Daily question: Reverse graffiti
Fri, Sep 26, 08
Paul “Moose” Curtis is a British artist who pumps high-pressured water through stencils to remove dirt from tunnels and walls to create large-scale urban “reverse graffiti.”
A video by Doug Pray depicts a recent project by Moose in San Francisco:
Apparently, however, not everyone is happy with Moose, says Guardian:
But, in Leeds, they do have a problem. Gerry Harper, a city councillor, described it as vandalism.
“It’s totally ridiculous really,” Mr Curtis replied. “All I am doing is cleaning their walls. Councillors only want me prosecuted because they’re embarrassed by how dirty their cities are.”
He claims his art is legal because he isn’t actually painting anything on to the walls or street.
No other similar case has come before a court, but the crown prosecution service says he may be in breach of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act.
A Leeds city council spokeswoman said: “Leeds residents want to live in clean and attractive neighbourhoods, and expect their streets to be free of graffiti and illegal advertising.
“We also view this kind of rogue advertising as environmental damage and will take strong action against any advertisers carrying out such campaigns without the relevant permission.”
Should Moose be forced to get “the relevant permission” to create his reverse graffiti?
