Not everyone had love for the “Knit-Hit” feature during Aetna Arts Week.
There was the question of how artistic integrity could be maintained when art has corporate sponsorship.
There was the question of whether the yarn might be better used to knit sweaters or blankets for infants, the homeless, or others who have the need for warmth. Is the decoration of trees, signs, fences, and statues the best use of resources?
Then, there was the matter of yarn bombing specifically, an act that takes place without consent from officials. The materials distributed by the Greater Hartford Art Council read: “Guerilla knitters storm Greater Hartford!”
Yarn bombing is like graffiti, except with yarn instead of paint. If street artists are granted permission to make this type of art, does it still qualify as street art?
A discovery in Bushnell Park that does not appear to be part of the sanctioned art seems to be a model of how a co-opted art form can be reclaimed:
UPDATE 29 May 2013
Someone claiming to be part of the yarn-bombing group says they were not paid. She also took responsibility for creating and displaying the anarchy sign, but not before explaining that they had lots of rules to follow about where the art could be displayed. She also claimed to not know that Aetna was affiliated with this Arts Week.
Richard
Yes, yes yes to the blue A on pink. We love anarchists and we love art. Good article and good questions. As always thanks.
Richard
Ah the best one bits the dust. So she put it where she wanted to? WOW what a radical move within the boundaries that are imposed upon artists by the all powerful. Doesn’t that display why this is not guerrilla art but perhaps the art folks are talking about below. Sanctioned art of the man within the man’s lines and controlled by the man. But of course the man can and will reach a boiling point and withdraw funding.
No this is not a piece of anarchist art and the artist is not an anarchist. She didn’t know that the press said Aetna Arts Week. Gad wouldn’t want her to guard my back in any anarchist action. furbirdsqueerly takes back their clap clap.
Check out some yarn art at Real Hartford. A big clap clap for the anarchist A. | furbirdsqueerly
[…] yarn art pieces from the knit-hit Hartford during Aetna’s arts week. The work can be found HERE. There is one piece in particular that strikes our fancy very very much. It is a pink circle […]
Jim C
http://vimeo.com/12575676
Jim C
Thursday is a Work of Art was supported by corporate and public money in mid to late 1970s. The people who created the performances and artwork managed to ruffle some feathers with some of their creations. They didn’t necessarily bite the hand that fed them as much as took some playful nips. There is a fine line between a jester with a fulltime gig and one who goes begging.
Richard
Thanks for the art history memories. We had such fun back then when Hartford’s downtown was alive. I will never forget Tim’s Food for the piegons (title?), Lynn’s flower pot on her head and ironing board in old Grants windows and I can’t remember the artist’s name who sang about UTC to the tune of Tis A Gift while calling himself one of the Haig brothers and sporting a machine gun. Yes all out there performance art that did ruffle the feathers so that funing was cut off. But while it lasted can I dare say it was a renaissance.
But I don’t believe that any of it would qualify as guerrilla art or what we preceive as street art, hit and run art, or art that doesn’t rely on the man.( just because most of it was perfomed out in the street) But great (yes I will use that term) street art none the less.
I have to think that today after occupy and the raising of one’s consciousness we would be a bit more mindful of right and wrong. Sol Le Witt and many of us back in the day had it right when we refused to show or participate in shows sponsored by UTC or Phillip Morris. Why, because they were killing people. Simple as that.Of couse then I work from an anarchist perspective so I come from a very different thought/time zone.
Again Jim thanks so much for the video of our own Merry Pranksters. I hope someone has most of this stuff documented somewhere. Isn’t it if they do time for a show?
Richard
I just finished watching the video. It was wonderful to see it all again.
Jim C
Richard,
“Those were the days, my friend, we thought they’d never end. La la la la la la, etc. ”
The piece you’re remembering was called Pigeon sacrifice. One of my other faves was Ed Stivender’s Punk Monk.
Tim
Bob Gregson, who posted the Vimeo video, has documented much of those Sidewalk and Thursday is a Work of Art days. I believe he’s handed over much material to the Hartford History Center at HPL.
A small handful of us in that video and from that era are still around, but as far as I know not art-bombing. I’m happy to see any of these activities, no matter the scale or the sponsorship, beginning to take place again. There has been a long silence and absence of such things in Hartford.
Those of us who wax nostalgic about the late seventies and early eighties art scene (including “street art”) in Hartford are fully aware that it would not have happened to the incredible degree it did without the Knox Foundation, Aetna, UTC, GHAC and many others who were willing to spend money on our diverse and collective visions at that time.
Richard
Yes agree. But here we are talking about guerrilla art not art sponsored by the state or corporations. Yes art can be radical within the definations of art, but I would continue to argue once it is backed by large corporations it would cease to be radical and certianly not guerrilla art. Perhaps what was done in the late seventies did upset the apple cart of the bourgeoisie, the mainstream art folks and yes even some folks who considered themselves cutting edge but again we are not talking about guerrilla art. The last time I looked and asked and did art I know that none of it was corporate sponsored or done with the permission of the state, art gallery, museum or anyone or anything the man holds dear. It was not sanctioned, cannot be sanctioned or it would loose its very nature. Let’s try to get back to the real question here about guerrilla art, pre-determined guerrilla art sites and the man permission.
I am sorry but I have to say that what is downtown this week doesn’t hold a candle to any of the art that was done back then.
Josh Michtom
The questions about the sponsorship of art and the effect of official permission on an art form that is traditionally extralegal are excellent ones. But asking whether yarnbombing is too wasteful because the materials could be used to clothe the needy underestimates the importance of art in a vibrant society, I think. Putting aside the question of whether what afflicts the poor and homeless really is the inaccessibility of woolens, there is no end to the line of criticism that starts this way. Any artist could surely devote her energies to feeding, housing, and empowering the poor and in this way achieve more immediate results. Shall we condemn art generally as a waste of time and resources?
Kerri Provost
Perhaps some of the Real Hartford readers who had been contacting me with this criticism could engage in that discussion.
Richard
The question about the use of yarn for yarn bombing, (here I will not debate whether or not the art downtown qualifies as yarn bombing, in all of the press about the knitters it was never referred to in that way. But let’s use this bomb term for a second, which will beg another question about bombs today, ie: Boston or Pakistan, and the use of the term yarn bombs when americkkkans are scared of their own shadow. Would the GHAC or Aetna allow or go along with such a term as yarn bombers? I don’t think so.
But is yarn art too wasteful? I suppose it all depends on where one is coming from. If I didn’t have a hat or scarf and it was below zero I would grab one of those creations right off the tree or fence and use it and be warm. Then I would thank my lucky stars and ask for all blessings for the knitters. Causing yarn art to be not wasteful at all but causing it to take on a whole new life. One that begs questions of the haves and have nots and the capitalist system. Could I wrap myself in a painting, no I don’t think so. Does a painting make me think of warm. No not at all. Yarn does. But this is not my question or fight. My fight is with the term guerrilla art or guerrilla artist when those who claim to commit such noble actions do not hold a candle to our many years of art making in this vein.
Now your line about the importance of art in a vibrant society is very debatable and not for this blog as we could all go on and on. Who is art important for? What art are you talking about? Mainstream art, gallery art, museum art, the art market, seems to be the last time I look to be just a cash cow for the wealthy. How do you look at art and what to you is art? These are questions that beg for an answer. And the final scared cow question does art really uplift the soul? Very little art or what the art historians are considering as art is like what Brecht said, Art is not a mirror to reflect reality but a hammer with which to shape it.” Today working in conjunction with the established order sure is a problem with me. Occupy taught us all a great deal about the 1% and how to or not to deal with corporate structures and what we see the corporations of the world are really doing. Shall we condemn art generally as a waste of time and resources? Well Perhaps if it is a playground for the wealthy. Here is a quote that I love:
Art has been so used for so long to justify the desires, avarice, decadence, and hubris of the social elite, ie: robber barons, art investors, social climbers, nouveau riche, and those who are behind destroying the worlds economy and resources, the biggest abusers of our world. The arrogance of those who have no idea of the world they live in but focus on stealing as much as they can.
Jim C
Josh,
Good point.
Like the song says,
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;: Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses!