Prompted by a commenter’s request I finally checked out all the graffiti recently sprayed on some of Amherst’s dorms. Although the random words in green and gold spray paint were not necessarily artistic (if anything they fall in the line of tagging which is primarily used to claim a space or area) it got me thinking about public art (abysmal as it is on this campus). Is graffiti public art? Is this type of graffiti public art? Why would someone graffiti on Amherst College buildings? What does this say about the relationship of the “artists” and the College? Did it matter to them where they laid their mark or would any place do? These tags were no works of Banksy but they did disrupt the pristine exteriors of the buildings in a way that made me look and think twice as I walked by. Though this is often the purpose, after all, of public art the fact that the graffiti disrupted the space was no saving grace. What a waste of time to the people in physical plant who have to clean it up and money for the people who bought the supplies to complete the project. I hope they got what they wanted.

Thoughts of graffiti lead me to this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/nyregion/08trash.html?ref=design ) about a Polish artist who designed the so called “urban art installation”  Trash—anycoloyoulike  which is essentially a number of trash bags that are produced in hot pink, blue, and glow-in-the-dark plastic to be used in public trashcans. Although the article cites that the bags make trash into art and art into trash and make people think twice about what they throw away all the while coloring the city—I’m not so convinced of this works palatability. Wait— is this even work? Maybe I’m just more conservative and stodgy than I thought but it truly pains me to think of all the great young people out there producing real and intelligent art who aren’t getting written up in the New York Times for it. I can’t help but think this guy wanted to do something somewhat sensational just for the attention—but who knows maybe he’s actually up to more interesting things and this whole thing was a ploy for coverage and therefore funding for other works of art. Neither the graffiti or the trash bags, despite their classification as urban or public art, serve the communities in which they function in a positive way—they just to be acknowledged in passing but leave no real lasting impression. They lack the permanence of a physical structure and the momentary-but-effective-power of a transient public act or performance.

 Trashbags!

 Photo by Jacob Silberberg for the New York Times

                                                                    Banks