Love it or hate it, the graffiti happened and it's part of the history. As a baseball artifact, sure, it would be better without it (or any of its non-original 1923 paint). As piece of New York City, the tags go with the territory. Again, love it hate it, it fits the time and place. I don't know anything about the taggers, but the marks are not very "artistic", which is a shame in a way. I don't think we're too far away from a major art museum adding a subway car, or box truck, or some other non-traditional item/structure to their permanent collection if it had the right graffiti on it. Perhaps it has already happened, I don't know. I for one would definitely attend a curated graffiti show at the MoMA. But I can understand how others would hate it, or even the idea of it. Actually, I think it would be pretty cool if your ticket booth were somehow worked into the (hypothetical) MoMA exhibit as a visual connection between graffiti and everyday life in NYC.
If it were mine, I'd restore it structurally and leave its outward appearance as it was when it was removed. If any of those guys are well known you could potentially be scrubbing major value off the booth. Cambell's Soup is worth .69 cents unless Warhol touched it. Not sure about added graffiti on a ticket booth - and the Warhol value comparison could easily be hyperbole, but you get the idea. Unlike collected art, graffiti was largely cleaned up, painted over, and scrapped. Genuine pieces from the era are greatly outnumbered by photos and memories of graffiti.
|
08-14-2016, 09:37 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode