed with is fairey should tell people where the images come from to increase awareness of old political issues that he is referencing in the modern world. Fairey's art is about concept, not creating something new with traditional techniques. There is a similarity with warhol there but this stuff for one looks so much better! But also the concept is better. Plus fairey donates a lot of the money he makes.
@LKeet6 So he doesnt have to be original and can take what he pleases and mix and match political heroes and straight rip off other logos to make his own brand....OK...
Only uneducated people would appreciate this nonsense. And to somehow classify it in some kind of postmodern category only furthers the illusion of something intellectual going on.
@xpez No he doesn't HAVE to be original, he can be what he wants to be, just as anyone should. Also, he's not asking/demanding that people call him an artist, he describes himself as a "visual communicator," which personally i find a bit pretentious! In terms of the "brand," he has fought a few cases and has won on the fair use law. Some are quite bad copies, i agree. the vast majority for me have been totally changed or an interesting/funny/political point has been made with some change.
@xpez as for you totally pompous 2nd paragraph, not all people want to approach art in a robotic, intellectual way. Art can inspire real genuine feelings. I think fairey's pictures look amazing, that's enough to make it worthwhile. Also many of them make some kind of political or anti-establishment sentiment. Whether they are copied or not, that point can not be denied.
I dont have to argue any of your points. EVeryone can enjoy art on their own terms for sure.
I just think pilfering graphics from the past to reinvent them is BORING. That doesnt mean it cant be popular. That doesnt mean its not COOL to some. It doesnt mean people cant enjoy it.. But putting it in the realm with Barbare Kruger, Andy Warhol, Jackson Pollock, etc is like putting GENE SIMMONS on par with JOHN CAGE....
@xpez Its as if someone decided that anti establishment, punk rock, propaganda aesthetic would make a good branding base for products. What if Martha Stewart starting making paint by number posters of PLANTS and gardens Flowers and just used HOME AND GARDEN MAGAZINE PICTURES FOR HER WORK. sure people would enjoy it and want to buy it and thought it was wonderful. but would you consider it important fine art? It's not very radical when you get into the subject matter of the work.
Well, I think hes great. His attitude is certainly refreshing. I'm very skeptical about street art, because I'm not a huge fan of someone just writing their name in graffito. But he really did something beautiful and different with it.
defined 'genius,' or a 'masterpiece,' or 'intelligence,' or 'music,' or a 'symphony,' or 'fine art,' or the pictorial equivalent of 'Mozart,' or 'Bach,' or 'Beethoven,' or 'The Clash,' or 'Ministry,' or even 'Barry Manilow.' And most important of all, they are NO DIFFERENT than the literally infinite pictures produced in just a: 'one,' single day, in tv - computers - etc, and anyone who tries to ascribe some higher meaning, to any of them including Picasso and Pollock, is FACT: exactly wrong.
As:'The equivalent of the machine language of the brain is very complex field configurations - The mind of man contains only so many visions; four recurrent geometrical forms...life is more patterns in space/time than it is particular things - consciousness is (a) space/time manifold - Einstein had replaced Newton's space witha network of light beams.' Cave drawings are 'cute,' Fairey's pictures are 'cute,' Picasso's pictures are 'cute,' but they are also defined 'noise,' and they are NOT...
FACT: 'Music' IS: fundamental frequency modulations. FACT: A person's developed capability to 'see' a visual equivalet of 'music' is their developed capability to 'see' fundamental frequency modulations: notes, expanded into their developed capability to 'see' directed tension, expanded into their developed capability to 'see' a concordant polyphonically structured whole, of non-tangible form geometrical equations: MOZART - symphony. SCIENCE now confirms these unequivocal facts...
ARE THE EXACT reason the 'art' world exists as it does today. Do you actually believe people pay 160 million for a Pollock because they understand it is a pictorial equivalent of 'Hiroshima'? Hell no. They have been 'brainwashed' into 'believing' that they are buying 'MOZART.' FACT: 'Some artists, like Mozart, find their voice early, but Pollock was one of art's late great bloomers.'This analogy: of defining visual art as 'music,' is the single most often employed scam by the art community...
affected by 'harmony': 'music,' in a certain way, and 'discord': 'noise' in another - completely opposite, way. Because, human beings are not supposed to 'like' this:'At Hiroshima the common lot was universal violence': defined 'noise' - 'chaos' - 'discord.' This is 'why' 2 hundred years ago people would go into a 'music hall.' Because 'inside' the music hall they could 'hear' something exactly different; 'music,' than that which was 'outside' the music hall; defined 'noise.' These facts...
As Keplaer explained;'Geometry is one and eternal - Nature loves these relationships in everything that is capable of being related. They are also loved by the intellect of man.' Fact: The 'Laws of Nature' are pure 'HARMONY.' Science also confirms the fact:'Even bacteria have a hierarchy of likes and dislikes- Scientists have discovered that even in people with no musical training the brain is capable of sophisticated musical analysis' - human beings have a genetic predisposition to be...
This defined syntax is what, factually - historically, enabled art to be transformed from being subjective into objective, and not opinion. More importantly - today, enables a person to produce a 'picture' which is exactly different than any of the literally innumerable pictures which are produced in a single day in the world, ie TV, computers, etc, and deserving of being put in a place desiginated for these 'different' pictures, which are defined 'intelligence,' and not entertainment, TV etc.
It's art. these people are pretentious. Fairey is not creative. I found that most of his pieces have been taken from previous illustrations and given nothing more than miniscule additions. For that reason alone, I could never deem him a genius.
@legendkillermike Wait. You mean it's NOT art - Right? And the people who are attempting to define it as art are the ones who are pretentious. As the definition of pretentious, is: "attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed."
@MrMikeludo Take a shit in your hand and throw it on a canvas, it's art. Both parties are pretentious in the way they over analyze this simple concept. The real question shouldn't be if it's art but rather if his art holds any substance, quality, or creativity. Unfortunately, all those aspects I listed, can vary from each individual. Is it art?Yes. is it any good? Subjective. As I stated earlier, I don't care much for Fairey's pieces, I much rather have the original's he copied.
@legendkillermike If I wrote these words:'girl-dog-up,' would you call me an author? If I nailed two 2 by 4's together would you call me a carpenter? If I pounded on a piano with my fists would you call me a musician? The answer is no, no, and hell no. The thing which defines these functions, is 'syntax': STRUCTURE. The fact is there does actually exist such a thing as pictorial syntax, which is 'intelligence,' which is a mathematical function. Any picture which does not contain it is 'noise.'
@MrMikeludo What structure? who defines this structure or rules? and why should we listen? If you were to bang on piano keys with your fist, most wouldn't consider you a musician because that's the opinion we have programmed into our minds, not because it's the scientific law of the universe. We can accept stick figures drawn in caves by ancient humans as art but we can't accept Fairey's pieces? It makes no sense whatsoever. Art is simply a from of mental expression. Some is better than others.
@legendkillermike The structure, like all syntax, exists a priori, human beings do not invent the rules of syntax, we learn them. Leonardo da Vinci learned the rules and the reproduced them in The Annunciation. It is, as leonardo explained:'Here no one hazards guesses as to whether two threes makes more or less than six - The haromonic proportionality is composed from the various components, as it generates a proportional harmony,' pure 'harmony.' Have you not read Kepler's Harmonices Mundi...
If you google "Shepard Fairey genius," you will find over 468 thousand hits attempting to define him as a "genius." If you put the work in an "art" gallery/museum, if you stand on a pedestal and proclaim something to be "genius,"if you pose the question: "art or not,"then it is attempting to be defined "Art,"and then you enter the world of pure objective fact."Intelligence" is the single most objective concept known to mankind. If you are attempting to produce "entertainment" then simply say so.
Who cares if it's not "fine art", it's not intended to be. You can't look at the work of a street artist and think it isn't art because it doesn't conform to your ideas about fine art. Excuse the cliche, but it's literally like comparing apples to oranges. They just aren't the same thing. Excuse the crap out of Fairey for trying to make statements he thinks are important in a public venue, instead of holing up in a loft somewhere smearing paint on a canvas waiting for someone to appreciate it.
The definition of intellect is: the power or faculty by which one knows as opposed to that which one thinks or feels. The definition of imagination is: that which is not accessible to the sense. So we can know, factually that Warhol was no genius, and so too was not Picasso, and so too were none of them: 20th century "artists". They were, factually, defined "con-artists".
The degradation can also be defined as a regression back to point time zero: the point of a person's birth. And also the elimination of universally applicable empirical self-consciousness: the knowledge that all of mankind can have in common gathered through their senses. Then "art" became the pinnacle antihesis of what art should be: To simply paint a picture of some "thing" never "seen" before, show "it" to the "child" mind: which had regressed back to point time zero, and watch them react.
In 1480 Leonardo da Vinci produced the world's first, and only, visual musical equivalent. This is what enabled art to acquire the title of "Art". This visual music contains a mathematical synatx. Experiencing of this synatax requires a developed congnitive capability. A prerequisite to this is a person's ability to congize "space". We can actually see this ability degenerating from 1480 to 1880, with the introduction of Picasso, and the elimination of "intelligence" in and of art.
i dont agree with what the l.a. times writter says. art is always linked in someway to the social background of the artist. the message transmited by the artist is in dynamic ralation to the social events the artist have been part of. even "fine art". of course an artist might be more in touch with the social aspects, however no art lacks completely a social aspect.
Mat Gleason sounds like such a holier than thou pretentious asshole, people like him represent everything wrong with the art establishment. He is so elitist and nauseating, im going to go vomit.
Fabulous! Heck yeah it's art. Its not Rembrandt but then Picasso isn't either. Watching his process in another video is great. I would buy it in a heart-beat. BTW...I am 52 years old and if it speaks to me and a teenager why wouldn't you call it art?
The most powerful piece Shepard did was the little girl holding the rose...until I saw it was a grenade. That really said a lot, and the symbolism was stunning.
Shepard Fairey's work IS art. It's brilliant work and I commend him for his efforts. He's achieved what a lot of people would like to achieve, but never do.
Love the work. After watching this, I thought I had seen this type of art before. I went and picked up my copy of Orwell's 1984, low and behold, cover work by Shepard Fairey. Anyone who does the artwork to THAT book deserves critical acclaim.
it me, it's art. the main thing i don't see as art would be someone to just video record themselves of just talking and answering questions or singing badly or just ripping up shirts. to me, art is something that you made, that you spend the time on to think of how to get your point across. art is something that makes up my life. i'm throwing you two thumbs up mr. shepard fairey =]
That one guy talks as if the fine art crowd is full of douche bag snobby people. Personally, I love both types...but many people who enjoy fine art are republican (so I've noticed over the years) & don't agree with the message in his art, which is why they "turn their nose," not because they are ignorant, like he portrays them. It's like van gogh painting a girl crying, & a rapist painting the same girl crying...u have 2 look at the artist himself & his views to decide if you like the art or not
I'm 16 i got to art school and working on stencils too..
I love how your idea to shake people awake with your art on the street, now gets this much attention so more people can see your work and open their eyes!
I don't see why there has to be a question about whether his work is art or not. He creates things that make people think and want to see, so even in the most basic term, his work is art.
@psnUNITARD no i don't think warhol or pollock are really artists in that fashion. they may have had talent in other fashions.... but know what they are known for. i dislike their work... both of them
@jtms9 no he isn't worse than warhol because he does at least do something. he is taking from propaganda for a reason, and i like what he does with it. but yes now that i've looked into it he does not give rightful credit at all. if he could do that, then he would be amazing. and yes he is a "brand" we shall say. but that's what i love. the bitch can do something no one else can. but now that i've seen it, i do think he oversteps the line of "creative influence"
@ydoiwatchthese Glad you checked it out. "atleast do something" I dont think Shepard has does any murals himself anymore/aswell as his limited posters. - At every spot he's at he got several assistants who does everything.
But in the end its whether you like his shit or not, which depends on every individual and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. :)
@jtms9 i do like shepard fairey's work, and he does have talent. however, it is a shame that talented people dont have their own creativity, and have to take from others. i had a girl like that in my art major class, she had talent, but she just took every creative thought from me instead of her own self. to everyone else she was great. but to everyone who knew the truth.... thats a different story. it sucks to know fairey is unoriginal, but im glad you showed me
@ydoiwatchthese Try to hold the hypocrisy to a minimum. There has only been one original artist and that was the first caveman who drew on his cave wall. Everyone else has taken from others. Picasso was banned from Giacometti's studio for stealing his ideas. Dali said that" The artist that doesn't copy doesn't produce". Fairey is as original as you seem to think you are.
@jtms9 i do like shepard fairey's work, and he does have talent. however, it is a shame that talented people dont have their own creativity, and have to take from others. i had a girl like that in my art major class, she had talent, but she just took every creative thought from me instead of her own self. to everyone else she was great. but to everyone who knew the truth.... thats a different story. it sucks to know fairey is unoriginal, but im glad you showed me
It seems like "art" has been hijacked by the rich. The definition of art is "The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power." Shepard Fairey does this.
quick question i know shepard has a lot of messages in his art toward politics but why is obery clothing so expensive isnt that kind of contradicting? and why do people seem to like it more becuase it is fashionable rather then the messages they posses
The fine art world is so small that nobody even knows it exists. The philosophies attached to modern art have alienated the majority of the population. The common folk feel like they are not intelligent enough to understand today's art. The art world is a victim to it's own philosophies which have deconstructed beauty and truth and relabeled it all. Most fine art is crap, and sometimes it's literally made of crap. Everybody is tired of that nonsense. People enjoy Shepard's work. Enough said.
This guy SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED a GRAFFITI artist he is the farthest thing from IT AN this shouldn't be called street art it's like saying the logo on your t-shirt is dumb and that's retarded this is all advertisement
@G0BSRMFE He is a graffiti artist. He is a street artist. If Leonardo Da Vinci painted illegally on the walls of cathedrals he would have been a graffiti artist.
Fairey is such a douche: 1) he started the Obey campaign as an anti advertising movement but then decided it would be more lucrative to use it for a clothing line. Thereby turning all the work of the shmucks that bought his bs into free labor posting ads for his anti add clothing line. 2) Fairey, who is widely criticized for his appropriation of others people's images, is suing other artists for appropriating HIS images.
how can this guy say its not art. and whats it with his teddybear-comparison. thats just stupid, cause shepard fairy does not only put something into a gallery! there is a meaning behind his pictures. obviously theres not when you put teddybears into a gallery. stupid comparison, in my opinion shep is great!!!
art is what you make it if you say something is not art your not an artist your just hater so i dare you to step up and say whats art SO TO YOU HATERS OUT THERE TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK IS ART ?
Who ever thinks this isn't art is a dumb fuck. Everything can be art. Music is a form of art and there is no drawing involved. Art is a process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way to affect the senses or emotions and this is exactly what Shepard Fairey does.
im so pissed ppl compare some artists like this guy to andy warhol. warhol was the biggest joke of an artist to ever be on the world. yes he pushed boundaries and what not but all he did was take a picture, anyone can do that, and put color on it. aka a joke. my opinion not yours. get mad about it idc.
If this isn't art , then I still love it. It it in your face , truthful and both respectful and dis respectful. If it isn't art , then it is something magnetic and grabbing. I see total punk and smash face graphic beauty. If it hits me like that , then who needs it to be art? What it is ... Is the SHIT !!!!! ..... and I love it.
is everything a commercial? this is nothing but a "counter informative" anit-critique infomercial. fairey is a decorative artist/illustrator. a very good one. but it's too eager like hering, warhol, peter max.... "fairey! you have an entire lifetime to make art.... slow down or you won't even have an art career when you are 60!"
as far as i'm concerned, art is anything visual. whether it's outstanding art or not is in the eye of the beholder. to argue that shepard fairey's stuff is not art is like arguing that the ocean is full of maple syrup not water. what really matters is if you like it or not.
hes 'bi winning'
emanvans 1 week ago
He has real cred. He came from the streets. For me, the repetition of his work has taken away any power the images once had for me. I see his work and I instantly recognize the style and I think, brand, and then I think Target/t-shirt. I know some guys who he's brought up and I love him for that. He's like any other art superbrand these days I guess. A reflection of the vacuous disposable brand conscious culture we are immersed in.
trickytoro 1 month ago
@trickytoro Isn't that the way with all artists? Don't you look at a Dali piece and think istantly of melting clocks and any advertising related to his work? Or even with music, when you hear a rolling stones song, do you think of the car commercials that used one of their songs. Artists that get famous enough to be part of pop culture will be exploited and become a signature style. If Shepard Fairey ever decided to pursue making fine art, he would no longer be Shepard Fairey.
RUKIHUM 1 month ago
even a artist can't tell what art is only the people that want it or not.
starknight97 1 month ago
If that faggot Matt(cocksmoke)Gleason doesn't like someone's art it's a sure bet it's great art.
kdavisification 1 month ago
fuck you all hes a king
hobbzTV 4 months ago
God i hate art collectors they dont care about the art only how much its worth
neil104 4 months ago 16
@neil104 Yet collectors are the only ones buying art. Don't be jealous of the artists who are selling. Maybe someday, if you work at it long enough and provided you have any talent at all, a collector may buy your stuff.
kdavisification 1 month ago
he's a cool dude
TheCoolMovement 5 months ago
Ugh .... fuckin hippsters
TheJugojumex 5 months ago 13
He is an artist, and a graphic designer but above all a communicator.
Doutcastangel 6 months ago
Fine art bores me. I understand the skill thats involved in capturing an image but thats as far as (the majority of) it goes.
Street art reflects a culture... And tells you a whole lot more than the subject itself.
Some fine art is thought provoking... But all street art is.
sevenstations 6 months ago
anything can be classified as art. There are all kinds of art, car art, painting, sculpture comics, film, etc... People are confused by semantics. Some people think that in order for something to be "ART" it has to be good. No so. there is plenty of BAD art , crap art, and junk art. The point of contention is that most of this work is communicating IDEAS that have already been talked about in history and art history. This is why the work, in my opinion, isnt very interesting
xpez 6 months ago
Comment removed
xpez 6 months ago
Comment removed
xpez 6 months ago
Comment removed
xpez 6 months ago
Comment removed
xpez 6 months ago
When you think of the riots in London and what actual human protest is about. It makes these posters with consumerist posterized images of earlier iconic political figures look like DISNEY CARTOON CHARACTERS... This is so meaningless and to sell the images on stickers and tshirts so suburban kids can pretend to acknowledge the bleeding edge of human struggle from the comforts of their bedrooms seems so TRITE and CHEAP and WORTHELSS... In reality these are just GIMMICKS to make some CASH!!!.
xpez 6 months ago
its art period.
NASH5520 6 months ago
Its 2011comerades lets stop bickering! Everything in life is Art!....Some beautiful, some disturbing, some functional and some destructive! its up to you the viewer to pick your poison! Living=Art!
dksaxton 7 months ago
how can fairey's stuff NOT be art!? so much modern art will fulfil most definitions of art but maybe not in 1 or 2 areas. How can that guy gleason say it's not art because it's a brand!? um hello, van gogh's selling for 10s of millions!? people buying fine because it's an investment or to make them look good not because they like it!? welcome to the modern, money obsessed world. Gleason also said art should increase consciousness, this totally does that. plus, it looks amazing.
LKeet6 7 months ago
1000 people could take the same image and turn it into an original piece. It doesn't mean that taking someone else's image is plagiarism it means he's taking what someone else has done and turning it into something original.
narky646 7 months ago
There is a very fine line between fine art and street art now a day.
the two are starting to emerge and soon you will not be able to tell where the line is.
no big words are needed to explain something simple. some people just sound like they have their head far up their ass.
through out all art history it has been the people who rebel against high art by changing it, that are remembered.
duder215 7 months ago
Plagiarism of the worst kind...come up with something original Shepard. Google: Obey Plagiarist Shepard Fairey, A critique by artist Mark Vallen
RigidSaw 7 months ago
@RigidSaw
found vallen's article interesting, but fundamentally flawed. The only point i agreed with is fairey should tell people where the images come from to increase awareness of old political issues that he is referencing in the modern world. Fairey's art is about concept, not creating something new with traditional techniques. There is a similarity with warhol there but this stuff for one looks so much better! But also the concept is better. Plus fairey donates a lot of the money he makes.
LKeet6 7 months ago
@LKeet6 So he doesnt have to be original and can take what he pleases and mix and match political heroes and straight rip off other logos to make his own brand....OK...
Only uneducated people would appreciate this nonsense. And to somehow classify it in some kind of postmodern category only furthers the illusion of something intellectual going on.
xpez 6 months ago
@xpez No he doesn't HAVE to be original, he can be what he wants to be, just as anyone should. Also, he's not asking/demanding that people call him an artist, he describes himself as a "visual communicator," which personally i find a bit pretentious! In terms of the "brand," he has fought a few cases and has won on the fair use law. Some are quite bad copies, i agree. the vast majority for me have been totally changed or an interesting/funny/political point has been made with some change.
LKeet6 6 months ago
@xpez as for you totally pompous 2nd paragraph, not all people want to approach art in a robotic, intellectual way. Art can inspire real genuine feelings. I think fairey's pictures look amazing, that's enough to make it worthwhile. Also many of them make some kind of political or anti-establishment sentiment. Whether they are copied or not, that point can not be denied.
LKeet6 6 months ago
Comment removed
xpez 6 months ago
I dont have to argue any of your points. EVeryone can enjoy art on their own terms for sure.
I just think pilfering graphics from the past to reinvent them is BORING. That doesnt mean it cant be popular. That doesnt mean its not COOL to some. It doesnt mean people cant enjoy it.. But putting it in the realm with Barbare Kruger, Andy Warhol, Jackson Pollock, etc is like putting GENE SIMMONS on par with JOHN CAGE....
xpez 6 months ago
@xpez Its as if someone decided that anti establishment, punk rock, propaganda aesthetic would make a good branding base for products. What if Martha Stewart starting making paint by number posters of PLANTS and gardens Flowers and just used HOME AND GARDEN MAGAZINE PICTURES FOR HER WORK. sure people would enjoy it and want to buy it and thought it was wonderful. but would you consider it important fine art? It's not very radical when you get into the subject matter of the work.
xpez 6 months ago
street artists rule
ConfusedHobbes 7 months ago
Well, I think hes great. His attitude is certainly refreshing. I'm very skeptical about street art, because I'm not a huge fan of someone just writing their name in graffito. But he really did something beautiful and different with it.
Erkerkerk123 7 months ago
defined 'genius,' or a 'masterpiece,' or 'intelligence,' or 'music,' or a 'symphony,' or 'fine art,' or the pictorial equivalent of 'Mozart,' or 'Bach,' or 'Beethoven,' or 'The Clash,' or 'Ministry,' or even 'Barry Manilow.' And most important of all, they are NO DIFFERENT than the literally infinite pictures produced in just a: 'one,' single day, in tv - computers - etc, and anyone who tries to ascribe some higher meaning, to any of them including Picasso and Pollock, is FACT: exactly wrong.
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
As:'The equivalent of the machine language of the brain is very complex field configurations - The mind of man contains only so many visions; four recurrent geometrical forms...life is more patterns in space/time than it is particular things - consciousness is (a) space/time manifold - Einstein had replaced Newton's space witha network of light beams.' Cave drawings are 'cute,' Fairey's pictures are 'cute,' Picasso's pictures are 'cute,' but they are also defined 'noise,' and they are NOT...
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
FACT: 'Music' IS: fundamental frequency modulations. FACT: A person's developed capability to 'see' a visual equivalet of 'music' is their developed capability to 'see' fundamental frequency modulations: notes, expanded into their developed capability to 'see' directed tension, expanded into their developed capability to 'see' a concordant polyphonically structured whole, of non-tangible form geometrical equations: MOZART - symphony. SCIENCE now confirms these unequivocal facts...
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
ARE THE EXACT reason the 'art' world exists as it does today. Do you actually believe people pay 160 million for a Pollock because they understand it is a pictorial equivalent of 'Hiroshima'? Hell no. They have been 'brainwashed' into 'believing' that they are buying 'MOZART.' FACT: 'Some artists, like Mozart, find their voice early, but Pollock was one of art's late great bloomers.'This analogy: of defining visual art as 'music,' is the single most often employed scam by the art community...
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
affected by 'harmony': 'music,' in a certain way, and 'discord': 'noise' in another - completely opposite, way. Because, human beings are not supposed to 'like' this:'At Hiroshima the common lot was universal violence': defined 'noise' - 'chaos' - 'discord.' This is 'why' 2 hundred years ago people would go into a 'music hall.' Because 'inside' the music hall they could 'hear' something exactly different; 'music,' than that which was 'outside' the music hall; defined 'noise.' These facts...
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
As Keplaer explained;'Geometry is one and eternal - Nature loves these relationships in everything that is capable of being related. They are also loved by the intellect of man.' Fact: The 'Laws of Nature' are pure 'HARMONY.' Science also confirms the fact:'Even bacteria have a hierarchy of likes and dislikes- Scientists have discovered that even in people with no musical training the brain is capable of sophisticated musical analysis' - human beings have a genetic predisposition to be...
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
This defined syntax is what, factually - historically, enabled art to be transformed from being subjective into objective, and not opinion. More importantly - today, enables a person to produce a 'picture' which is exactly different than any of the literally innumerable pictures which are produced in a single day in the world, ie TV, computers, etc, and deserving of being put in a place desiginated for these 'different' pictures, which are defined 'intelligence,' and not entertainment, TV etc.
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
It's art. these people are pretentious. Fairey is not creative. I found that most of his pieces have been taken from previous illustrations and given nothing more than miniscule additions. For that reason alone, I could never deem him a genius.
legendkillermike 7 months ago
@legendkillermike Wait. You mean it's NOT art - Right? And the people who are attempting to define it as art are the ones who are pretentious. As the definition of pretentious, is: "attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed."
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
@MrMikeludo Take a shit in your hand and throw it on a canvas, it's art. Both parties are pretentious in the way they over analyze this simple concept. The real question shouldn't be if it's art but rather if his art holds any substance, quality, or creativity. Unfortunately, all those aspects I listed, can vary from each individual. Is it art?Yes. is it any good? Subjective. As I stated earlier, I don't care much for Fairey's pieces, I much rather have the original's he copied.
legendkillermike 7 months ago
@legendkillermike If I wrote these words:'girl-dog-up,' would you call me an author? If I nailed two 2 by 4's together would you call me a carpenter? If I pounded on a piano with my fists would you call me a musician? The answer is no, no, and hell no. The thing which defines these functions, is 'syntax': STRUCTURE. The fact is there does actually exist such a thing as pictorial syntax, which is 'intelligence,' which is a mathematical function. Any picture which does not contain it is 'noise.'
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
@MrMikeludo What structure? who defines this structure or rules? and why should we listen? If you were to bang on piano keys with your fist, most wouldn't consider you a musician because that's the opinion we have programmed into our minds, not because it's the scientific law of the universe. We can accept stick figures drawn in caves by ancient humans as art but we can't accept Fairey's pieces? It makes no sense whatsoever. Art is simply a from of mental expression. Some is better than others.
legendkillermike 7 months ago
@legendkillermike The structure, like all syntax, exists a priori, human beings do not invent the rules of syntax, we learn them. Leonardo da Vinci learned the rules and the reproduced them in The Annunciation. It is, as leonardo explained:'Here no one hazards guesses as to whether two threes makes more or less than six - The haromonic proportionality is composed from the various components, as it generates a proportional harmony,' pure 'harmony.' Have you not read Kepler's Harmonices Mundi...
MrMikeludo 7 months ago
If you google "Shepard Fairey genius," you will find over 468 thousand hits attempting to define him as a "genius." If you put the work in an "art" gallery/museum, if you stand on a pedestal and proclaim something to be "genius,"if you pose the question: "art or not,"then it is attempting to be defined "Art,"and then you enter the world of pure objective fact."Intelligence" is the single most objective concept known to mankind. If you are attempting to produce "entertainment" then simply say so.
MrMikeludo 8 months ago
Who cares if it's not "fine art", it's not intended to be. You can't look at the work of a street artist and think it isn't art because it doesn't conform to your ideas about fine art. Excuse the cliche, but it's literally like comparing apples to oranges. They just aren't the same thing. Excuse the crap out of Fairey for trying to make statements he thinks are important in a public venue, instead of holing up in a loft somewhere smearing paint on a canvas waiting for someone to appreciate it.
eleventhousandfour 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The definition of intellect is: the power or faculty by which one knows as opposed to that which one thinks or feels. The definition of imagination is: that which is not accessible to the sense. So we can know, factually that Warhol was no genius, and so too was not Picasso, and so too were none of them: 20th century "artists". They were, factually, defined "con-artists".
MrMikeludo 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The degradation can also be defined as a regression back to point time zero: the point of a person's birth. And also the elimination of universally applicable empirical self-consciousness: the knowledge that all of mankind can have in common gathered through their senses. Then "art" became the pinnacle antihesis of what art should be: To simply paint a picture of some "thing" never "seen" before, show "it" to the "child" mind: which had regressed back to point time zero, and watch them react.
MrMikeludo 8 months ago
In 1480 Leonardo da Vinci produced the world's first, and only, visual musical equivalent. This is what enabled art to acquire the title of "Art". This visual music contains a mathematical synatx. Experiencing of this synatax requires a developed congnitive capability. A prerequisite to this is a person's ability to congize "space". We can actually see this ability degenerating from 1480 to 1880, with the introduction of Picasso, and the elimination of "intelligence" in and of art.
MrMikeludo 8 months ago
This is soooooo art. It's just too awesome for those stuck up guys to comprehend.
TheWrongLefty 8 months ago
i dont agree with what the l.a. times writter says. art is always linked in someway to the social background of the artist. the message transmited by the artist is in dynamic ralation to the social events the artist have been part of. even "fine art". of course an artist might be more in touch with the social aspects, however no art lacks completely a social aspect.
leoelmosca 8 months ago
this isn't art it is better than art its so damn good that people in the art community haven't even made a word for it yet
mylescot24 8 months ago
It's art in my book.
KanSirKing 8 months ago
So what if it's not fine art you smug assholes, it's still some of the best art I've ever seen!
Battezu 8 months ago
I think his art work is beautiful and i would buy it if i had the money haha.
ItsMeAgain0909 8 months ago
Street art is the latest movement in art. One day it will be in the history books just like the renaissance and pop.
sproket343 8 months ago
This guy is so far from Warhol it isn't even funny. And that's a compliment.
sproket343 8 months ago
Clearly art,.
sproket343 8 months ago
Who are you to say what is or is not art. If you creatively market your art and message, you are no longer an artist? That's life.
TheBieberDiehards 8 months ago
Mat Gleason sounds like such a holier than thou pretentious asshole, people like him represent everything wrong with the art establishment. He is so elitist and nauseating, im going to go vomit.
delxart 8 months ago
Fabulous! Heck yeah it's art. Its not Rembrandt but then Picasso isn't either. Watching his process in another video is great. I would buy it in a heart-beat. BTW...I am 52 years old and if it speaks to me and a teenager why wouldn't you call it art?
SueMan79 8 months ago
A pencil can be art if a person can find meaning in it or/and draw emotion out of it. Whether something is art or not is determined by the onlooker.
BitterSweetBleu 9 months ago
Life is art.
MISS4149 9 months ago
The most powerful piece Shepard did was the little girl holding the rose...until I saw it was a grenade. That really said a lot, and the symbolism was stunning.
Way to be, Shepard Fairey! :)
thatskateful 9 months ago
This is nit art it used to be, but galleries and clothing defeats the whole purpose of what it stands for
RIOT227 9 months ago
At the moment Shepard is the face of art, I'm sure it will stay that way for a long time
Enwazzirb 9 months ago
He Uses Alot Of The Colors : Black, Gold, And Red
Trade Mark For Him?
Yes :)
EmilySketchit 9 months ago
Shepard Fairey's work IS art. It's brilliant work and I commend him for his efforts. He's achieved what a lot of people would like to achieve, but never do.
davidchristian17 9 months ago
I call that art more than a lot of other famous "art" pieces.
bbuzzard96 9 months ago
Art
1dcramo 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow he's amazing! : )
MuFFugginLover 9 months ago
Love the work. After watching this, I thought I had seen this type of art before. I went and picked up my copy of Orwell's 1984, low and behold, cover work by Shepard Fairey. Anyone who does the artwork to THAT book deserves critical acclaim.
SirHanger18 9 months ago
Art is defined by the artist.
onefish26 9 months ago
Lets start arguing whether or not howl has any literary value...
RareAirSupply 9 months ago
HOW THE FUCK IS 0:38 NOT ART?
dlMrINSPECTORlb 9 months ago
i love it!
it me, it's art. the main thing i don't see as art would be someone to just video record themselves of just talking and answering questions or singing badly or just ripping up shirts. to me, art is something that you made, that you spend the time on to think of how to get your point across. art is something that makes up my life. i'm throwing you two thumbs up mr. shepard fairey =]
dark7days 9 months ago
That one guy talks as if the fine art crowd is full of douche bag snobby people. Personally, I love both types...but many people who enjoy fine art are republican (so I've noticed over the years) & don't agree with the message in his art, which is why they "turn their nose," not because they are ignorant, like he portrays them. It's like van gogh painting a girl crying, & a rapist painting the same girl crying...u have 2 look at the artist himself & his views to decide if you like the art or not
jms8220 9 months ago
Like
Rembacheid 9 months ago
Damn Shepard, your my hero!
I'm 16 i got to art school and working on stencils too..
I love how your idea to shake people awake with your art on the street, now gets this much attention so more people can see your work and open their eyes!
You deserve this!
btw awesome Joy Division T man! ;)
baaciaateboy 9 months ago
Exit through the gift shop :)
MrsBobbydeniro 9 months ago
he's so fuckin' perfect!
claudiapt23 9 months ago
WOAH. THIS IS REAL. ANDY WARHOL WOULD EAT POO.
dollycarcass 9 months ago
Comment removed
dollycarcass 9 months ago
LSD creates prodigies in every field :)
NoNameWorks420 9 months ago
Mat Gleason is an untalented asshole.
Murderermarv 9 months ago
I don't see why there has to be a question about whether his work is art or not. He creates things that make people think and want to see, so even in the most basic term, his work is art.
ReiShadow 9 months ago
dudes good
ica949 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Mat Gleason is an idiot.
xSassySailor 9 months ago
Mat Gleason is an idiot.
xSassySailor 9 months ago
this isn't like andy warhol at all. unlike andy warhol, Shepard Fairey is actually making art. and i fucking love it
ydoiwatchthese 9 months ago 11
@ydoiwatchthese
well said mate. Never been a fan of warhol, the pop are thing was kind of a good comment by warhol but that was it, it was pop itself, throw away.
LKeet6 7 months ago
@ydoiwatchthese Warhol was making art? If people call fucking paint splatters art, then Andy Warhol work is art as well.
psnUNITARD 5 months ago
@psnUNITARD no i don't think warhol or pollock are really artists in that fashion. they may have had talent in other fashions.... but know what they are known for. i dislike their work... both of them
ydoiwatchthese 5 months ago
@ydoiwatchthese dude. Search for 'Disobey duh fairey' and tell me again that shepard isnt THE plagiat artist ever existed even worse than WARHOL.
jtms9 5 months ago
@jtms9 no he isn't worse than warhol because he does at least do something. he is taking from propaganda for a reason, and i like what he does with it. but yes now that i've looked into it he does not give rightful credit at all. if he could do that, then he would be amazing. and yes he is a "brand" we shall say. but that's what i love. the bitch can do something no one else can. but now that i've seen it, i do think he oversteps the line of "creative influence"
ydoiwatchthese 5 months ago
@ydoiwatchthese Glad you checked it out. "atleast do something" I dont think Shepard has does any murals himself anymore/aswell as his limited posters. - At every spot he's at he got several assistants who does everything.
But in the end its whether you like his shit or not, which depends on every individual and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. :)
btw
BLEK LE RAT 1970*
BANKSY RAT 2003?
Who is the most original vs the most payed?
jtms9 5 months ago
@jtms9 i do like shepard fairey's work, and he does have talent. however, it is a shame that talented people dont have their own creativity, and have to take from others. i had a girl like that in my art major class, she had talent, but she just took every creative thought from me instead of her own self. to everyone else she was great. but to everyone who knew the truth.... thats a different story. it sucks to know fairey is unoriginal, but im glad you showed me
ydoiwatchthese 5 months ago
@ydoiwatchthese Try to hold the hypocrisy to a minimum. There has only been one original artist and that was the first caveman who drew on his cave wall. Everyone else has taken from others. Picasso was banned from Giacometti's studio for stealing his ideas. Dali said that" The artist that doesn't copy doesn't produce". Fairey is as original as you seem to think you are.
kdavisification 1 month ago
@jtms9 i do like shepard fairey's work, and he does have talent. however, it is a shame that talented people dont have their own creativity, and have to take from others. i had a girl like that in my art major class, she had talent, but she just took every creative thought from me instead of her own self. to everyone else she was great. but to everyone who knew the truth.... thats a different story. it sucks to know fairey is unoriginal, but im glad you showed me
ydoiwatchthese 5 months ago
@jtms9 Spoken like a true hypocrite
kdavisification 1 month ago
@ydoiwatchthese Uhh he just prints and hangs wallpaper.. :-/
ChuckNoarus 5 months ago
@ChuckNoarus yeah but he designs those posters, not just google them
SH1TZzWEAK 4 months ago
@ydoiwatchthese
You know what I think?
Banksy's masterpiece is Mr. Brain Wash, who has in some way or another exposed what pop art is lol
He has actually redefined the difference between art and random image montages.
HowMasters 4 months ago
he is my absolute favorite artist in the world.
aptxxxtimmy 9 months ago
ART!!
WhatTheHeckAnimation 9 months ago
@BenAdamsStudios your fucking retarded!!!! How is he a graffiti let me say it AGAIN, !GRAFFITI!!! artist if he doesn't do any??!!
G0BSRMFE 10 months ago
probably the most stupid question possible to title this video
spackification 10 months ago
What is "fine art"?
It seems like "art" has been hijacked by the rich. The definition of art is "The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power." Shepard Fairey does this.
alyciaengel 10 months ago
He's the ultimate Pop Artist!!
subjulio 10 months ago
quick question i know shepard has a lot of messages in his art toward politics but why is obery clothing so expensive isnt that kind of contradicting? and why do people seem to like it more becuase it is fashionable rather then the messages they posses
steventherunner 11 months ago
Im so undecided on shep :/
puck88freak 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
that fuck ass that disses on Shepard can suck my big black cock!
Doublecowbell 11 months ago
Shepard is Fucking amazing
P.S.
I hate Mr.Brainwash
SPYLAGO 11 months ago 7
so....this guy with the lame ass beered I HEARD HES A FAKE!!!! A FUGAZI A BITER THOSE ARE SHIT IS ALL FRM OTHER PPL
TheSkulls777 11 months ago
RISD
Mraquanetchris 11 months ago
hes a legend of art""
jcducky 1 year ago
Fine arts a dirty word.
Troy741852963 1 year ago
The fine art world is so small that nobody even knows it exists. The philosophies attached to modern art have alienated the majority of the population. The common folk feel like they are not intelligent enough to understand today's art. The art world is a victim to it's own philosophies which have deconstructed beauty and truth and relabeled it all. Most fine art is crap, and sometimes it's literally made of crap. Everybody is tired of that nonsense. People enjoy Shepard's work. Enough said.
castlemaninc 1 year ago 27
@castlemaninc are you the head council for the common folk? the art world is doing better than ever. chill out
ZackSladden 9 months ago
Comment removed
castlemaninc 1 year ago
Comment removed
castlemaninc 1 year ago
This guy SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED a GRAFFITI artist he is the farthest thing from IT AN this shouldn't be called street art it's like saying the logo on your t-shirt is dumb and that's retarded this is all advertisement
G0BSRMFE 1 year ago
@G0BSRMFE He is a graffiti artist. He is a street artist. If Leonardo Da Vinci painted illegally on the walls of cathedrals he would have been a graffiti artist.
BenAdamStudios 10 months ago
Damn his work is fuckin awesome, who gives a shit if other people dont like, its still awesome
chico0492 1 year ago
If what Sheppard is doing isn't art, then I guess I have yet to see a true creative art.
408mastamind 1 year ago
not art; but imagery? allegory?
But no, not traditional "fine" art.
crazyfoolaw 1 year ago
everything is art.
Soulchild666 1 year ago
Fuck Art. Shepard Rules!
jaydelas 1 year ago
Fairey is such a douche: 1) he started the Obey campaign as an anti advertising movement but then decided it would be more lucrative to use it for a clothing line. Thereby turning all the work of the shmucks that bought his bs into free labor posting ads for his anti add clothing line. 2) Fairey, who is widely criticized for his appropriation of others people's images, is suing other artists for appropriating HIS images.
aefkjj 1 year ago
@aefkjj smoke a bowl mate
bmathers21 1 year ago
Who cares if it´s art or not. It´s fuckin´awesome!
jaydelas 1 year ago
fuck mat gleason
Ice123alex 1 year ago
@Ice123alex
yeah, youre totally right!
imjalbafan 1 year ago
how can this guy say its not art. and whats it with his teddybear-comparison. thats just stupid, cause shepard fairy does not only put something into a gallery! there is a meaning behind his pictures. obviously theres not when you put teddybears into a gallery. stupid comparison, in my opinion shep is great!!!
imjalbafan 1 year ago
Not only is he an artist, he's also a genius.
IntoTheHeartOfMusic 1 year ago
art is what you make it if you say something is not art your not an artist your just hater so i dare you to step up and say whats art SO TO YOU HATERS OUT THERE TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK IS ART ?
richmed 1 year ago
@richmed I don't deny it is art. As an artist, I find it cool as shit. As a person, I think Fairey is a hippocritical douche.
aefkjj 1 year ago
Not. Tracing photographs.
Ataensic 1 year ago
whos to judge?
troas131 1 year ago
@troas131 So right man.. He is doin him, who cares what anyone else thinks
bballjmh 1 year ago
i vote masterpiece
thecastman97 1 year ago
Who ever thinks this isn't art is a dumb fuck. Everything can be art. Music is a form of art and there is no drawing involved. Art is a process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way to affect the senses or emotions and this is exactly what Shepard Fairey does.
ZeNTRiicKz 1 year ago 52
im so pissed ppl compare some artists like this guy to andy warhol. warhol was the biggest joke of an artist to ever be on the world. yes he pushed boundaries and what not but all he did was take a picture, anyone can do that, and put color on it. aka a joke. my opinion not yours. get mad about it idc.
stevo8782 1 year ago
Is Art.
GekoNeko 1 year ago
its uncomprehendable how someone could believe its not art...its as simple as this, he painted it right? are paintings not art anymore?
didyouseethatunicorn 1 year ago
if i had enough money i would buy all of those, make copies and wheat paste them in my house
AnTHoNyB1125 1 year ago
This guy is an arthole
jimiburntoes 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If this isn't art , then I still love it. It it in your face , truthful and both respectful and dis respectful. If it isn't art , then it is something magnetic and grabbing. I see total punk and smash face graphic beauty. If it hits me like that , then who needs it to be art? What it is ... Is the SHIT !!!!! ..... and I love it.
googoobh 1 year ago
Comment removed
googoobh 1 year ago
is everything a commercial? this is nothing but a "counter informative" anit-critique infomercial. fairey is a decorative artist/illustrator. a very good one. but it's too eager like hering, warhol, peter max.... "fairey! you have an entire lifetime to make art.... slow down or you won't even have an art career when you are 60!"
eenkjet 1 year ago
It's definitely art, I am really a fan of his work
TOYZINDAHOOD 1 year ago
everythings art.
the world revolves around art..
to bad most of it sux.
obey is DA SHIT!
mrKANYEwes 1 year ago
as far as i'm concerned, art is anything visual. whether it's outstanding art or not is in the eye of the beholder. to argue that shepard fairey's stuff is not art is like arguing that the ocean is full of maple syrup not water. what really matters is if you like it or not.
SaturnHillinger 1 year ago