Urban Art Association

Each one is hand painted. These won't be around long.

I think its about the naivety and the cheerful colours?, tis for me anyhow, fun over serious kind of thing?. Apols. to Rae if theres a really deep and meaningfully serious explanation.

Ive enjoyed some of his latest work but this one does nothing for me, a bit too much going on maybe!

You're certainly entitled to your opinion darhart but to say RAE "has threw up a few street pieces" tells me you obviously don't live in New York City. He's actually put up some of the most imaginative work I've seen in a long while. Maybe some of us are predisposed to look for a witty stencil pun these days but I find his work refreshing on many levels. Not sure a "10 year old" can make works like these:

Well im glad that some people are at least putting up an argument as to what they like about his work, i often feel debate on the merits of work posted on here is very much lacking. I still maintain that there is nothing on this page a 10 year old couldn't paint (ok maybe not on the scale of some of these "works") and nothing thats really creative or imaginative with anything to say?

As for witty stecils and the like, 99% of that stuff is far from what i find interesting in the street/urban art world (or whatever you want to call it).

I'm not looking to start any arguments but im interested in what are you seeing here that gives his work the merit that clearly i don't give it?

Personally
I don't see any skilled/clever/intersting/new technique?
I can't see any message/commentary?
There's nothing new or original?
Other than the one with the trees at the bottom (which is the 1st piece of his i've seen I dont totally dislike) there doesnt seem to be any interesting interaction with the environment?
And i don't get any feeling for the work.

I see there are some bold bright colours and if I saw some of these when walking along the street they'd make me smile and thats about all i can get from it. I want more from an artist that sells their work at anything other than bottom end prices.

Im not saying every artist needs to bring a new technique, i was giving a list of things I look for in art to give it something of merit. New technique is something that would be good, or an interesting technique, or a clever technique or a skilled technique or any of the other things on the list i posted. I think you miss understand.

You say i dont get it, what it there to get, that is my entire question!

100% agree with Tinmar. Seems like you have some axe to grind with RAE by trying to write off his work as having no new technique. Really lame debate mate. Doubt it if you've actually looked at his whole body of work either. There are many pieces that do have "messages" (not that I always need one) but others that are more playful and use recycled objects. Hey maybe he's talking about the environment! But according to you it would still have no merit because he didn't invent a "technique".

I'm always up for a good debate when there is one to be had but you're presenting a pretty weak one at the moment.

Pre-sale for Silly Rabbit prints are on. PM for the email link if interested.

Maybe this piece has more meaning for you darhart?  Seems to be saying something!! 

Please try and read and understand my posts before comenting, you say you're "up for a good debate" but to do this you need to take in what has first been said. I'll try and make it simple for you.

I've at no point said he or any artist has to invent a new technique.

What i gave was a list of things that I look for in a piece of art that i think would give it merit.

Inventing a new technique is an example. It doesn't have to have a new technique, it's just one thing that could be enough to make a painting interesting.

Following so far?

On that same line i also suggested that having a skilled technique could be enough to make a painting interesting. It could be an old technique that many artists over the years have used, nothing new at all but has been used with a degree of skill showing artistic quality to lift it above the norm. But even then it need have no new technique, or skillfull technique, read on!

On that same line i gave other examples of technique that i think would make the painting have merit. I separtated these sugggestion with a slash "\"  meaning any one of them is valid. 

Still with me?

But, even if the painting has none of the above, no great technique of any note at all that still doesnt mean its a meritless painting! Yes thats right, i then went on to point out a whole host of other merit worthy things ANY ONE OF WHICH would be enough to give it merit.

Phew this is hard work, i've explained those few lines and thats enough for me, but you get the idea dont you?

I do see what you are saying and think its a little bit suspect in the sales/creative sense!

I'm out of the debate now, I just wanted to explain my point of view to DARHART.

But I do want to say that I've ordered one of those and I'm preety impatient o receive it!

id like the link too if there is anything left

How much do they cost?