A Nike viral I spotted thanks to Tar Art Rat Foundation. Do the commercial objectives mean it’s different from the ‘unsponsored’ film of two posts ago.
[tags] Tar Art Rat Foundation [/tags]
A Nike viral I spotted thanks to Tar Art Rat Foundation. Do the commercial objectives mean it’s different from the ‘unsponsored’ film of two posts ago.
[tags] Tar Art Rat Foundation [/tags]
sixtysecondview.blog 
“Do the commercial objectives mean it’s different from the ‘unsponsored’ film of two posts ago.”?
I would initially venture to say “yes” because the the BLU video seems to exist simply as a vehicle for presenting the artwork/promoting the artist in a viral video way…
However the motives of artists like BLU are (I think) more like:
-that they constantly make work.
-that their work gets seen.
(-is the purpose also to one day become sponsored? hard to say, and perhaps also spightly hard to do if what you are doing forces you to keep your identity fairly secret because your worrk is technically illegal)
Verses motives of Nike, probably more along the lines of:
-that they constantly perpetuate their own publicly perceieved cool-ness which results in people buying/wearing their products.
Looking into the matter further I’m not sure how ‘legal’ much of BLU’s work is- based on images in the BLOG
then again- Nike has also incorporated street-art like guerilla campaigns in recent years, some of which is definitely attached (even painted onto?- not sure) to/on/in public space-
mh.
LikeLike
Good points. Thinking about it, I guess artists have always had to ‘deal’ with money or power, it’s just done in different ways. Whether it was the eighteenth century patron who wanted family portraits or the powers-that-be who commissioned the cisteen chapel ceiling.
LikeLike
True, -or at least the more fortunate ones have had the opportunity of dealing with money/power…
LikeLike