Chicagoist: Night Moves Apprehended, Sleep In Still at Large

thundercougarfalconbird

Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:38:48 -0600

At least graffiti kept you in a proper school that taught you how to read and write correctly. Kudos to you, Mr. Apes1, you.

apes1

Sun, 22 Apr 2007 12:42:26 -0600

man all u guys dont know the real deal about graffiti its not about being cool so don't say that. we aint no criminals the media and all u ingnorant people made us criminals spreading bad rumors about us saying that we are gangs and annoying and assholes. So let me ask a question would u rather have your children do graffiti or hold a gun ready to shoot at some other gang rivals ending up dead for no reason. The artist that i know have been successful in life because graffiti kept them away from gangs and other things such as drugs and violence against other people. Grafiiti is about expressing yourself its art but in a diffrent way. Street art is a way fr a writer to get known "getting up" make a name for yourself. The rumors that were spread around made us rebel against police and the mayor of this city and goverment ways. So if the city keeps on buffing we wil keep on writing because graffiti will never stop and for all u haters and hipocrits and ignorant up-pedy people suck my dick bitches keep on talking and having your little meetings because no matter what u say we will still be out there fuck the PIGS!!!!!!

jocelyn

Wed, 08 Nov 2006 23:03:24 -0600

here's how i look at it. 1. if it's on public empty space that's otherwise ugly, why not encourage free expression? 2. i do believe that true artists are altruistic in their nature. when i asked how so many of the open spaces and surfaces in millenium park, for instance, are left pristine, i was told that parks and other such spaces are normally left alone for their aesthetics and for what they are. i took that to mean they're *already* pretty. 3. there are some artists i don't really dig and some i realllly like. but it doesn't mean that i just dismiss these pieces out of hand as nothing or trash or graffiti without considering them on their own merit. i think it's really easy to criticize and blast things we don't understand. if i'm not mistaken, basquiat started out as a street artist.

chicago

Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:46:44 -0600

i was pumped on blutt when i first saw his stuff up and then i saw it 25,000,000 times over and now it's just annoying. it's got to a point where it no longer feels like art rather more like branding/tagging. if your making art- learn to push your self and your designs

art fan

Fri, 09 Jun 2006 02:10:10 -0600

as long as sonny (aka rain clouds) is tagging small businesses he's just an asshole not an artist

anti-viking

Fri, 09 Jun 2006 02:07:59 -0600

as long as sonny (aka rain clouds) is tagging small businesses he's just an asshole not an artist

anti-viking

Fri, 09 Jun 2006 02:07:12 -0600

as long as sonny (aka rain clouds) is tagging small businesses he's just an asshole not an artist

madLove.

Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:10:23 -0600

Anyone seen "Jack" up lately?

paulfitz

Tue, 23 May 2006 18:23:32 -0600

Trying to draw a fine line between street art and graf is absurd as it is all art of some sort. If its art you don't like, that's another matter entirely. Anyone who's travelled through neighborhoods that aren't filled with young, well off hipster types has seen graf murals (or burners, if you will). I think the line you're trying to draw is between throwup tags and pieces that someone spent some time or thought on. On that note, I like a lot of paintings and postings on the street, but preston and nitemoves put up the ugliest shitty tags I've ever seen in this city. Most of the gang throw ups in my neighborhood looked better than their drunken scrawl. To put it in context with other graf, preston and nitemoves are toys whose stuff should be gone over (crossed out by another writer). I think that would have been the result if they actually ever put something up in a neighborhood that graf writers (sorry, street artists) lived around. It's pretty funny though, a neighborhood gets gentrified and the graf gets worse. I think the clouds are beautiful and as close to all city as I've seen anyone get. Keep it up!

PeeP

Tue, 23 May 2006 16:21:51 -0600

i agree with Mr. Smith about tagging on private property. Listen, i don't like about 75% of the crap (rain clouds, "you have nothing to lose...") being mass produced but if you put it up on abandoned buildings or ads, go for it. Once you start putting this on private property, which they are doing all the time, you give a bad name to street art and to be quite honest, you have no sense of adventure or creativity. It's not just about finding blank spaces and filling them. Oh, and try to fucking get out of the West side for once. I'd like to see them try this shit down in Englewood. If you have nothing to loose, go for it...

phantom 45

Mon, 22 May 2006 09:20:27 -0600

i'm not a tagger in anyway ,but i like the clouds...so thats all that matters to me...you people can bitch and moan all you want.street art isn't going anywhere anytime soon....so enjoy it

melt

Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:03:36 -0600

nite moves!! oh noooo!

some asshole

Sat, 29 Apr 2006 00:21:53 -0600

harry carrey? i'm confused. when did this turn into a thread about the cubbies? and didn't people stop using the word nerd when harry carrey was still alive?

Ryan Duggan

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 15:15:25 -0600

i feel that there's a simple distinction between street art and graffiti/tagging. street art is altruistic in nature and genuinely strives to liven an area wheras tagging is all about ego- it's about getting the tagger's dick hard when his friends see his advertisement for himself. street artists like chris uphues, ryan davies, and sighn are about visually improving an area. about mental stimulation in an otherwise uninteresting setting. the distinction is easy to make most of the time. just step back and think, "was this created for me or the person who did it?" if you're honest with yourself it's usually pretty easy. good street art takes a boring or ugly surface and brings it to life. it makes the boring surface so interesting you bring it up with your co-workers at office max. bad street art is just bad art, like monet. however, unlike his trash, you can make something of your own and cover the bad street art if you'd like- this aspect of impermanence is part of the excitement of street art. chicago has a wealth of talent right now, if you learn to separate it from the tags you might notice some of it. ...and as for this nerd telling people to commit seppuku: you're a fucking nerd. you would get your point across better if you just called it hari-kari like everyone else.

"chicago street artiste"

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:49:48 -0600

Haha of course Viking spits his bullshit on 'ere

some asshole

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:00:11 -0600

based on the viking's commments (very "too cool for school" tiger! kudos) i'd like to extend my invitation to commit seppuku to this illustrious gentlemen. and if nite move and rain clouds want to join the fun, we've got enough samurai swords to go around.

jt

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:35:18 -0600

uh oh, someone awoke a street artist! now that we all know that the rain clouds and NITE moves are about "rebelling against the commodity system" and are a vital public service we are being provided for free i will sleep much easier (although, I must say I agree with some asshole--I'd enjoy this great public service a lot more if it involved some talent).

the Viking

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 01:49:07 -0600

I love the press ALWAYS gets the facts wrong. There might be an ounce of truth to this article, but you should really check your sources or ask someone who knows or knows people that do this. Rain Clouds is not in any way shape or form related to some drunk ass person writing "sleep in" on the inside of the rainclouds. Another minor correction is that its "Nite Moves" not "Night Moves." I know this might be nit picking, but if you've seen any of the tags you should know the distinction. I can tell you that the person behind rainclouds and nite moves are neither from the suburbs, nor are most of the "street artists" (as everyone reluctantly calls them on this thread) in Chicago. Also in response to the first post by "what?" -what a fucking capitalist? Isnt the whole part of what we do rebelling against the art as a commodity system and giving something freely to the public? Do you work for the city? I mean the city already spends a few million dollars to clean what we do up, so its pointless...so many flaws to that arguement. I dont really know why Im posting on here since I know the general public doesnt get it most of the time. Maybe I just have higher expectations for a blog than the Chicago Journal. Either way, theres a lack in dialogue that leads to these gaps in knowledge between "artist" and environment/society.

some asshole

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:20:44 -0600

i'd like to take this opportunity to invite the dumbass who has been spraying inspirational messages (e.g. "you have nothing to lose") followed by ellipses all over wicker park to commit seppuku. i'm all for graffiti, but it'd be nice if at least a couple of our local taggers had a fucking iota of talent.

april

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:37:12 -0600

I agree that there is a huge difference between street art and tagging. I put up some pics of Preston on Flickr [someone mentioned above] out of sheer amusement for how retarded of a tag it is. For the record, I do not, er, endorse Preston as an 'artist'. 'Urban legend' is a bit strong.

Mr. Smith

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:06:18 -0600

There's a big difference between what, say, Blutt does (street art) and what taggers do (see above). http://www.chicagoist.com/archives/2006/04/26/from_stickers_to_spray_paint_with_blutt.php I'm vehemently against tagging private property and businesses that are vital to the area. It's anti-communoty and pisses me off to no end. And that includes everybody from Preston to the fancy boys who think making something "kewl" with their Kylon cans means it rises above. But if someone wants to paint rain clouds on the boarded up windows of abandoned buildings then there more than welcome to do so, IMHO.

drytellar

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:52:44 -0600

"Street art"? I'm with "what?" Give me a break. Cavemen did a better job of painting on walls. You think that graffiti is part of what makes the city better than a strip mall? Poor Jane Jacobs hasn't been resting in her grave for more than a day and already she's spinning. That is possibly the lamest thing I'd ever heard in my life, or at least until this thread turned into a debate on the relative merits of these vandals. These so called "street artists" are just posers from the suburbs with too much time on their hands and the keys to their motherss minivans (or are at least someone equally lame).

Philip Anton

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:23:57 -0600

firstly, 'rain clouds', and 'sleep in' are def. two different people. writing a word or two in the most basic lettering like 'preston' or 'nite moves' is the most basic form or vandalism...it should not get any attention at all. a graphic looking rain cloud is one step up but not much better.

john

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:13:08 -0600

I like people are starting urban legends for Preston!

Eamon

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:11:28 -0600

Preston is lame, lame, lame. If you're going to do something, do it right. At least the raincloud thing is interesting.

Stephen

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:26:51 -0600

My sense is that the rainclouds and "sleep in" are actually two different individuals... one person is posting / pasting / drawing the rainclouds and someone else is filling in the clouds with the additional "sleep in" directive. I'm just basing this guess on the Flickr photos that "sonny" (the raincloud artist) has posted - none of which have any writing in them. I find the raincloud image kinda soothing and aesthetically pleasing... but it always does irritate me when I see peoples' private property tagged with this stuff.

navin

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:25:13 -0600

I've enjoyed seeing those "Night Moves" tags around town, especially like the choice of moniker. I don't care if they were done by kids in the suburbs besides it'll just make the Chads feel like they're in a more gritty, edgy neighborhood. Oh and by the way seeing "Roll with the Changes!" scawled on something would be pretty rad.

what?

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:51:11 -0600

So graffiti, or "street art", is okay if only a few people do it? So only the first few people that do it get the street cred and the others are just doing it to be cool? How is writing a name on the wall art regardless if only a few people are doing it? Maybe the city should start selling permits to street artists. Tax them so we can keep it under control, what a great idea! We can make the fee realy high so we can compensate all the property owners for the cost of removing the vandlism too!