MoMa Red Studio Summer Program Work Comes Down

Last Tuesday I ran into a wild horde of teenagers posting their artwork over illegal NPA Outdoor advertising. After the last posting about my interactions with the artists at work, I found out this street takeover was a part of the MoMA Red Studio summer program. I spoke with one of the teachers from the program and it seems the class thought I should post some images of them at work.

I decided to go past the location again today as I walked to my studio. Lo and behold NPA Outdoor had come back to reclaim what isn't rightfully theirs, and did so illegally. The participants in the street takeover that removed this illegal advertising by placing art over it, did so with permission of the landlord. NPA Outdoor on the other hand not only illegally posted advertising, but illegally removed artwork at the property. As sad as this is, I hope it helps the students understand what they were doing, and how the advertising that they were covering is directly at odds with this type of artistic endeavor. By monopolizing public space and communication, outdoor advertising silences public use of public space by literally covering works of art. As well, it provides a singular view of what kind of messages and images should grace our walls and helps criminalize those other activities in the process.

MoMa Summer Programs Bring Kids To The Sreets

Today I was coming back from the photo store when I turned down 9th avenue from 18th street headed north. I then came upon a construction shed being plastered with art by what looked like a roaming horde of young adults let loose on the city. They were aggressively posting their images over illegal NPA Outdoor advertising content. I immediately stopped to ask what was going on and was quickly told they were a part of a MoMA summer program that teaches young adults about the art world. This specific class was a response to a trip to a recent rock and roll exhibition that pays homage to New York's influential rock and roll culture. Punk rock, being a large part of NYC music history, has a rich DIY poster history itself. Many of the bands used public posting as a cheap media outlet when others were unavailable.

The students were practicing this process for themselves out in the open, in broad daylight. Not only this, but they were having what looked like a fantastic time, getting on each others' shoulders to reach the higher spots and generally enjoying creating their own public content. I asked them if they knew that the advertising they were pasting over was illegal, which they seemed unphased by, yet oddly aware of. Getting rid of advertising content using artwork, or publicly created content, suddenly seemed very natural.

I ran home to get my camera to take the group portrait you see above. Thanks to the two wonderful teachers for bringing their students into the rich world of public art and public interaction. Bravo!

MoMA Severs Ties with HappyCorp

A recent post by The Gothamist explains MoMA's final word on the whole PosterBoy alteration of the Atlantic/Pacific project. What I couldn't understand was why MoMA would speak so clearly against the vandalism when to do so would destroy their credibility with those who thought the stunt was interesting. It seems they are receiving a lot of pressure from the MTA and CBS outdoor. If this was the reason they were firing HappyCorp, I thought it a little sheepish of them. Researching more, I read a comment regarding PosterBoy's work on that station and I think it explains why MoMA might not have been game for such fun. It holds up quite well and is reproduced here.

By MisterSparkle on 02/24/2009 at 7:17pm

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that MoMA is involved in this, even if they are denying it. More to the point, though, I don't really understand the intentions of whoever actually vandalized the ads (be it a member of the Poster Boy movement or somebody else).

To a certain degree, I can understand vandalizing ads for large corporations, consumer products and the like in the name of both art and anarchy. But the MoMA ads seem to be largely unobstructed, unadulterated prints of some of their best art work. While I do take issue with MoMA's high admission prices, I respect their fundamental role as a cultural institution and their attempts to draw more visitors to the museum. Therefore, I see no reason to destroy MoMA ads that a) consist of already great artwork and b) have a generally admirable goal (promoting modern art and generating new patrons), especially if the ads will be replaced shortly at MoMA's expense.

To me, this is the height of snarky, holier-than-though post-modern derisiveness because it attacks the very art that gave way to the validation of subversive street art. If the person responsible was working with MoMA, I would be impressed by MoMA's awareness and hope that they might leave the ads as-is or do more work with street/graffiti art in their marketing. If the person was Poster Boy or some other adherent/imitator, he or she clearly has no respect for the art that gave rise to theirs and no sense of purpose and integrity.

More on MoMA's Mashed Up Masterpieces

This post, and all the links contained within, seem to cover all the aspects of the PosterBoy MoMA mashup. My only two cents is, yes HappyCorp knew this was publicity stunt and MoMA is surely happy about that as well. It doesn't ruin the fact that HappyCorp respects PosterBoy his concerns about public space. They did a good thing by championing his work and keeping the outdoor advertising industry furious about their lack of control.

from Gothamist by Jen Carlson

As of Tuesday, Doug Jaeger of HappyCorp was cleverly wording his comments about his and Poster Boy's involvement in the alteration of MoMA's subway ad campaign in Brooklyn, which he developed. According to Jaeger, he met Poster Boy, who he says is more than one person, and that he and some others were in the subway system the night the ads were deconstructed.

The NY Post, not a fan of Poster Boy's work in the past, chimes in today saying that Jaeger has "admitted his responsibility in the bizarre publicity stunt," refused to pin any of it on Poster Boy (who is already facing charges), and allegedly didn't have MoMA's permission to carry out the vandalism. In a statement released yesterday MoMA said, "The museum deplores any kind of vandalism and we are distressed that this happened, did not condone or authorize it and hope it doesn't happen again." (In other words, they love it, it's drawn even more attention to their campaign, but they can't say that because it's totally illegal.)

The museum is keeping mum about their current relationship with HappyCorp, and the fact that they haven't severed ties with them has the MTA "furious," according to the Post. While we haven't heard back from Jaeger about the latest developments, we talked to Jeremy Soffin at the MTA, who told us that even if MoMA and HappyCorp altered their own ads it is still illegal, and that "designing an ad doesn't give him any more right to vandalize than anyone else." The MTA's contractor CBS Outdoor is currently in contact with both parties on the organization's behalf.

While it seems pretty evident that this was the plan all along, the Village Voice is still questioning why the HappyCorp folks went from being so proud of the installation to vandalizing it. Maybe they were just tired of seeing Starry Night? The subway station isn't a dorm room, after all.

Poster Boy and Aakash Nihalani rework Monet, Smells of Appropriation and Publicity Stunt

This seems to be the only commentary I've found on the PosterBoy, MoMA mashup that happened a few days ago at the Atlantic/Pacific train station in NYC. Mr. Gould's initial response to the MoMA installation is expected, yes it's clearly a publicity stunt and yes it is equivalent to an advertisement in every way. That said, it is expected PosterBoy would find his way to this station to call attention to this fact by treating the work the same way he has treated advertising throughout the subway system.

Mr. Gould's final remark about the connection between PosterBoy and Doug Jaeger turning this into a publicity stunt instead of a well guided attempt to continue along an artistic trajectory set nearly a year ago by PosterBoy, does not sit well with me. On some levels I agree that this wreaks of a partnership where both parties are clear about what they will gain from the stunt and are taking advantage of an opportunity. On another level I am aware of more of the back story than I think Mr. Gould is, and thus realize what an amazing opportunity for PosterBoy this was. The Atlantic/Pacific station is heavily trafficked and nearly impossible to hit. Without Doug Jaeger's participation this project probably could not have happened.

So as an artist, PosterBoy is in a strange position. By doing the project he is able to continue his work in an interesting way by leveling MoMA's art advertising stunt and thus comparing it to the regular advertising you see. He is also able to draw attention to his project on an unprecedented level, thus gaining momentum for what he hopes will be a strong investigation into who controls public communication in the public environment. The only thing he has to do is team up with someone involved with the MoMA project. Remember MoMA had nothing to do with this stunt.

And so the question remains. Does aiding a PR firm while moving his own ideas forward become caustic to his project as a whole?

VIA Free Williamsburg

C/O Dan Gould

My initial reaction to the MOMA installation at Atlantic Ave. was mixed. I concede that people are inundated with advertising, and this was an opportunity to offer people something more cultured. Still, the motivation seemed a little suspect. Seeing Poster Boy and Aakash Nihalani, however, remix the works made me very excited about the installation. While the public display makes the work vulnerable to vandalism, it also provides for the images to be appropriated and enter the larger cultural dialogue. It, therefore, brings a new life to the pieces and provides for more social commentary.

C/O Doug Jaeger

What I don't quite understand in this story is why Doug Jaeger, the advertising brains behind the original campaign, was photographed participating in the vandalism? The move reduces Poster Boy's street art to a publicity stunt. This makes the project seem calculated and doesn't bode well for the MoMA or Poster Boy.

MoMA Atlantic/Pacific Project

In an effort to bring MoMA's permanent collection to the people and raise awareness for the museum, the Atlantic/Pacific train station has been overtaken by some 58 well known artists like Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Georgia O'Keeffe, and Man Ray. It's a wonderful project and inspiring to see public space used for artwork instead of advertising. The work may not itself redefine the way public space is used but if for one moment the project can make you think of the possibilities for a newly imagined public culture, it serves a wonderful purpose. I also think you might see some things change in this station in the not so far future, so keep your eyes on it and I will report back soon.