normally, pictures of murals are chosen as the winner in ccc's street art contest. this is understandable, and murals are certainly impressive. you have to look up at them. similar to monumental architecture, which demonstrates the power of the builder to the visitor and inspires awe, murals also make heads look up respectfully. but the large murals are not only beautiful to look at. they are much more than simple works of art in public space.
these works should not only be gazed at thoughtlessly, it is advisable to enjoy murals with caution. as in every work of art, there is also an intention in these monuments. but are all these large murals works of art at all? many a monstrous work reveals, if one looks at it critically and a little more closely, a monstrous propaganda apparatus behind it. thus, in the end, not much more remains than a creative, elaborately designed and fancy permanent propaganda poster for a big company. unfortunately, there are quite a few talented artists who have sold their talent to internationally operating corporations. why such corporations like to buy artists has different reasons. street art has a hip image, the artists are often originally from the field of graffiti and therefore do not belong to the establishment in the perception. this can polish up the image of a corporation if they suggest that they promote art from underdogs. if the money for such projects was collected through more than just questionable and unethical business practices, the viewing of great works should be done under the knowledge of this aspect. certainly, there are numerous works of art in the public space that came about without such unholy alliances. but how is it to be evaluated when the viewer is secretly and subconsciously foisted advertising slogans through alleged art?
but that's not all. the unscrupulous behavior of some corporations is also shown in the appropriation of such artworks without any cooperation with the artist. finally, a criminal energy is revealed here that does not come from the artists. those bear the risk of being punished and corporations profit several times over from the work. in these cases, the anonymity of the artists is often used in order to be safe from legal prosecution. in this way, foreign image material can be used with a no budget. in such cases, the artists can of course not be blamed, since they are abused.
but what about those who pose murals for large car manufacturers, fashion manufacturers, fast food chains, lemonade producers, etc.? and there are a lot of this murals especially in berlin.
finally, there is the category of artists who simply want to turn the tables without legitimization. when companies simply help themselves to art, they simply help themselves to the logos of corporations without being asked. not only zevs plays with the logos of well-known companies in public spaces. for example, in lüneburg, bred downey painted the huge logo of a fast food chain on a fire wall. the writers moses and taps also painted a whole car with the logo of a lemonade manufacturer, which was slightly altered upon closer inspection. all these actions were not initiated by these global corporations. the concern of the artists in these cases is to deal with the perception and design of public space as well as the omnipresence of advertising and logos.
the big murals in the cities certainly attract tourists. but will they continue to come if the same famous muralists are invited all over the world and the local scene is neglected as a result? why should someone travel to another city for a work of art when there are similar paintings in their own city? sure, it's a bit exaggerated, but when corporations and authorities decide who can paint where and what should be painted, it's better to leave the walls gray. there's already enough disgusting propaganda, there's no need to create another medium to mislead people.
especially since such artworks go hand in hand with gentrification and thus rising rents. so it's not surprising that in berlin, a real estate shark organizes festivals where walls are painted. this certainly doesn't hurt the company's income, and the bad image can be polished up. but artists who take part in such projects should know that their image and authenticity suffer when they make their talent available to such companies. anyone who shares in the profits of these corporations can hardly denounce them.
but now to the murals in the picture. these two works were probably the most famous in berlin and were emblazoned on the curvy brache from 2007 to 2014. in 2014, with the permission of the creator blu, they were finally painted over. in the color black. a sign of protest. lutz henke, the initiator of the action, said: "we wanted to destroy this street art before it drives the progressive gentrification." with this, berlin has lost one of its most important works. the action can certainly be seen as a symbol for the decline of berlin's creative scene and the exodus of creative minds.
places like this, where artists can let off steam freely, are increasingly disappearing along with the artists. thus, these walls are orphaned and become increasingly unsightly, as they are no longer created on by artists.
