Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

[chowce5382]

I’m with beesonthewhatnow on this.

Fair enough, this is normally the reaction to this type of thing. Followed by I don’t know much about art, but I know that this isn’t art

 

[Winot]

Coming soon to Brixton - a conceptual art piece by the shadowy 'OneLambeth' involving a series of excavation projects at LTN borders. In a clever nod to the pluralism and confusion of the nature of modern debate, it transpires that there are in fact multiple 'OneLambeths', resulting in the holes being simultaneously emptied by one group and filled by another, illustrating the metaphor of 'keeping digging' whilst - ironically - closing the very thoroughfares that they seek to keep open.

 

[chowce5382]

Coming soon to Brixton - a conceptual art piece by the shadowy 'OneLambeth' involving a series of excavation projects at LTN borders. In a clever nod to the pluralism and confusion of the nature of modern debate, it transpires that there are in fact multiple 'OneLambeths', resulting in the holes being simultaneously emptied by one group and filled by another, illustrating the metaphor of 'keeping digging' whilst - ironically - closing the very thoroughfares that they seek to keep open.

This is a very interesting interpretation. But be careful, you’ll get told to fuck off soon for that kind of language

 

[technical]

Those planters are literally right next to a primary school. I cannot believe that any right minded person thinks that is a legitimate way to protest against LTNs.

 

[thebackrow]

Also, why use oil (I assume it is). If it’s just vandalism use creosote or something like that which is cheaper as this is a fair amount of oil

indeed, if it’s environmental art why not use something that looks like oil,
rather than dumping toxic waste on the street and polluting the environment?

Like XR, Greenpeace and other environmental protesters do.

perhaps also don’t do it in the same place that high traffic campaign criminals have been vandalising public property so they can get away with breaking the law (to avoid any possible confusion).

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Not defending it, just telling you guys what I’ve been told and the exact rationale given. Also, it’s not pseudo criticism, these are pretty main stream concepts which flow through the Arts.

Are you aware of just how fucking stupid you sound right now?

Let’s just be clear - you’re saying someone has vandalised the planters that mark an LTN (designed in part as an anti pollution measure) as part of an art installation that highlights, errrr, pollution?

 

[thebackrow]

This is a very interesting interpretation. But be careful, you’ll get told to fuck off soon for that kind of language

That’s what someone told him. He’s no idea who it was but I’m sure it’s true.

 

[BigTom]

Fair enough, this is normally the reaction to this type of thing. Followed by I don’t know much about art, but I know that this isn’t art

I do know a fair amount about art and I will just say this:
Fuck right off with this.
There is no way this is a piece of art and Banksy absolutely has had manifestos and books he's written about his art.
This is a piece of vandalism, politically motivated. There is an approximately 0% chance this is an environmental activist creating a piece of art to talk about how oil destroys nature.
There is an approximately 100% chance this was done because oil will kill the plants and they want to fuck the planters up because they think this will help their political cause.

Trying to claim this is a piece of art just makes you look like a fool who is supportive of these actions whatever you say about not supporting them.
a piece of art.
lol.

good luck in your court case if you try to take a similar level of arguments and reason into the appeal court.

 

[chowce5382]

indeed, if it’s environmental art why not use something that looks like oil,
rather than dumping toxic waste on the street and polluting the environment?

Like XR, Greenpeace and other environmental protesters do.

perhaps also don’t do it in the same place that high traffic campaign criminals have been vandalising public property so they can get away with breaking the law to avoid any possible confusion.

I don’t know, you’d have to ask the artist. It’s an interesting point though and glad to see that you’re thinking about this installation. It’s what the artist would have wanted

 

[chowce5382]

I do know a fair amount about art and I will just say this:
Fuck right off with this.
There is no way this is a piece of art and Banksy absolutely has had manifestos and books he's written about his art.
This is a piece of vandalism, politically motivated. There is an approximately 0% chance this is an environmental activist creating a piece of art to talk about how oil destroys nature.
There is an approximately 100% chance this was done because oil will kill the plants and they want to fuck the planters up because they think this will help their political cause.

Trying to claim this is a piece of art just makes you look like a fool who is supportive of these actions whatever you say about not supporting them.
a piece of art.
lol.

good luck in your court case if you try to take a similar level of arguments and reason into the appeal court.

No. We’ll be going on the grounds that the judge suggested we go on. Also, not sure if you know this but the law courts aren’t the right forum to talk about this kind of thing.
I’m telling you what I’ve been told. When I saw it I thought that someone had poured oil all over a planter because they didn’t like them.

 

[chowce5382]

Also, quick question. What is the legal difference between this act of vandalism and the rainbows and stars which were painted on a council road at the beginning of lockdown during the night by the children (which I have to say looked quite nice) somewhere at the top of Tulse Hill?

 

[liquidindian]

Are you going to go on suggest that your posts and the OLJ twitter feed (nothing to do with you, of course, you're just the bagman) are a form of performance art? And then explain to everyone what performance art is?

 

[spitfire]

Also, quick question. What is the legal difference between this act of vandalism and the rainbows and stars which were painted on a council road at the beginning of lockdown during the night by the children (which I have to say looked quite nice) somewhere at the top of Tulse Hill?

I'll be honest, I read all of your posts and was happy to see that at least one of the anti LTN brigade wasn't a frothing loon and could engage like a grown up but mate...

 

[chowce5382]

Are you going to go on suggest that your posts and the OLJ twitter feed (nothing to do with you, of course, you're just the bagman) are a form of performance art? And then explain to everyone what performance art is?

Nope.

 

[chowce5382]

I'll be honest, I read all of your posts and was happy to see that at least one of the anti LTN brigade wasn't a frothing loon and could engage like a grown up but mate...


View attachment 278744

Ok, I’ll answer for you. Nothing. The only difference is that of aesthetics. One looks appalling, the other doesn’t

 

[teuchter]

If it wasn't art then the next most plausible explanation is that it was done by the squirrels and foxes which have been roaming the LTNs and terrorising residents.

 

[chowce5382]

If it wasn't art then the next most plausible explanation is that it was done by the squirrels and foxes which have been roaming the LTNs and terrorising residents.

No, the most plausible explanation is that it was a person or persons.

 

[teuchter]

Also, quick question. What is the legal difference between this act of vandalism and the rainbows and stars which were painted on a council road at the beginning of lockdown during the night by the children (which I have to say looked quite nice) somewhere at the top of Tulse Hill?

It seems to me that one quite clearly "amounts to an impairment of the value of the usefulness of the property to the owner" while the other quite clearly doesn't.

 

[spitfire]

Ok, I’ll answer for you. Nothing. The only difference is that of aesthetics. One looks appalling, the other doesn’t

Thanks. Glad you cleared that up for me.

I remember similar arguments put forward by the mentalist behind the One Tower Hamlets account when some kids drew on the road with chalk. Interesting fellow traveller.

 

[edcraw]

I don’t know, you’d have to ask the artist. It’s an interesting point though and glad to see that you’re thinking about this installation. It’s what the artist would have wanted

Trying to claim this is a piece of art just makes you look like a fool who is supportive of these actions whatever you say about not supporting them.

 

[liquidindian]

I take it all back. Please pour oil on all the other planters.

 

[edcraw]

View attachment 278747

It seems to me that one quite clearly "amounts to an impairment of the value of the usefulness of the property to the owner" while the other quite clearly doesn't.

and he claims to have been a lawyer! No wonder he's funding the avaition industry now instead.

 

[chowce5382]

View attachment 278747

It seems to me that one quite clearly "amounts to an impairment of the value of the usefulness of the property to the owner" while the other quite clearly doesn't.

Yup, case law says that it is would be need to be cleaned to put it back to its original state The the cost of the cleaning can lead to diminution in value of the property as it is as embedded cost.

 

[Jesterburger]

Ok, I’ll answer for you. Nothing. The only difference is that of aesthetics. One looks appalling, the other doesn’t

A cyclist could slip on that oil and cause themselves serious damage. It is a lot more than aesthetic. Trying to defend this shit won't do you or the anti-brigade any favours at all.

 

[teuchter]

Yup, case law says that it is would be need to be cleaned to put it back to its original state The the cost of the cleaning can lead to diminution in value of the property as it is as embedded cost.

Why would there be a need to clean the chalk drawings?

 

[chowce5382]

Anyway, it’s been great fun winding you up for part of the morning.
For the record, this is obviously vandalism, I condemn it and it’s dangerous but it’s been fun to see how people like Backrow react to a bit of their own medicine in terms of being wound up.

 

[chowce5382]

Why would there be a need to clean the chalk drawings?

Well the wouldn’t, hence it’s not vandalism as no need to clean it up

 

[teuchter]

Well the wouldn’t, hence it’s not vandalism as no need to clean it up

So - the difference is not simply one of aesthetics.

 

[edcraw]

Man - I’d forgotten what disingenuous, self-righteous dicks you get on forums sometimes.

 

[spitfire]

Anyway, it’s been great fun winding you up for part of the morning.
For the record, this is obviously vandalism, I condemn it and it’s dangerous but it’s been fun to see how people like Backrow react to a bit of their own medicine in terms of being wound up.

I don't know anything about the Backrow comment but your "wind up" has frankly just made you look awful in your reaction to this.

There's nothing "fun" about this vandalism.