Judge Not

Sunset & Hillhurst.

It seems that this Mr. Brainwash Chili Peppers ad had yet to be covered so I did my part and threw something over it. A lot of people ask me what I think of Mr. Brainwash and honestly I am a bit ambivalent. As far as his work goes, I don't know how much I have the right to judge it. I tend to not spend much time analysing art and sussing out how derivative it is or isn't. Every single artist I've ever admired has admired someone else, which means that no matter how hard you try, breaking the cycle of being influenced and influencing others is pretty pointless. Does Mr. Brainwash "rip off" Banksy? No more so than Banksy "rips off" Blek Le Rat or Van Gough "ripped off" Monticelli or Edward Hopper "ripped off" Robert Henri or Oasis "ripped off" The Beatles. For me, all that matters is if a piece speaks to me, regardless of who influenced the style. Does Mr. Brainwashs' stuff speak to me? Some of it. It's hard to say. I tend to gravitate to stuff with a more emotional bent. Pop culture references get tiresome to me quite quickly, especially if there isn't another layer intellectually. That said, his 'spraypaint soup can' is pretty fun, I can't deny that. I also like the kid with the camera that he pasted all over his studio space.

A lot of people mention the fact that he hires people to make his art for him. That he only thinks of ideas and then tells people to make it for him. I'm a little torn on this as well. My gut says this is wrong but it's hardly something new, even in the art world. Warhol did it, I'm told, as did others. If you thought of a brilliant invention, mapped out exactly how you wanted it to look and function but don't know how to solder or code the data that would give your sex robot her personality cortex, then is it wrong to pay someone else to help you do it? Oh, and yes, halfway through that example I decided that you were building a sex robot.

I think the biggest problem with his method is that no one other than MBW gets credit. Comic book writers have artists that create what springs from their mind- but those artists gets credit for their work. If I was Brainwash, I'd feel obliged to credit the artists that help make his stuff for him. I don't expect an artist to credit every person that works with them in any capacity- who welded Banksy's phonebooth stunt or hand pulled his prints (BTdubs, for his Barely Legal show, the man's name was Ramon De Larosa, who happens to be amazing and I know because he pulled my prints for the Post No Bills show- plug plug) but if they had an artistic hand in the physical origins and visual realizing of the piece, then I think they should get credit. Look at Bill Finger and Bob Cane in the creation of the Batman universe, it took a while but Finger was finally credited with his contributions, a bit overdue if you ask me, but still.

Finally, and here's the thing I do take issue with, the ads. For those who don't know, Brainwash took a job designing a promo for the new Red Hot Chili Peppers album and put them up around town on electrical boxes. Whether he was paid to paste them up by the Chili Peppers or their record company, I don't know. Obviously it would be silly for me to say "HEY! STREET ART GOES ON THOSE THINGS! NOT ADS!" because the city owns those boxes. Claiming them as the property of street art is crazy. We ask for the same permission that he did. That is to say, none. We don't ask. So we don't deserve to think we get dibs. He did however cover up a lot of pieces and as someone who is a figure in the street art scene, he should know that it's a bit of an ethical no-no. It's forgivable if it's another piece of art but to put up an ad- it's just disrespectful to your contemporaries. I'm sure some would say: "hey, the Chili Peppers are a musical group, what's wrong with promoting their art?" I would say that they, and their record company have plenty of money to pay for a few hundred billboards. Acting like renegade artists that use the streets to get their message out is a lame, poseur move. Does Banksy have enough money to pay for his own billboards? Yeah, that's true. But his work is designed for the streets and is a free gift to the viewer. This was an ad. Its purpose was to create word of mouth and boost album sales and has very little value outside of that purpose. I mean c'mon Brainwash, we have walls all over the city that have ads plastered all over them. Just post on those! This is the reason that I have zero problems with artists pasting over them. Myself included.

Is it possible that Brainwash realized that it was an uncool move? Yeah. Should this mean war must be declared on all of his stuff? No. Because "art war" is silly and gets way too self referential too quick and then it's just making stuff for the handful of people who even know what the beef was over. Do 90% or the UK populous know what the whole Robbo/Banksy thing was over? Probably not. They just see a few slightly uglier Banksy pieces that got capped by some guy- a guy who should have spent that time making blazed pieces of his own. I mean no disrespect, but with there being a doubt we'll ever get a new Robbo piece- if he doesn't wake up from the coma- I'd rather him have left us with more art of his own and less destruction of someone else's.

But I digress...

So where do I stand on Mr. Brainwash? He seems like a nice guy who recognized street art as something that could be a business just like any other. He ran a vintage clothing store for a while, did some other stuff, now he designs promos for The Red Hot Chili Peppers. Does that make his intentions in the scene less than noble? Maybe. Does that make him Hitler? No. Do I have any right to judge the man since I've never met him? None at all. 

There you have it.