it says a lot about your understanding of (and appreciation for) art to remain so level-headed in what is so obviously someone else's mistake. people nowadays flip over someone giving them decaf instead of regular, and the city PAINTED OVER a piece of your work without so much as a heads-up.
not that you likely care, but i know a little something about psychology and it sounds to me like that richard guy is just grade-school-style jealous of your work (and likely the space dedicated to it). why else would he spend so much energy on something that ultimately will be cleared up when you meet with the city? i'd put $50 on him being the one who called and complained. but maybe that's just all the sir arthur conan doyle i read growing up...
the best part of this situation is how many people i've seen/read/heard discussing this. people CARE about art. and they care about YOUR art. and i hope that makes you happy. it's the least your city can do for you now, to reaffirm how important public art is.
Well well well...
It is exciting to have people discussing art so passionately.
There are a number of questions here to be answered, first and foremost did I have permission to do the mural, or am I somehow confused, as seems to be suggested. Well I very much had permission to do the mural, and I am very much in control of my faculties! The inference that I somehow did not understand, I am not going to respond to, in my opinion that is outrageous. I am quite sure that in the records of the Clean and Beautiful fund sits my proposal and acceptance for a mural on the south wall and subsequent payment. I have now been contacted by the city and they have requested a meeting, and I am quite sure that this will be worked out.
I also live in this community, my son goes to school in this community. I have painted around the world, shown in galleries in Canada and the USA and have my paintings in collections in North America, Europe and Asia, one of my paintings hangs in the mayor's office in my home town of Owen Sound. Not everyone has to like my work, and I know some people actively do not like it, such is art. But I was given permission to paint my mural, I did so in good faith, and i would at least expect a level of respect for that. Not to mention, if you follow what has happened with this, that many people did in fact like my mural, and some of them passionately.
I do not yet have all the facts, but i think we should all remain friendly. The city has asked to meet with me about this issue and I am more than happy to do that. I am extremely thankful for all of the support that I have been given, and I am quite sure that something can be worked out.
In my mind good art is not always liked or even understood, but that is hardly reason to destroy it.
I encourage anyone who has questions about this please contact me, like I said I am a member of this community also and want to continue to feel good walking through my neighbourhood, This is not a war, it is art.
I take penises and vaginas as a compliment any day! :)
The bureaucracy wasn't that onerous and has really nothing to do with the creativity. What's unfortunate was that Joel was confused about his "right" to paint the mural there. There are many artists/groups who have no problem going through the bureaucracy in order to have a public space to work upon. These spaces are for personal expression - but with a responsibility - a responsibility to the neighbourhood that has to live with it. You're right in the fact that you'll never please everyone but I think, at the least , each artist/group has an aesthetic responsibility to making the best mural possible, considering and respecting the space it is painted on and the people who live around it. Bad or indulgent murals do nothing but attract more tagging and certainly does nothing to encourage or promote any pride in the 'hood.
This isn't about taking an artist's rights away. It's plain and simple that he just didn't have permission to paint there. If he had, the mural would probably still exist! (proof - his mural on the north face is still there - no one painted that over - Why? because he had permission to paint that one.).
I believe that "making it right is the proper way to go" as you say. I would add a proviso though. I think that designs should be submitted and judged for their aesthetic value by members of the art, graffiti and neighbourhood communities to get the best murals possible and where everyone can have a say. Competitions may not be a bad idea either...
One of the stated reasons for the removal of this mural is that supposedly it looked like an attack on Stephen Harper. I find that laughable. Perhaps someone included that in a complaint, but anyone who actually looked at the mural would know immediately that this was not the case.
There has been, however, some anti-Harper graffiti around the neighbourhood. A quite well-known stencil of "G20 Harper" appeared on the stairway leading up to the Railpath at Dupont St. last year. It was done by a graffiti artist calling himself Posterchild. Here's the link. It took a long time for the City to remove this (only within the last couple of months). Oddly enough, during a previous cleanup, the City removed all graffiti in that stairwell except for the Harper one! How bizzarre.
Also, there has been some anti-Harper graffiti on Bloor St. since the election. City hasn't painted over that yet. Here's a photo I took this morning (excuse the bad cellphone pic).
I wonder if this was was just part of the confusion. Other complaints about anti-Harper graffiti in the neighbourhood being applied to Joel's mural? Who knows.... But the mural is gone, and the anti-Harper graf lives.
I'm certain that this whole thing comes down to confusion over the legality of the mural, as you mentioned.
However, I still don't think it was right to just go ahead and blank the whole thing without following up with the artist first, or at least checking in with the current local councillor. Something could have been worked out without causing the big fallout we have now.
I've heard mixed reviews of most of the local murals. Some people really like(d) Joel's mural that got erased, and the evidence is there in all of the online commentary that showed up on Facebook, Twitter, and in responses the news articles. Lots of detractors too, and I can totally understand that. But there have also been negative comments about other local murals. E.g. Someone on this site hates the bike mural (link), others don't like the "childish" murals in various places (while others demand that this is what we should do to get kids involved), and one person even made hilarious comments about Richard Mongiat's murals on Bloor, basically saying that they're a bunch of penises and vaginas! Ha!
If we only ever installed murals that everyone liked, we'd still only have grey walls adorned with tags and "illegal" art. I guess that going through all the proper channels, and making sure it's done right, is the way to go, but I also hope that excessive bureaucracy doesn't kill the creativity and willingness to do public art.
My name is Richard Mongiat and I painted the two murals on the Bloor St. Underpass just west of Lansdowne Ave. I wanted to answer this before it gets blown way out of proportion as an attack on the city and it's war on graffiti. I also painted my murals through the same deptartment that Joel Richardson painted his commissioned mural on the north side of Dupont St. I also attended the graffiti summit at the Drake Hotel last night.
In order to paint a mural with funding by the city (which Joel claims he was doing) - not graffiti - on each side of a city underpass you need:
- support/partnering from a local community group (they receive the money from the city - not the artist directly)
- permission from the City works Dept.
- permission from Buildings and Structures, City of Toronto
- The Rail line
- insurance
You don't just get permission from a couple of staffers from your ex-local Councillors office. Adam Giambrone had no personal power to okay a mural on city property. How do I know? Because I went through his office to paint mine and and I had to do all of the above in order to paint the Bloor St. underpass.
I was actually in conversations with Joel about re-working the design of his mural to better serve the space that it was painted on. I asked him repeatedly if he had permission to paint this side of the underpass and and although he claimed he did I honestly think he confused his permission and fee from painting the north face of the underpass the year before for having
permission to paint the whole underpass. This wasn't some conspiracy by the city or the city flexing it's muscles against graffiti. Joel goofed up. An honest mistake. That's all it was.
It also makes perfect sense that the city does not fund murals with supposed political messages. It may be fine and dandy if you agree with the muralist's politics but what if the muralist paints a mural containing views you find offensive? Would there be an out cry then? The city's policies are fair because no one's political views are allowed - left, right, whatever.
I would like to add that Elyse Parker and her staff at the city of Toronto have been nothing but supportive and helpful in the painting of my murals (and many mural/art projects) and the Nuit Blanche project that I did last year with artist Jeff Winch at the Wallace St. pedestrian bridge. They are not the enemy here. Turning this into a witch hunt will only polarize people and confuse the issues of graffiti, public murals and public spaces that the summit last night was starting to address.
Please, ask questions, find out all of the facts before throwing more fuel on the fire.
I know Elyse Parker to be a very nice person and a thoughtful, dedicated City employee. The Nuit Blanche project Rail of Light would have never happened on the Wallace Avenue bridge last fall without her cooperation and that of her department. Gaining the support of the various government bodies and rail companies would have gone nowhere if she had not offered her unqualified support and vouched for a bunch of people wanting to being a unique arts event to the Junction Triangle.
Rail of Light will leave a mural legacy that will last for years (we hope) with a project starting later this month. Evidence of Elyse Parker's work is all over this neighbourhood and she has helped make it a more attractive place to live. Before anyone dumps more grief and scorn on her, let's give the facts a chance to come out. Elyse deserves the benefit of any doubt.
I live at the corner of Davenport and Lansdowne, and I greatly appreciate the work you've done in our up and coming ward.
The dog park in Earlscourt is a wonderful addition to the area, and has created a real sense of community. I would have preferred a nice large green space rather than the proposed soccer pitch on the west side of the park, but we can’t win all our battles.
However, can you please explain to me how, in an area that is quickly becoming a hub for young, artistic minded people, who are not only renting in the area, but also making long term investments in the area, this could have happened:
I pass (I supposed passed) this mural daily and am livid that it has been painted over. These murals are part of our urban landscape, and add to the attraction and diversity of the area. We are a walking culture, a biking culture, and we look to our surroundings to stimulate our imaginations. There is nothing inspiring about a white wash wall (underpass on Lansdowne north of Dupont). It is unsightly and bland.
Tagging should be covered, art should not, and art is often driven by political motives. Could you imagine if Banksy’s art, one of the UK’s most celebrated artists, whose canvas of choice is a brick wall, was covered because it was had political undertones? Every single mural he has ever created would have to be painted over.
And, as is claimed, the Mural was removed because of a complaint, shouldn't there be a public consultation before that complaint is acted on? One complaint? Myself and other park goers spent all of last summer complaining that there was a group of men crapping, littering and accosting women in Earlscourt park, but that didn't seem to make any difference. Perhaps I should spray paint my initials on them while they are passed out in a drunken stuper. Perhaps then you will take some action.
My toddler learned how to say both dog and bird at the Caledonia and Davenport underpass. I sure hope they aren’t next on the white washing list.
Giambrone confirmed today that Joel had permission to do this mural. Joel also has the documentation from the City, which he shared with The Star and mentioned on the radio.
Excerpt:
"Councillor Ana Bailão, who succeeded Giambrone in last October’s election, was also trying to discover why Richardson’s mural was erased, noting “I never found it offensive — I walk by it all the time.”"
Sandy,
As a residents of this ward I would like to know if Joel had permission from the City to paint the mural. I think this needs to be determined first. Did Adam Giambrone's office get permission or not, we don't know this but I would like to know???
Sandy this might be hard to hear, but I spoke to few people who didn't like the mural, it's more then one. One person in particular who has a lot of influence and is well known in the community and across Ontario told me personally they didn't like it. . For me I like to know if Joel was given the green light or was he lead on to believe he had permission.
I don't know Joel's work all that well to pass judgement. The only stuff I seen was his mural on paton and dupont. There were people who said they should had artist bid for the job rather then to give to to Joel, they felt his realtionship with Marjolein had some influence. This is waht was said and what I heard. It way more then what you are saying. JF
Elyse Parker could have called the Councillors office to clear this up. I wonder how she got the gig deciding what is and what is not political.Given the size of the mural one would think that it might have occurred to her that maybe it had been commissioned. I aw the mural and did not see Harper, I saw a generic "businessman". Personally I am not too keen on one person having the say in what people can or cannot see in the hood.
Who knew that we were living in a communist country?! This is MY formal complaint: Elyse Parker should be released from her duties effective immediately. A RESIDENT complained (ONE SINGLE RESIDENT) about a loved mural by Joel Richardson on Dupont Street?! Humour would be my complaint actually coming to fruition!
We live in Canada whereby, we just spent millions urging our younger generation to vote - how dare one resident and one director decide the demise of a city funded project????? The 'active community' of the Junction Triangle just met a few weeks ago with Ana Bailao (in case Ms. Parker is unaware she's our city councillor) to discuss beautifying our neighbourhood - the surroundings of and on Dupont Street. One of the big topics was that of our 2 bridges and their unsafe underpasses. We discussed how they are NOT lit properly, and as well we talked about how much we all appreciate and enjoy the art work, JOEL'S included! Do I ever wish I had a magic communistic wand, because I would wave it and I would have beautiful basket's of flowers, garbage bins, and more lights all available for the safety of our community walking and biking along Dupont especially at night. But alas NO, we have to beg and plead, write application after application to BEG for money to help make our street more beautiful? How much time and money did it take for an entire wall of art to be destroyed by Ms. Parker - oh right, one phone call and probably $1500.00 for time and paint, oh and $2000.00 for the commission itself. This approximate $1500.00, Dupont Street could have used to benefit our community!!! Despicable! It's sad to think that ONE phone call lead to this moral and ethical atrocity - a paint brush won't let me ever forget to tell my children what Ms. Parker did to our community, because she was so ignorant to assume that the art was about STEPHEN HARPER, the funny thing is that her careless actions are now about so much more! Clearly, we must always teach our children to fight for our so-called democracy, because in a splash of a paint brush it can be gone?!
THIS IS THE BIGGEST WASTE OF TAXPAYERS MONEY AND IT IS INSULTING BEYOND BELIEF THE MESS MS. PARKER HAS LEFT ON 'OUR' WALL - IT LOOKS AWFUL AND WITHOUT QUESTION THIS IS AN EMBARRASSMENT TO EVERY CANADIAN CITIZEN! WHO WANTS TO WALK UNDER THE BRIDGE NOW, THANK YOU MS. PARKER - PERHAPS YOU NEED TO LOOK UP THE WORD DEMOCRACY AND BEGIN TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY AS TO WHOM YOU WORK FOR?! AS WELL, WE HAVE SURVEYS THAT ARE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE WHEN DECIDING THE FATE OF A COMMUNITY!
Strange - According to Joel's post on Facebook, the City has removed this City-Sponsored mural. Is it a misplaced part of the "war of graffiti"? Will be interesting to hear the details when they come out.
Note: Followup article posted here. Closing comments on this page.
Here are a few more examples of how privatization has not worked in the US.
"Unlike the public sector, the private sector is bred to maximize profits. Left to its own devices, it will always find a more profitable way to provide services even when that means increasing their cost..."
The real underlying point is that there no longer is a true free market so there is no real competition.
As you have likely heard Council went ahead with privatization with some strings added including having council input on awarding the contract.
Vote was 32-13, with following councillors voting against.
Maria Augimeri, Janet Davis, Glenn De Baeremaeker, Sarah Doucette, Paula Fletcher, Mary Fragedakis, Mike Layton, Pam McConnell, Joe Mihevc, Gord Perks, Anthony Perruzza, Adam Vaughan, Kristyn Wong-Tam
See council minutes for additional motions & votes http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2011.PW3.1
I have traveled across the US and seen how the "lets pay the lowest amount possible" concept has decimated the country. You see it in the retail sector where things are cheap at Wal-Mart but the downtowns have been hollowed out and mainstreet is a shell and all the jobs are in China. And what jobs do remain are making the US a new sweatshop.
Things are cheap but working families are a paycheck or disease from going under. Special volunteer "medical camps" are sprouting up across the US to do free medical clinics for the working underclass who cant ever get ahead. Towns are closing libraries and public health departments and schools so they can provide tax breaks to corporations because there are no local jobs anymore, or ones that pay a living wage. The saying "you get what you pay for" sadly really rings true as in the book "The High Cost Of Low Prices".
The idea that privatizing public services has been discredited as towns fall into bankruptcy because they dont have a tax base any more and everybody is making 7 dollars an hour with no benefits at all. You can always find somebody who will do stuff cheap but what is the larger cost to the community when people have no security? Somebody is making money but it is not the regular folk. How is privatization doing?
For those that follow real news instead of populist chants that appeal to our baser selfish interests the evidence is clear. The lowest price and privatization works against the working person and lines the pockets of others while costing the larger society as a whole a lot more. As stated above when cities and towns loose the bargaining power they have and become beholden to market forces the only people who win are the companies. In case anybody has forgot, the free market is not interested in the community, not interested in the common good, not interested in reducing poverty or improving literacy; its only interested in profit.
Followers of Mike Harris and Rob Ford and Kevin O'Leary never seem to realize (like the book "Whats Wrong With Kansas") that they are in the end acting against their own best interest but by the time only lawyers can afford to buy a house in Toronto, by the time there are no free services for children or immigrants, by the time all public property is sold off to corporations it will be too late. It always amazes me how people who pretend to be for the "working family" and less advantaged so easily duped by the merchants of profit. Privatization and its variations and the common good are at opposite ends of the spectrum and to think otherwise is delusional. Spend less time listening to Ford and more time reading the newspapers to see where his "vision" has taken the US. You are being played.
There is no coincidence that both buildings were built by the same developer. People need places to live and we should be careful not to stigmatize people just because that was the only place they could afford, or find, or was close to their work.
That said, in this day and age when there are so many materials and building techniques available it is a crime that even the most average of buildings cannot in some way add to their community and enrich the lives of the residents. The Standard "Lofts" looks like prisons I saw when I was shooting in Russia in 1992. All these years later the folks on Ward Ave. still look out at one of the ugliest bleakest unfinished streetscapes I have ever seen. Who let this happen? He is not in ofice any more. This developer is still planning even more blight on this site despite the fact that with some imagination the site could be improved and made far better for the residents and the community. The residents should band together and demand a more human environment and a say in what the rest of the development looks like. Is a safe well lit people friendly space too much to ask? With this developer the answer always seems to be yes.Thats why we get "cram as many people in as possible" school of design such as BeBloor where touches of humanity are a luxury.
Christopher Hume in the Toronto Star has been doing a series of video stories about the best and worst buildings built in Toronto this century. Today he takes aim at BeBloor and calls it the second worst building this century in Toronto. You can see the video at http://www.thestar.com/videozone/991051--hume-the-second-worst-building-...
I wonder if the Standard Lofts were built before 2000? They would certainly make it onto the worst list. And it is no coincidence they are built by the same developer who has blighted the neighbourhood with phoney Brownstones.
way to go mr. richardson!
this is the city's fuck up, no doubt about it.
it says a lot about your understanding of (and appreciation for) art to remain so level-headed in what is so obviously someone else's mistake. people nowadays flip over someone giving them decaf instead of regular, and the city PAINTED OVER a piece of your work without so much as a heads-up.
not that you likely care, but i know a little something about psychology and it sounds to me like that richard guy is just grade-school-style jealous of your work (and likely the space dedicated to it). why else would he spend so much energy on something that ultimately will be cleared up when you meet with the city? i'd put $50 on him being the one who called and complained. but maybe that's just all the sir arthur conan doyle i read growing up...
the best part of this situation is how many people i've seen/read/heard discussing this. people CARE about art. and they care about YOUR art. and i hope that makes you happy. it's the least your city can do for you now, to reaffirm how important public art is.
a supporter,
alberta
I've updated this entry with more media links and a message from Councillor Ana Bailao. See above.
Well well well...
It is exciting to have people discussing art so passionately.
There are a number of questions here to be answered, first and foremost did I have permission to do the mural, or am I somehow confused, as seems to be suggested. Well I very much had permission to do the mural, and I am very much in control of my faculties! The inference that I somehow did not understand, I am not going to respond to, in my opinion that is outrageous. I am quite sure that in the records of the Clean and Beautiful fund sits my proposal and acceptance for a mural on the south wall and subsequent payment. I have now been contacted by the city and they have requested a meeting, and I am quite sure that this will be worked out.
I also live in this community, my son goes to school in this community. I have painted around the world, shown in galleries in Canada and the USA and have my paintings in collections in North America, Europe and Asia, one of my paintings hangs in the mayor's office in my home town of Owen Sound. Not everyone has to like my work, and I know some people actively do not like it, such is art. But I was given permission to paint my mural, I did so in good faith, and i would at least expect a level of respect for that. Not to mention, if you follow what has happened with this, that many people did in fact like my mural, and some of them passionately.
I do not yet have all the facts, but i think we should all remain friendly. The city has asked to meet with me about this issue and I am more than happy to do that. I am extremely thankful for all of the support that I have been given, and I am quite sure that something can be worked out.
In my mind good art is not always liked or even understood, but that is hardly reason to destroy it.
I encourage anyone who has questions about this please contact me, like I said I am a member of this community also and want to continue to feel good walking through my neighbourhood, This is not a war, it is art.
Joel Richardson
I take penises and vaginas as a compliment any day! :)
The bureaucracy wasn't that onerous and has really nothing to do with the creativity. What's unfortunate was that Joel was confused about his "right" to paint the mural there. There are many artists/groups who have no problem going through the bureaucracy in order to have a public space to work upon. These spaces are for personal expression - but with a responsibility - a responsibility to the neighbourhood that has to live with it. You're right in the fact that you'll never please everyone but I think, at the least , each artist/group has an aesthetic responsibility to making the best mural possible, considering and respecting the space it is painted on and the people who live around it. Bad or indulgent murals do nothing but attract more tagging and certainly does nothing to encourage or promote any pride in the 'hood.
This isn't about taking an artist's rights away. It's plain and simple that he just didn't have permission to paint there. If he had, the mural would probably still exist! (proof - his mural on the north face is still there - no one painted that over - Why? because he had permission to paint that one.).
I believe that "making it right is the proper way to go" as you say. I would add a proviso though. I think that designs should be submitted and judged for their aesthetic value by members of the art, graffiti and neighbourhood communities to get the best murals possible and where everyone can have a say. Competitions may not be a bad idea either...
Here's a photo that shows the City had painted over other graffiti in the stairwell but left the Harper stencil:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/swizzlestudio/4999687798/
Weird, eh?
One of the stated reasons for the removal of this mural is that supposedly it looked like an attack on Stephen Harper. I find that laughable. Perhaps someone included that in a complaint, but anyone who actually looked at the mural would know immediately that this was not the case.
There has been, however, some anti-Harper graffiti around the neighbourhood. A quite well-known stencil of "G20 Harper" appeared on the stairway leading up to the Railpath at Dupont St. last year. It was done by a graffiti artist calling himself Posterchild. Here's the link. It took a long time for the City to remove this (only within the last couple of months). Oddly enough, during a previous cleanup, the City removed all graffiti in that stairwell except for the Harper one! How bizzarre.
Also, there has been some anti-Harper graffiti on Bloor St. since the election. City hasn't painted over that yet. Here's a photo I took this morning (excuse the bad cellphone pic).
I wonder if this was was just part of the confusion. Other complaints about anti-Harper graffiti in the neighbourhood being applied to Joel's mural? Who knows.... But the mural is gone, and the anti-Harper graf lives.
I'm certain that this whole thing comes down to confusion over the legality of the mural, as you mentioned.
However, I still don't think it was right to just go ahead and blank the whole thing without following up with the artist first, or at least checking in with the current local councillor. Something could have been worked out without causing the big fallout we have now.
I've heard mixed reviews of most of the local murals. Some people really like(d) Joel's mural that got erased, and the evidence is there in all of the online commentary that showed up on Facebook, Twitter, and in responses the news articles. Lots of detractors too, and I can totally understand that. But there have also been negative comments about other local murals. E.g. Someone on this site hates the bike mural (link), others don't like the "childish" murals in various places (while others demand that this is what we should do to get kids involved), and one person even made hilarious comments about Richard Mongiat's murals on Bloor, basically saying that they're a bunch of penises and vaginas! Ha!
If we only ever installed murals that everyone liked, we'd still only have grey walls adorned with tags and "illegal" art. I guess that going through all the proper channels, and making sure it's done right, is the way to go, but I also hope that excessive bureaucracy doesn't kill the creativity and willingness to do public art.
My name is Richard Mongiat and I painted the two murals on the Bloor St. Underpass just west of Lansdowne Ave. I wanted to answer this before it gets blown way out of proportion as an attack on the city and it's war on graffiti. I also painted my murals through the same deptartment that Joel Richardson painted his commissioned mural on the north side of Dupont St. I also attended the graffiti summit at the Drake Hotel last night.
In order to paint a mural with funding by the city (which Joel claims he was doing) - not graffiti - on each side of a city underpass you need:
- support/partnering from a local community group (they receive the money from the city - not the artist directly)
- permission from the City works Dept.
- permission from Buildings and Structures, City of Toronto
- The Rail line
- insurance
You don't just get permission from a couple of staffers from your ex-local Councillors office. Adam Giambrone had no personal power to okay a mural on city property. How do I know? Because I went through his office to paint mine and and I had to do all of the above in order to paint the Bloor St. underpass.
I was actually in conversations with Joel about re-working the design of his mural to better serve the space that it was painted on. I asked him repeatedly if he had permission to paint this side of the underpass and and although he claimed he did I honestly think he confused his permission and fee from painting the north face of the underpass the year before for having
permission to paint the whole underpass. This wasn't some conspiracy by the city or the city flexing it's muscles against graffiti. Joel goofed up. An honest mistake. That's all it was.
It also makes perfect sense that the city does not fund murals with supposed political messages. It may be fine and dandy if you agree with the muralist's politics but what if the muralist paints a mural containing views you find offensive? Would there be an out cry then? The city's policies are fair because no one's political views are allowed - left, right, whatever.
I would like to add that Elyse Parker and her staff at the city of Toronto have been nothing but supportive and helpful in the painting of my murals (and many mural/art projects) and the Nuit Blanche project that I did last year with artist Jeff Winch at the Wallace St. pedestrian bridge. They are not the enemy here. Turning this into a witch hunt will only polarize people and confuse the issues of graffiti, public murals and public spaces that the summit last night was starting to address.
Please, ask questions, find out all of the facts before throwing more fuel on the fire.
Richard
Richard
Richard Mongiat
I know Elyse Parker to be a very nice person and a thoughtful, dedicated City employee. The Nuit Blanche project Rail of Light would have never happened on the Wallace Avenue bridge last fall without her cooperation and that of her department. Gaining the support of the various government bodies and rail companies would have gone nowhere if she had not offered her unqualified support and vouched for a bunch of people wanting to being a unique arts event to the Junction Triangle.
Rail of Light will leave a mural legacy that will last for years (we hope) with a project starting later this month. Evidence of Elyse Parker's work is all over this neighbourhood and she has helped make it a more attractive place to live. Before anyone dumps more grief and scorn on her, let's give the facts a chance to come out. Elyse deserves the benefit of any doubt.
Mr. Palacio,
I live at the corner of Davenport and Lansdowne, and I greatly appreciate the work you've done in our up and coming ward.
The dog park in Earlscourt is a wonderful addition to the area, and has created a real sense of community. I would have preferred a nice large green space rather than the proposed soccer pitch on the west side of the park, but we can’t win all our battles.
However, can you please explain to me how, in an area that is quickly becoming a hub for young, artistic minded people, who are not only renting in the area, but also making long term investments in the area, this could have happened:
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1000475--artist-says-city-erased-mur...
I pass (I supposed passed) this mural daily and am livid that it has been painted over. These murals are part of our urban landscape, and add to the attraction and diversity of the area. We are a walking culture, a biking culture, and we look to our surroundings to stimulate our imaginations. There is nothing inspiring about a white wash wall (underpass on Lansdowne north of Dupont). It is unsightly and bland.
Tagging should be covered, art should not, and art is often driven by political motives. Could you imagine if Banksy’s art, one of the UK’s most celebrated artists, whose canvas of choice is a brick wall, was covered because it was had political undertones? Every single mural he has ever created would have to be painted over.
And, as is claimed, the Mural was removed because of a complaint, shouldn't there be a public consultation before that complaint is acted on? One complaint? Myself and other park goers spent all of last summer complaining that there was a group of men crapping, littering and accosting women in Earlscourt park, but that didn't seem to make any difference. Perhaps I should spray paint my initials on them while they are passed out in a drunken stuper. Perhaps then you will take some action.
My toddler learned how to say both dog and bird at the Caledonia and Davenport underpass. I sure hope they aren’t next on the white washing list.
Sincerely,
Kate
Giambrone confirmed today that Joel had permission to do this mural. Joel also has the documentation from the City, which he shared with The Star and mentioned on the radio.
The Toronto Star has an article about this incidence:
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1000475--artist-says-city-erased-mur...
Excerpt:
"Councillor Ana Bailão, who succeeded Giambrone in last October’s election, was also trying to discover why Richardson’s mural was erased, noting “I never found it offensive — I walk by it all the time.”"
Sandy,
As a residents of this ward I would like to know if Joel had permission from the City to paint the mural. I think this needs to be determined first. Did Adam Giambrone's office get permission or not, we don't know this but I would like to know???
Sandy this might be hard to hear, but I spoke to few people who didn't like the mural, it's more then one. One person in particular who has a lot of influence and is well known in the community and across Ontario told me personally they didn't like it. . For me I like to know if Joel was given the green light or was he lead on to believe he had permission.
I don't know Joel's work all that well to pass judgement. The only stuff I seen was his mural on paton and dupont. There were people who said they should had artist bid for the job rather then to give to to Joel, they felt his realtionship with Marjolein had some influence. This is waht was said and what I heard. It way more then what you are saying. JF
Elyse Parker could have called the Councillors office to clear this up. I wonder how she got the gig deciding what is and what is not political.Given the size of the mural one would think that it might have occurred to her that maybe it had been commissioned. I aw the mural and did not see Harper, I saw a generic "businessman". Personally I am not too keen on one person having the say in what people can or cannot see in the hood.
Who knew that we were living in a communist country?! This is MY formal complaint: Elyse Parker should be released from her duties effective immediately. A RESIDENT complained (ONE SINGLE RESIDENT) about a loved mural by Joel Richardson on Dupont Street?! Humour would be my complaint actually coming to fruition!
We live in Canada whereby, we just spent millions urging our younger generation to vote - how dare one resident and one director decide the demise of a city funded project????? The 'active community' of the Junction Triangle just met a few weeks ago with Ana Bailao (in case Ms. Parker is unaware she's our city councillor) to discuss beautifying our neighbourhood - the surroundings of and on Dupont Street. One of the big topics was that of our 2 bridges and their unsafe underpasses. We discussed how they are NOT lit properly, and as well we talked about how much we all appreciate and enjoy the art work, JOEL'S included! Do I ever wish I had a magic communistic wand, because I would wave it and I would have beautiful basket's of flowers, garbage bins, and more lights all available for the safety of our community walking and biking along Dupont especially at night. But alas NO, we have to beg and plead, write application after application to BEG for money to help make our street more beautiful? How much time and money did it take for an entire wall of art to be destroyed by Ms. Parker - oh right, one phone call and probably $1500.00 for time and paint, oh and $2000.00 for the commission itself. This approximate $1500.00, Dupont Street could have used to benefit our community!!! Despicable! It's sad to think that ONE phone call lead to this moral and ethical atrocity - a paint brush won't let me ever forget to tell my children what Ms. Parker did to our community, because she was so ignorant to assume that the art was about STEPHEN HARPER, the funny thing is that her careless actions are now about so much more! Clearly, we must always teach our children to fight for our so-called democracy, because in a splash of a paint brush it can be gone?!
THIS IS THE BIGGEST WASTE OF TAXPAYERS MONEY AND IT IS INSULTING BEYOND BELIEF THE MESS MS. PARKER HAS LEFT ON 'OUR' WALL - IT LOOKS AWFUL AND WITHOUT QUESTION THIS IS AN EMBARRASSMENT TO EVERY CANADIAN CITIZEN! WHO WANTS TO WALK UNDER THE BRIDGE NOW, THANK YOU MS. PARKER - PERHAPS YOU NEED TO LOOK UP THE WORD DEMOCRACY AND BEGIN TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY AS TO WHOM YOU WORK FOR?! AS WELL, WE HAVE SURVEYS THAT ARE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE WHEN DECIDING THE FATE OF A COMMUNITY!
In case you missed radio, you can download today's show here:
http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/features/podcast/
Direct link to MP3 file:
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/metromorning_20110601_86270.mp3
According to Joel on Twitter: "Sounds like I will be on CBC radio this morning at about 8:10 regarding my mural"
I'm assuming that's on 99.1FM.
Strange - According to Joel's post on Facebook, the City has removed this City-Sponsored mural. Is it a misplaced part of the "war of graffiti"? Will be interesting to hear the details when they come out.
Note: Followup article posted here. Closing comments on this page.
BlogTO has posted a shining review of June Harlowe Foods and their patio:
http://www.blogto.com/eat_drink/2011/05/toronto_patio_season_preview_jun...
Quite a bit of commentary about Dupont St. and the neighbourhood too.
This study was actually initiated by Friends of West Toronto Railpath with the help of Gord Perks too.
Here are a few more examples of how privatization has not worked in the US.
"Unlike the public sector, the private sector is bred to maximize profits. Left to its own devices, it will always find a more profitable way to provide services even when that means increasing their cost..."
The real underlying point is that there no longer is a true free market so there is no real competition.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-morris/and-the-winner-isthe-publ_b_8...
As you have likely heard Council went ahead with privatization with some strings added including having council input on awarding the contract.
Vote was 32-13, with following councillors voting against.
Maria Augimeri, Janet Davis, Glenn De Baeremaeker, Sarah Doucette, Paula Fletcher, Mary Fragedakis, Mike Layton, Pam McConnell, Joe Mihevc, Gord Perks, Anthony Perruzza, Adam Vaughan, Kristyn Wong-Tam
See council minutes for additional motions & votes
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2011.PW3.1
I have traveled across the US and seen how the "lets pay the lowest amount possible" concept has decimated the country. You see it in the retail sector where things are cheap at Wal-Mart but the downtowns have been hollowed out and mainstreet is a shell and all the jobs are in China. And what jobs do remain are making the US a new sweatshop.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/150_years_later_were_still_fighti...
Things are cheap but working families are a paycheck or disease from going under. Special volunteer "medical camps" are sprouting up across the US to do free medical clinics for the working underclass who cant ever get ahead. Towns are closing libraries and public health departments and schools so they can provide tax breaks to corporations because there are no local jobs anymore, or ones that pay a living wage. The saying "you get what you pay for" sadly really rings true as in the book "The High Cost Of Low Prices".
The idea that privatizing public services has been discredited as towns fall into bankruptcy because they dont have a tax base any more and everybody is making 7 dollars an hour with no benefits at all. You can always find somebody who will do stuff cheap but what is the larger cost to the community when people have no security? Somebody is making money but it is not the regular folk. How is privatization doing?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/19/us/19prisons.html?smid=fb-nytimes&WT.m...
For those that follow real news instead of populist chants that appeal to our baser selfish interests the evidence is clear. The lowest price and privatization works against the working person and lines the pockets of others while costing the larger society as a whole a lot more. As stated above when cities and towns loose the bargaining power they have and become beholden to market forces the only people who win are the companies. In case anybody has forgot, the free market is not interested in the community, not interested in the common good, not interested in reducing poverty or improving literacy; its only interested in profit.
Followers of Mike Harris and Rob Ford and Kevin O'Leary never seem to realize (like the book "Whats Wrong With Kansas") that they are in the end acting against their own best interest but by the time only lawyers can afford to buy a house in Toronto, by the time there are no free services for children or immigrants, by the time all public property is sold off to corporations it will be too late. It always amazes me how people who pretend to be for the "working family" and less advantaged so easily duped by the merchants of profit. Privatization and its variations and the common good are at opposite ends of the spectrum and to think otherwise is delusional. Spend less time listening to Ford and more time reading the newspapers to see where his "vision" has taken the US. You are being played.
There is no coincidence that both buildings were built by the same developer. People need places to live and we should be careful not to stigmatize people just because that was the only place they could afford, or find, or was close to their work.
That said, in this day and age when there are so many materials and building techniques available it is a crime that even the most average of buildings cannot in some way add to their community and enrich the lives of the residents. The Standard "Lofts" looks like prisons I saw when I was shooting in Russia in 1992. All these years later the folks on Ward Ave. still look out at one of the ugliest bleakest unfinished streetscapes I have ever seen. Who let this happen? He is not in ofice any more. This developer is still planning even more blight on this site despite the fact that with some imagination the site could be improved and made far better for the residents and the community. The residents should band together and demand a more human environment and a say in what the rest of the development looks like. Is a safe well lit people friendly space too much to ask? With this developer the answer always seems to be yes.Thats why we get "cram as many people in as possible" school of design such as BeBloor where touches of humanity are a luxury.
Christopher Hume in the Toronto Star has been doing a series of video stories about the best and worst buildings built in Toronto this century. Today he takes aim at BeBloor and calls it the second worst building this century in Toronto. You can see the video at http://www.thestar.com/videozone/991051--hume-the-second-worst-building-...
I wonder if the Standard Lofts were built before 2000? They would certainly make it onto the worst list. And it is no coincidence they are built by the same developer who has blighted the neighbourhood with phoney Brownstones.