On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Cindy Boyer
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> What happens after the project’s launch?  Did the yarnbombers remove the work after a time? Did it get really ratty in changeable weather?

Yarnbombers typically work in durable yarns like acrylics or good
wools. Those yarns last through just about anything. Most people take
down their yarnbombs before things start to look ratty.

> I don’t understand why so many see this as a positive thing. Yes, it can be
> beautiful, pretty, amazing; and I have admiration for the fiber artists
> skills.  But I don’t understand what makes it different from tagging or
> graffiti with paint.  Both seem disrespectful to me.

The difference between yarnbombing and graffiti is that yarn is not
permanent and can be removed without harming the artifact it is on.
Covering a bike rack with yarn is not the same as covering it with
paint. Whole statues have been bombed with yarn and are no worse the
wear when the yarn is taken down. Do the same with paint and you have
ruined the statue. It will have to be sandblasted to take the paint
off. An unwritten rule of yarnbombing is that you don't harm whatever
you are bombing. It's supposed to be fun and whimsical, not
destructive.

I love this story of this little tree sweater to give you an example
of what happens to a yarnbomb over time.
http://archive.redshirtknitting.com/?page_id=271

> Again – this may be off-topic since you’re really discussing consensual art. But does it encourage the hit and run aspect?

I think you do have a point - what is the difference between a
yarnbomb and consensual art? To me, a yarnbomb is done without the
knowledge of the bombee. It is a "hit and run" activity meant to be
fun or even meant to make a statement. It is organized by the artist
or artists and carried out in secret. Friends of mine bombed a plastic
horse in front of a local chili place. They gave him a silly scarf,
ear warmers, leg warmers, and some other stuff. The owner thought it
was very funny and kept it up for over a week. He also gave the
bombers free lunch. That was a fun bombing and the bombers knew that
the worst that would happen was their stuff would just be taken down
without a word. We talked about bombing other things around town and
certain things were definitely off-limits like the confederate soldier
statue. Bombing the soldier would be taken as insulting by some
people, though I think he would look much better with a scarf in
Winter. People in DC leave knitted hats and other woolly items for the
homeless at the statue of Gandhi as sort of a humanitarian bombing.
Recently the statue of Einstein was bombed. I don't know if that was
sponsored or not.

Museums and other institutions, which plan bombings, I think are more
community art projects. They are no less significant but serve a
different purpose and have a different meaning. I think they are great
ways to involve the community and publicize events and exhibits.

Deb Fuller

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).