Artist who created famed Obama 'Hope' posters arrested on graffiti charges

A street artist famous for his red, white and blue "Hope" posters of President Barch Obama has been arrested on warrants accusing him of tagging property with graffiti, police said Saturday.

Shepard Fairey, 38, was arrested Friday night on his way to the Institute of Contemporary Art for a kickoff event for his first solo exhibition, called "Supply and Demand."

Two warrants were issued for Fairey on Jan. 24 after police determined he'd tagged property in two locations with graffiti based on the Andre the Giant street art campaign from his early career, police Officer James Kenneally said Saturday.

Read More

I saw this article which was rather interesting, so I thought I'd share it with everyone here on the ATS forum. Click on the link at the bottom for the full content.

This guy has been featured on a commercial and I think I remember seeing him featured on a TV show - like on the history channel or something. The commercial and TV show (or it was a commercial for the TV show) was speaking about people who made positive changes with their talents .. that sort of thing.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
This guy has been featured on a commercial and I think I remember seeing him featured on a TV show - like on the history channel or something. The commercial and TV show (or it was a commercial for the TV show) was speaking about people who made positive changes with their talents .. that sort of thing.

I think it's possible to make a positive contribution to society through artistic talent, but graffiti and the defacing of public property isn't it.

reply to post by LLoyd45


Man, I thought I respected you.

Second line.

as a very wise man once said "taste is a mtter of taste". and i liked those obey posters - helps a city to feel like living organism when its more proactive inhabitants decide to decorate it. like put stuff on brick walls. anyways.

i think the larger issue is that this andre the giant art project (actually started as a school project) is what, 15 years old? older than most of the people reading this? those posters are all over the world. there are a few in my neighborhood. and the PTB decide to throw the book at him now? have fun on your moral high horse defending brick walls

This is too bad. There are so many places/canvases to do art.
Why graffiti on public buildings - walls/windows?
Where's the respect for others property?
I have seen our little town trashed from the constant graffiti.
I just don't get this.

Originally posted by spines
reply to post by LLoyd45

 

Man, I thought I respected you.

Second line.

Sorry you feel that way, but defacing public property isn't the way to get a message across. If it's that important, rent a sign board, set up a web site, or take out an ad in a paper like other law abiding citizens do.

Would anyone really like it is some stranger tagged the side of their home? I know I wouldn't. Not only is it disrespectful, it costs time and money to remove. Cities spend millions of dollars every year removing graffiti from public areas, money that could be used to provide food and/or shelter to the homeless, or any of a thousand badly needed services for the poor.

reply to post by LLoyd45


The Kernel agrees. I wonder why we are focusing on this graffiti artist out of millions of them though. Because he came up with the Obama posters? ATS. Another Tabloid Service. Sad.

This is a subject that splits my thinking but I don’t think it is necessarily paradoxical. In the UK we have Banksy putting his stuff up on public and I think private buildings and a lot of it is very good and has been welcomed as an improvement to the image of the place. The location of his work is also vital to its appeal; it wouldn’t be the same if he rented a billboard. So on the one hand I would hate to lose that vibrancy and surprise of seeing a great piece of art where it wouldn’t be expected and knowing that it represents the artist and not the corporation that sanctioned/funded it. But of course on the other I don’t want to see the words “Danno sucked Robs knob here” scrawled on the local library with a giant c*ck sprayed next to it.

But I don’t think we have to take the position of either letting people do it or not. As in the case of Banksy he does it knowing it is illegal and so doesn’t reveal his identity. When one of his pieces shows up it seems that either people don’t like it in which case it is removed or in quite a few cases people do like it and it’s kept and even becomes a bit of a tourist attraction. The police would still arrest him or anyone else found to have “vandalised” private or public property but public leniency is shown to him where it wouldn’t be to others because he does good work. The result is we get the interesting, vibrant, thought provoking public artwork without having inconsistent enforcement of the law or opening the doors to a graffiti flood.

So as far as the OP goes, glad the police arrested him but it’s a shame he got caught.

Graffiti is beautiful. More beautiful than grey slate and concrete.

It is my understanding that artists don't usually regress in their works. Once they have gone through phase "XYZ", they don't go back and paint in that style/subject/genre again. Yet, the police are saying that he was "tagging" based on his "old work". Perhaps I a have misunderstood how artists work in their progression.

Can any artists help me out here?

Originally posted by sadisticwoman
Graffiti is beautiful. More beautiful than grey slate and concrete.

Uh huh. Until it says or conveys something you don't agree with - then it becomes obscene and vulgar, right?