« Previous | Culture Monster Home | Next »

Italian street artist Blu calls MOCA's removal of his mural censorship

December 14, 2010 | 10:57 am

Blu Mural 01[1]
In a Times' report on MOCA's controversial decision to whitewash an antiwar mural it had commissioned for the Geffen Contemporary, museum director Jeffrey Deitch discusses his reasons for painting over the artwork.

Blu, the Italian street artist who created the mural, could not be reached for comment by press time. But after the story went to press, I received the following e-mail, addressing the question of whether he considers the removal of his mural censorship:

It is censorship that almost turned into self-censorship when they asked me to openly agree with their decision to erase the wall. In Soviet Union they were calling it 'self-criticism.'

Deitch invited me to paint another mural over the one he erased, and I will not do that.



Controversy erupts over removal of Blu's antiwar mural at MOCA

Controversy over video censored by Smithsonian continues to build steam

-- Jori Finkel

Photo: Blu's mural on the Geffen Contemporary before it was whitewashed. Credit: Brian Forrest / MOCA


Comments () | Archives (8)

Blu also said: "journalists are still not sure if this can be called censorship
so they start asking my opinion about that." http://blublu.org/sito/blog/?p=1020

Nah, bro, I think it has more to do with your art being generic, boring, and nothing more than a shock gimmick. Oh and it might offend one or two or thousands of people, but yeah bro, the world is out to get you, you're such a genius, lol.

Shock doesn't equal brilliance... LA's art world really needs to learn this

of course it is censorship. it happens all the time in los angeles. it is routine for deans, curators, directors et al. to ensure that only a pre-approved controversy will not be censored, i.e. the censorship of censorship. I'm waiting to hear from the l.a. based academics in the arts, e.g. the head of art at calarts, ucla, art-center--how they rationalize as they lure students into art-debt.

I've seen blu's workspace in Italy. I've also seen his other works. This mural he painted for MOCA was halfassed to say the least if you compare it to his other murals and short films.

And even if you are admiring blu's best work, Banksy does it so much better.

Any one else tired of these faux rebellious douchebags?

This "artist" stinks. His mural looks like something that came out of a 10th grade art class, and it was only done to poke American citizens in the eye. I hope no tax dollars went to pay for this nonsense. Maybe this idiot should go to Ethiopia and paint some murals of Il Duce.

Blu's mural is childish in execution and hackneyed in subject matter. It isn't original, shocking, or even interesting. It would have been embarrassing for MOCA to go to bat for a piece that's so cliched and poorly done.

This form of art must be protected. As for Graffiti, which are a form of modern expression, to voice their disappointment at this company on the brink of a crisis of identity. This work, in my opinion, denounces an untenable situation, in which the governments of states that have a world power, have a monopoly on everything. But in the end, leading to collapse the entire economic system by dragging with it the poor savers. The death of the power of money in this case.


Recommended on Facebook

In Case You Missed It...


Explore the arts: See our interactive venue graphics


Tweets and retweets from L.A. Times staff writers.