Last week Askew reported that one of his walls at Poynten Tce in Auckland had been buffed by the local council in what he felt was an act of council censorship. Since then the issue has grown legs of its own and has caused some interesting discussion in the media and between the powers that be, the landlords and the artists themselves.
To recap Askew dropped this article on his blog. It’s well worth a read and while Askew might end up losing this wall to council bureaucracy, it’s really refreshing to see this handled in an intellectual manner from Askew’s side and will hopefully break some ground on the way that “name-based” artwork is treated.
“On top of an insane workload as of late I have been dealing with a crazy incident of Council Censorship – An event that has just snowballed beyond my expectations, becoming far more political than I would have ever thought possible. My phone has been ringing nonstop, twitter going crazy, lots of media interest – some great, most pretty misguided. So I decided it was time to write a post about the experience and my thoughts about this whole insane situation.
Firstly, the incidents as they happened:
“Last Monday Component from Cut Collective turned up at my studio to tell me about the contractors painting out a mural site I have painted and maintained since 2001. I left my studio immediately and drove up to the wall to speak with the contractors, just to grasp how this had come to be. They were nice polite guys, both a little shocked that they were ordered to remove this mural and had actually thought it must be a mistake. I was told that it was due to a complaint from the owner as apparently the wall was illegally done. They said Tony Capton had made the call and it had maybe come from higher up. I was shocked to hear this, I new it was likely a mistake as although I wasn’t certain at the time whether the tenant I got permission from was the landlord or not – I was curious to investigate and find out conclusively.
“I approached the KBA amongst other people in hope they could find answers quickly and learned that neither the tenant or landlord was that thrilled about the wall being painted grey – as well as neighbouring business owners and people in the community. In frustration I called upon Len Brown via twitter to give an explanation. After many other people joined in and demanded answers Len Brown replied and eventually made an apology. He informed me that his council officers would be making contact and sorting out a solution. I was happy with this outcome, it seemed like an unlikely victory and I was optimistic about working together with the council to put a new work up on the wall.
“Barbara From the KBA was approached and ended up in a discussion with Council on my behalf about fixing the situation. Rob Shields, the council graffiti prevention officer somehow became involved and had prior to the meeting taken steps to contact the landlords – convincing them that he should ‘Project manage’ the creation of a replacement mural. Barbara could see no other alternative as far as dealing with them at this stage and opted to discontinue her involvement from there.
“I was made aware of Rob’s involvement and voiced my disapproval. I have an interesting past with Rob Shields to say the least – to most that should be obvious considering who I am, what I do and who he is. I don’t care to delve into all the details at this stage other than to say that since I refused to be under his thumb about 9 years ago he has made it his mission to sabotage and interfere with a raft of positive projects I have worked on and also employed divide and conquer tactics to tarnish the reputations of myself and others in the graffiti scene. Needless to say – I don’t work with Rob Shields – Principally I have to consider it working with the enemy.
“After John Brunton, the current tenant appeared in the Central leader voicing his disapproval of the mural’s removal, I approached him to have a discussion about proceeding with a new mural with no council involvement – a request he put to the landlords on my behalf. I was phoned today, the 10th of March by John and told that the landlords were working with Rob Shields in selecting artists to paint a suitable mural which the council would pay for as an apology and if I wanted to be considered for the job I needed to submit concept sketches by next week. I was also told that there could be no ‘signatures’ or ‘names’ featured in the new work. Interesting request considering the work I specialise in and am known primarily for right?
So here’s the underlying problem with this whole scenario:
1. Firstly and most importantly – this is a council created problem. That is both initially and in the solution offered. Big pile of unnecessary drama made created by the council. There was no problem in the way it was before, in fact far from it.
2. The council removed this mural illegally.
3. I have painted and maintained this mural site for around a decade, since world renown, German artist Can Two’s first visit in 2001. A friend of mine worked at the bar, and she asked the previous owner who said yes. Whether she got permission from the landlords is not something I can confirm for certain but obviously there was no objection to the work we were ding as we painted murals there consistently for 10 years – often there for several days at a time.
4. The Murals have all been painted from the artists own pockets – never to a specific brief but to always to a high standard. On the odd occasion, the previous tenant gave me a small amount of money and almost always a tray of soft drinks for the troops while we worked on the wall.
5. The site has become iconic for having some of the best graffiti work around the K-Rd area and has been photographed, used as backdrops for film and TV and has over the years featured work from a host of amazing international and local artists.
6. Rob Shields is the graffiti prevention officer – he should not given the opportunity to dictate the content of the new work when he has an obvious prejudice against art of this style and also against the artists themselves.
7. No other artist should be considered in contention for the job painting the replacement mural. This is disrespectful and shows how little understanding of public art the council have. The work that was removed was painted mostly by me and not really with the financial support from nor objection of the landlords it seems strange to gift the landlords a new mural when the only people robbed of anything are myself and the other artists – the landlords have been indifferent to the issue all along so really they likely wouldn’t have made any noise about this hadn’t I and likeminded people in the community brought it to the attention of Len Brown.
8. The ‘no signatures’ angle is very typical of Rob Shields statements in media about stamping out ‘name-based fame’ in public art. It seems hard for me to fathom this decision has not been influenced by him.
9. Council funded murals deemed as ‘acceptable’ by Rob Shields are generally awful in my opinion. Take a look at the atrocious mural work near the New Market station and the putrid historic city-scape at the Boston road station for example. Neither of these paintings could be deemed as current, compelling or particularly well executed for that matter. One of my only dealings with Rob Shields on a mural project he had us paint people mowing lawns. I am not kidding.
10. The last mural was painted over three 12-16 hour days. It was painted during the middle of winter and into the night – sometimes even the early hours of the morning. Around 80 spray cans were used and it was exhaustive and time consuming as we broke a lot of new ground with this painting. For that reason this work was also of sentimental value, although we would have liked to have done an update this year to keep it fresh.
11. The council and Landlords both neglect to understand the merit of my work and the reason this site was well respected was primarily because of it’s integrity. The fact that it was done without any influence outside of what myself and friends wanted to paint was why it was so good. The idea of ‘historical themed murals’ may seem like a way to please a broader group of people but realistically most locals are discerning enough to see through that. This is also not reflective of the people of K-Rd, maybe a conservative neighbourhood. K-Rd is edgy and our local area – we are well known characters and frequent the local cafes and shops. Everyone knows us around there.
12. The idea of the council rewarding other artists for painting a mural they deem as ‘acceptable’ when the only people wronged as far as I can see are the artists and the community is despicable. Especially when I have offered to paint the new mural for free without their involvement. The landlords could remain indifferent, the tenants can be happy with a new work on the side of their premises, I can continue having a platform to do cutting edge pieces with no council influence and the local community can remain happy – problem solved.
“There’s a lot more I want to say about this. I’m shocked, pretty mad, disappointed and feel more disillusioned with bureaucracy than ever before. What can I do? It’s been depressing enough seeing the whole city systematically painted grey in preparation for the Rugby World Cup – but it extending to this level is sad. I think the vision for this city is something that extends beyond a right of bureaucrats and politicians – it’s a right we all share. I thank everyone that has been vocal and supportive through this and hope it can be the catalyst of for change and inspiration for us all to make noise when we feel local government lose sight of what’s right for the areas of the city we inhabit.”
–Askew.
More info: askewone.tumblr.com