Talk:Shepard Fairey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Graffiti, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to graffiti art, graffiti artists and all aspects of graffiti culture. Click Here for more information.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? Class: This article has not been assigned a class according to the assessment scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Carolina, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve South Carolina-related articles to a feature-quality standard.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] My paper on Shepard Fairey

I wrote a paper on Fairey for an art class. If any passer-by would like to chop it up and throw some information into the article, go ahead. LockeShocke 00:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Shepard Fairey is a modern graphic designer whose work is heavily inspired by graffiti and street art. Growing up in Los Angeles, where gangs and graffiti are near-ubiquitous, Fairey’s surroundsings probably had an impact on his artistic vision (Wikipedia).
As a student at the Rhode Island School of Design, Fairey began his “experiment in Phenomonology”: the Andre the Giant has a Posse sticker campaign. (Since, the original image has evolved into the “Obey Giant” campaign.) Fairey admits that the sticker itself means nothing. The real purpose was to study how, in culture, the sticker would catch on and spread.
Fairey contends that people are seldom, if ever, bombarded with advertisements for products that are not immediately apparent. Because the omnious stylized portrait of Andre the Giant is so ambiguous and devoid of purpose, the viewer is intrigued more than they would be by a regular advertisement (Fairey, 2002).
Fairey, in addition to his giant pieces, creates other works that are reminiscent of propaganda, using ominous imagery in a tongue-in-cheek assault on authority. In his piece More Militerry Less Skools, he continues his mock-attacks against government. Fairey uses a very straightforward approach to delivering his message: by using bold, unmistakeable type. The message communicated in this piece–’more military, less schools’–most every viewer would disagree with. He continues to offend by misspelling ‘schools’ as skools, implying the creator of the poster (the government) doesn’t even care enough about schools to spell the word right. He misspells military as well–ironically, the government is misspeling the very name of the institution it is advocating.
A representation of a sinister Big Brother character appears at the top of the poster, and a moire motif, immitating money, is used in the background. A seal appears at either upper corner. Finally, the obey logo and slogan, “Obedience is the most valuable currency,” fall at the bottom of the piece. The money motif sets in stone that the target of the satire is the government, and the obey tag and slogan at the bottom–aside from serving as Fairey’s calling-card–give the audience a final chill as they move to the next piece.
This piece also succeeds in being senseless, ambiguous, and a social experiment. What kind of response does this piece ellicit from the audience? Fairey, himself, is looking for that very answer, and once the audience questions first the work and then his or herself, he has succeeded.
Who is this Big Brother character? Who could possibly be advocating more military and less schools? The seals in the corners would imply it is meant to represent the United States itself... is there a person Fairey believes is the personification of this and other destructive ideologies?
Who are we to obey?

[edit] References

  • Shepard Fairey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. [1]
  • Project X. (interview) [2]
  • Fairey, Shepard. Post No Bills. ©2002 Shepard Fairey. Ginko Press, Inc.
  • This is Your God exhibition - static x. [3]

[edit] References

I've removed the statements tagged as unreferenced from the article. They can still be found in the history if anyone wants to find the references and reintroduce them. It wasn't doing the article (or the artist) any good to have so many uncited claims.--Ethicoaestheticist 23:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Bought a home in San Diego" and the Expedition posters

Fairey couldn't have bought property in San Diego as every building that was covered with his posters got razed by Mayor Golding. If he had his own art in his house, the bulldozers were sure to follow.

Did Fairey do the "Expedition" decals? Expedition what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.157.164 (talk) 14:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article written by Obey fans

Is this a PR piece. There is certainly a lot of criticism of fairey in the art world that deserves some inclusion here.

This article gives no undue or unbalanced praise to Fairey. Granted there is certainly criticism that is not contained within, but that's the critic's job to add. LockeShocke 00:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Vallen PUBLISHED a critique on a valid WEBSITE, not a BLOG, Mr. Ethico!

The policing of this page by Ethicoaestheticist is biased. He seems to OR work for the company Obey OR seems to be policing Wikipedia without any kind of ETHIC. The critique, by Mark Vallen, a NOTABLE artist & curator, was PUBLISHED on his famous WEBSITE, not a BLOG, like Ethicoaestheticist tried to scam us with. Ethicoaestheticist, do your job if you are policing & CLICK on the links. READ them. DON'T JUST SUPPOSE. This is information for the world to see. You have NO RIGHT to do policing of Wikipedia if you make these kinds of GIGANTIC mistakes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.17.133 (talk) 19:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Please note that this source is a personal website, not a published, neutral third-part source. We must be careful with sources per WPBIO. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 19:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Freshacconci, you dissapoint us all. WPB is respected. You can't just delete ALL the facts!! Someone is going to put them back up again. You'll see! Instead of editing like a maniac, why don't you contribute? You are an ARTIST. Of all people, you should have SOME inclination to want people to know the facts. Am I completely out of wack, here? Help me out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.17.133 (talk) 20:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Then don't start an edit war. At least three other editors have questioned the validity of the source you are attempting to insert. The "facts" are not established and we must use caution when writing about controversial material per WP:BIO. Do not place the material back in the article until other editors have a chance to voice their opinions. Do not attack other editors, do not vandalize user pages and read WP:SOCK. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 20:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The sources are VALID. Mark Vallen is a respected artist & Mat Gleason is a respected curator. Both have "published" their critique. Thus, the article is respecting WPB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.17.133 (talk) 20:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:BLP#Sources: "Material about living persons available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all in biographies of living people, either as sources or via external links. Self-published books, zines, websites, and blogs should never be used as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article."--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I am an admin and I have reviewed this conversation and the relevant edits. I completely endorse the statements of Freshacconci and Ethicoaeatheticist above. I have also removed material from this page per WP:BLP. I gather there is more understanding now about wiki policies, and hope that matters have settled down. Tyrenius 03:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I've replaced some of the contested text that was recently removed [4]. I've never had a problem with the Gleason comments, which seem to me to be legitimate art criticism.--Ethicoaestheticist 19:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
...and now I've added a published (in a book that is) reference replacing the Gleason video. Hopefully that will be that!--Ethicoaestheticist 20:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apology to Freshacconci

I know, I know. You are doing your job. Very well I must say. But this article does need some serious wiki-expertise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.17.133 (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missed Consensus

I noticed that consensus has been reached on this page about the issue of Mark Vallen's critique. While I disagree with the reasoning (I think exceptions to the blog rule should be made in instances where blogs are, or could be, the only sources for a relevant fact, notably Fairey's need to repay Rene Mederos). That said, I'll simply dig into Mat Gleason's published work and find a written example of his criticism (he is, after all, the editor of a published art journal). SiberioS (talk) 18:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)