« Inkjet Print Survivability, Part II | Main | OT: Music Notes »

Tuesday, 22 February 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Very ephemeral "art". It existed shorter than a butterfly's life.

[CAUTION: Not workplace / school safe. —Ed.]

So, do Chad's photographs support or thwart the artist's intent? That is, if the artist intends his art to be ephemeral, will the artist cheer or boo Chad's preservation effort?

Or does the question even matter?


I done some of this sort of documentation over the last few years. The state of Texas announced that they were going to destroy roadside memorials on the premise that they were driving hazards. I found myself photographing every one I came across for almost three years. The state has since backed off a bit. Roadside memorials may well be hazards but the decision to remove them was very unpopular.

Not to mention the great Andy Goldsworthy. Most of his work is entirely ephemeral and created in remote locations. Without his excellent photographs, nobody would ever have heard of him or his work. In fact, it's always interested me that he is thought of as a sculptor rather than a photographer.

Lovely pictures and sculptures...


there's something deeply sad and moving about this.

Arguably it's even an artistic medium I haven't seen before -- line drawings implemented with wire against a bright background. The detail in this example is quite remarkable.

You could say that the photographs made by Weegee of crime scenes in New York are a form of ephemeral art.

Maybe they're being removed by collectors, perhaps including local authorities.

Chad Thompson is not simply documenting, he's creating meta art—those aren't "record" photos, they're clearly art. Exhibit A: Those clouds are very purposefully placed within the frame.

Kudos to Mr Thompson, I love what he's doing. And the mystery Spenser can bend a mean wire too.

Andy Goldsworthy comes to mind as well (e.g. http://lhlefevre.com/blog/2006/05/30/installation/).

I like that it's not intended to last. It's sculptural graffiti and one thing I've always loved about graffiti is that you know that what you've created is in a precarious position from birth. His Mona Lisa with Rocket Launcher was converted to Osama Bin Ladin by another artist and totally removed by the council. All this within the space of two days

Local authorities have painted over and washed down many a Banksy in my city . A graffiti artist would not expect anything less, part of the appeal of it is the to keep one step ahead of the authorities. His work's no longer knowingly destroyed, it's authenticated & protected by the old enemy. It's other artist that'll get to them now and he can't object to that


Authorities are not an authority on art

Reminds me of the Banksy documentary "Exit through the gift shop". In that case it was video documentation of temporary street art.

Why have the authorities been removing them?

"Why have the authorities been removing them?"

I assume because they're on road signs and you're not allowed to deface or obstruct road signs.


It gladdens my heart to see references to Andy Goldsworthy already. He is my single favorite artist, bar none.

Hmmm; I'd say the reaction of the sculptor to Chad's photos is "of interest", but is not in any way dispositive.

"Why have the authorities been removing them?"

I suppose,if they didn't,the spray paint
artists will bitch to the city government
about their graffiti being banned and
artistic discrimination.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007