Live data from Hacker News

Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

amusingplanet.com

231–240 of 428 posts

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#231
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since this law was adopted, there's been an increase in full building graffiti, which is not banned. Now 10 years later, it is more likely to see one of these nowadays than an empty outdoor frame Nearly all of these look like murals, not graffiti (these are distinct forms of street art). Regardless, those photos are beautiful and I'd love to have those instead of billboards in my city.

Are building murals not associated with ghettos outside the US? Where I live you know if you start seeing big faces on walls you're in the bad part of town and need to be careful.

> Are building murals not associated with ghettos outside the US?

It's two things in the US. It's ghettos, as you say. But more and more it's whites who want to signal that they're "cool" with minority culture, and you see them in economically well off areas.

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are building murals not associated with ghettos outside the US? Where I live you know if you start seeing big faces on walls you're in the bad part of town and need to be careful.

In Montreal they are celebrated: we have a mural festival!

And they mostly appear in or near the downtown area.

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#233

In Zurich, the ban against billboards was recently introduced as well. It reminds me of the discussion of ad blockers on websites like Youtube and Co. After all, advertising is actually a fundamental part of the economy. How are things in Sao Paolo 10 years later?

I live in Zurich and there are several billboards on my residential street.

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#234
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're uninformed about it all being the same. The graffiti in São Paulo has a vast range of styles. I have hundreds of photos I've taken myself. This fine art I can see outdoors is one of the most pleasurable things about living or visiting there. I studied art in university, am an artist myself, and visit major exhibitions around the world on a regular basis. Much graffiti is indeed valid art.

[flagged]

If you might be an artist then where's your portfolio? There's no links in your profile, zero HN submissions. Put up or shut up.

The NYC gallery scene started bestowing art-ness upon people who became known for the work they painted on the city's walls around... exactly forty years ago, I looked up Kieth Haring as a random example and galleries started showing his work in 1983.

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#235

As an individual, I'd welcome no advertisements everywhere. I think ads were abused long enough. It's just a leech on the human life.

I can live with ads but living in the city the billboards with leds or spotlights on them are hell. Who doesn’t love being forced to buy blackout curtains so you can sleep.

City life has undoubtedly taken a tole on my mental and physical health in the form of noise and light pollution combined with having zero control over it.

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#236
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither murals nor graffiti is art. None of those would have been accepted in any gallery some 30~40 years ago when standards were higher and the world didn't suffer from the high number of grown-up men who are hooked up on comic books and animated cartoons it suffers through today. A lot of it is just vandalism. None of it seems to be made by or for adults. 99% looks like it's made by some comic book fan on LSD. Alw…

> None of those would have been accepted in any gallery some 30~40 years ag Graffiti started showing up in art galleries 30-40 years ago.

There is a Banksy one on now in Glasgow.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/rare-banksy-solo-e...

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#237
post #9

> Seven years on, the world's fourth-largest metropolis and South America’s most important city remains free of visual clutter and eye sore that plagues the majority of cities around the world. Unfortunately it suffers greatly - to a ridiculous level, in some places - from that ugliest kind of grafitti, convoluted "tags" made in single-stroke black ink I'm not sure if that is the case everywhere but in Brazil people…

These appear to be a worldwide phenomenon, except for places like Switzerland or Singapore.

I'm this close to putting some ethanol into a hand sprayer and just walking around and removing them from places where the medium is permanent marker on laminated surface (usually signs).

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#238
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d take ugly street art over ugly advertisement. At least it’s not trying to manipulate you.

at least advertisement is not made on the wall of your house without your consent

Do you think everyone who lives in a house with a billboard on it are asked to OK the ads?

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#239
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, good thing art is subjective. To me these are leagues better than ads and they bring social commentary and inspiration far more than any ad. It's one of the few things I am proud of as someone who lived in the state of Sao Paulo for a good chunk of my life.

No, they don't bring any social commentary, they only bring sycophancy. As soon as you criticize it you are moderated and silenced into oblivion. Your "social commentary" can only go in the way they demand that it go.

Can you give an example of good art and of valid artistic social commentary?

You have said what you think isn’t valid or good and seeing something you value would be interesting.

Re: Sao Paulo: A city with no outdoor advertisements (2013)

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so you know, the exact same thing was said about pretty much every major art movement over the past century and beyond. When you say, "None of it seems to be made by or for adults", the same was basically said of Salvador Dalí and Andy Warhol and Paul Gauguin and Henri Matisse. The more things change, the more they stay the same. :)

That's not a very good argument. Putting aside the present topic, this argument doesn't address the substance and instead lazily falls back on an association fallacy: "if people said P about A in the past and we no longer think that, and you say P about B, then you must also be wrong". It's the same kind of progressive argument people use when they categorically dismiss any criticism of new music as just the same old…

> It assumes the premise that art cannot be bad

The difference is that pieces of art can be bad, but you’re going to have to do a lot more work to dismiss an entire set of categories of art. Even the examples of Warhol, Dali, etc. are individual artists, not an entire medium.

Imagine arguing that there are exactly zero good pieces of software written in JavaScript bc JavaScript is a bad language.

Post reply on HN