Can you spot the difference? One is considered art and the other is not. For example, both involve abandoned supermarket trolleys. If nothing else, both examples could be seen as a form of ‘still life’. However, the first example is a piece from the ‘Sweet Streets’ street art exhibition from a couple of years ago. The supermarket trolley containing leaves from tree branches sits inside the trolley. The trolley is attached or ‘trussed’ to the wall by strings of yarn. This form of art is known as ‘yarn bombing’. The pieces of yarn attached to the brickwork stretch around to the other side of the wall. I must confess, I’m a little perplexed, especially in relation to the ‘fodder’ in the trolley, but I accept it is a form of art.
However, a few weeks ago, I was at the back of a railway station car park (and it is often around these areas you do see some great street art), that I spied this piece. Yes, it reminded me of the above piece of some time ago, but what of its difference? Both carry dead branch ‘fodder’; both are in trolleys. This one also contains other rubbish as well. But if the purple rubbish bin next to it is empty, why not put the rubbish in the bin! and why did they choose the trolley to ‘dump’ if a bin is nearby? And yes, there is no string or twine to hold it together, so it doesn’t look like some ‘yarn bombing’ installation. So, is that all it takes to differentiate? – or is it a matter of position?
If you put the object in the proper context; it is considered art – and when it is out of it; it is exactly that – “out of it”. So, when is rubbish art really rubbish art? – I’m confused – Let me know what you think otherwise I’ll leaf it there.