The Neckface and Vans billboard on Lafayette Street was recently hit with paint. Is nothing sacred anymore?

Following the false alarm on Tuesday, comes a story in the New York Times on the Splasher, who has been covering street art with paint to protest its commodification, to the horror and even delight of many. With each hit, the Splasher has posted manifestos explaining his work, which is fortunate, because we’d have even less of a chance of understanding his purpose without them. They also establish the contradiction between his expressed views and his actual actions. What better way to attack artists for creating fetishized commodities than with weapons of the same ilk?

Although it may be too soon, we see no indication that his paradoxical manifesto is resonating. As awareness, alone, does not compel action, the Splasher should reconsider his game or just quit while he’s still ahead. Bringing people up, to help understand and adapt new ideas, is often more effective than putting down or punishing them, which mostly creates resistance. At this point, it appears the Splasher is only out for personal fame and not the actual advancement of street art.

It’s also important to remember that street art and graffiti gets covered and destroyed all the time, whether by other writers over beef, or by buffers for money. This doesn’t make the Splasher’s work any less obnoxious, but it questions why he doesn’t get a job with the buff squad. After all, cleaning up graffiti and street art creates fewer commodities, comes with a nifty uniform, and overtime pay.

Photo by Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times.

The word from a Gothamist tipster is that the Splasher has made his “most extreme hit yet.” Although the green paint is a bit tricky to read, it’s not the Splasher. It’s a tag by Katsu, and a giant one at that. Some graffiti writers are choosing to stick with good old fashioned letter tags over amorphous paint spills.

Photo from Gothamist.