Posts Tagged ‘graffiti’


Another Banksy Removed From Bristol

August 18, 2009

An original Banksy has been scrubbed off a wall in Bristol, just 200 metres from his exhibition at the city museum and art gallery.

It is thought the stencil saying ‘Playing It Safe Causes a Lot of Damage In The Long Run’ was sprayed in 1998.

It was on the side of the Clifton Heights building on Pro-Cathedral Lane, and was signed with Banksy’s trademark stencil signature.

Banksy Stencil on Pro-Cathedral Lane (from bristolgraffiti)

Banksy Stencil on Pro-Cathedral Lane (from bristolgraffiti)

But this week the building’s managers had the stencil scrubbed off, saying they did not know it was a Banksy.

A spokeswoman for Clifton Heights’ management company Petit Papillon told #SITE_NAME#: “We didn’t know it was a Banksy and we’re not sure what we would have done if we had known.

“But it’s gone now and what’s done is done. As far as we’re concerned, we had some graffiti on the building, it was removed and there’s nothing more to say.”

Bristol City Council confirmed they had nothing to do with the removal of stencil and that it was on private property, with the removal arranged privately.

It is estimated there are only 11 original Banksys left in Bristol. His exhibition, Banksy versus Bristol Museum at the City Museum & Art Gallery runs until the end of August.

Above and Below: the Banksy stencil on Pro-Cathedral Lane before and after. Banksy signature is top right. Pictures from the Bristol Graffiti blog.

Banksy stencil after (from Bristolgraffiti)

Banksy stencil after (from Bristolgraffiti)


Council sees red over f-word graffiti

June 26, 2009

Bristol City Council has told a community group in Stokes Croft to get rid of a piece of graffiti from a legal ‘practice wall’ because it contained the f-word.

The council’s ‘Clean and Green’ boss Denise James asked local activist Chris Chalkley to paint out the offending word as it was deemed “offensive” and the council has “a duty to remove the offensive wording.”

The boards were originally established by the council, but were given to community group the People’s Republic of Stokes Croft (PRSC) as a practice wall for street artists.

The offensive graffiti

The offensive graffiti

PRSC founder Chris Chalkley said he did not believe local people were offended by it. He said: “I took a straw poll in the area and from an admittedly small sample, 73% said they did not find the f-word offensive.

“So it shows that people in Stokes Croft value freedom of expression over the sensibilities of what is a minority in the area.”

He also said that establishing the wall had reduced the amount of problem graffiti.

He told us: “Local residents all report that since the practice was was established, there has been a diminution in the tagging that has been a bit of a blight on the city.

“Having this medium for expression has meant that there has been less damage elsewhere.

“I don’t think the council need to be our moral guardians, but if they’ve had complaints what they’ve done was right in writing a polite letter.”

“We were preparing a witty response but in the event it all blew over because it was painted out by another piece of work, as happens on practice walls.”

In a statement, the council told #SITE_NAME#: “Bristol City Council is always keen to work positively with the local community and artists, which is why we gave permission for street artists to use these boards in the Stokes Croft Area.

“However a picture which heavily features a four letter word will undoubtedly be highly offensive to many people and will not enhance the area.  We therefore have a duty to see that it is removed.”

Pictured: (above) the graffiti the council objected to and (below) how it was covered over by another artist


Council reviews graffiti policy after destroying mural

May 29, 2009

Bristol City Council has launched a review of its policy on street art, after contractors mistakenly painted over a legal mural on Stokes Croft.

The painting of an angel by artists Cheo and 3Dom was valued at over £5,000 until workmen painted over it with black paint two weeks ago.The owner of the building it was on had given them permission to paint it.

Community groups reacted angrily and the council has since issued an apology, saying “The mural was removed following a complaint to the council from a member of the public.

“However, as this mural was on a privately owned building, the council should have made contact with the owner first to seek permission before removing it and this was unfortunately not done.”

Now, officers have begun the first stages of a policy review, looking into the way they deal with street art and graffiti.

Community activist Chris Chalkley welcomed the review, saying: “I think it’s high time they did look again at their policy. I’m sure it was a failure to communicate on this one.

“We did tell the council arts department that it was a legal site, and yet somehow the piece got painted over. It isn’tthe first time there’s been massive failure in communication.”

He also called for the council to consult local groups in different parts of Bristol as no one policy would work for the whole city.

He said: “For the last few years we’ve had a vaguely laissez-faire attitude in Stokes Croft from the council which has allowed a flowering of local artists beautifying an area which has been shockingly run-down.”

“It’s going to be difficult to have laws that will enshrine that. That entails a change of attitude on an area-by-area basis.

“I’m not suggesting this would apply to Clifton or Stoke Bishop because people there may want something different.”

A council spokesman told Original they could not comment because the policy review was at a very early stage.

Pictured: The blacked-out mural at the corner of Stokes Croft and Hillgrove St.

Blacked out mural on Stokes Croft

Blacked out mural on Stokes Croft


Bristol City Council paints over £5k street art

May 12, 2009

Community activists in Stokes Croft say they’re “gutted” after council workmen painted over a piece of street art valued at £5,000.

The painting of an angel by Bristol artists Cheo and 3Dom had been sprayed on boards covering a building at the corner of Stokes Croft and Hillgrove St.

The artists are described as Bristol “graffiti royalty” and both recently had work shown in the Crimes of Passion exhibition at the Royal West of England Academy.

The building was privately owned and the landlord, who lives in London, had given permission for the mural to be sprayed on it.

Chris Chalkley from community group The People’s Republic of Stokes Croft told Original: “We heard last Thursday that the council were going to paint it out.

“We informed the council on Friday that it was not an illegal piece of graffiti and had been sanctioned by the landowner. But council contractors SITA painted it out on Monday.”

Chris also claims the council’s destruction of the work could be regarded as criminal damage, because the painting had permission from the owner.

He said: “In a word, people around here are gutted. But, there is also a resignation, which is even more sad.

“People expect the council to behave in this manner. They are not surprised and that has got to change. It has got to change that we have such low expectations of the people who are put in power to serve us.”

Chris is calling on people to email the council’s Chief Executive Jan Ormondroyd directly to complain.

Bristol City Council said: “The council will investigate and review the circumstances once all the facts are known.”

Audio: Martin Jones interviews Chris Chalkley from the People’s Republic of Stokes Croft


Charges dropped against Broadmead pavement chalker

April 7, 2009

A student at the UWE has had charges of criminal damage against him dropped.

Paul Saville, 23, is studying sociology and criminology in Bristol. He was arrested by Avon and Somerset police officers for writing the words Liberty. The right to question it. The right to ask: “Are we free?” in chalk on a pavement in Broadmead.

He was charged with criminal damage and taken to Trinity Rd police station where he was fingerprinted, had a DNA sample taken and spent two hours in the cells.

He had been due to appear at Bristol Magistrates Court on Thursday April 9 to face charges. But on Saturday he received a letter from the Crown Prosecution Service which said that his charges have been dropped due to ”lack of evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction”.

Paul told us he is relieved, but saddened by the experience. He said: “The DNA sample and fingerprints will stay on record. So, although I won’t be paying a fine, my DNA will stay on their database, which is the sad part for me.

“It is a funny story but sat in that cell that evening it wasn’t funny to me. I was in disbelief. My original question about civil liberties was answered that night. It was ironic that I had been arrested for speaking up about civil liberties.”

Paul says he used household chalk which would have washed away “after one rainy day in Bristol” and believes police over-reacted in arresting him.

However, he revealed he’d received help in fighting the case by scientists at the UWE. The technical definition of ‘criminal damage’ is anything that “damages, destroys or reduces the life of” something.

Paul said: “A laboratory at the UWE has been very kind and performed tests on concrete to see if chalk does ‘damage, destroy or reduce the life of’ it. In their opinion it doesn’t do any of those and chalk comes off after running the concrete under a tap. So I would say it wasn’t technically criminal damage anyway.”

Paul carried out his chalking as a political protest against the erosion of civil liberties, and has attracted followers from across Bristol and the UK. One group is promising a mass chalking protest on the streets of Bristol to show solidarity with Paul and protest against his arrest.

Audio: Paul Saville speaks to Original’s Martin Jones