Friday, December 01, 2006

Who is the sexy naked lady with the pineapples ....

Kelly had some photos of guerrilla art images around Hanna and Central

37 comments:

jaded1 said...

Apparently some uptight woman marched indignantly into Tampa Antiquarian thinking they had put it up, and demanded they take it down. Steph and John knew nothing about it, and she said she would tear it down. which she partially did. Makes me kinda sad. I liked looking at her while I sat at the light. She's kinda hot.

Stupid wench.

jaded1 said...

The lady with the pineapples. Didn't mean to be vague.

IFly said...

The lady with the pineapples is a stupid wench?? Just kidding, unclear antecedents often have humorous results. Thanks for the giggle.

Anonymous said...

She is just more Grafitti that TPD is unable to control.

Yournamegoeshere said...

I like her .What's the big deal
She isnt obscene and nor is it typical graffiti.
You all complain to much about the most unimportant crap.

Anonymous said...

but no one here is really complaining about it.

Anonymous said...

I was wondering why Randy kept looking at that pole!!

Anonymous said...

She looked she was trying to lure the gradeschool kids into a life a sin.

Anonymous said...

I always assumed she was reminding us not to take life so seriously!
She did have a lovely bunch of pineapples though and I don't even care for pineapples.....now guavas - that's a whole nother story right there!

Anonymous said...

I just got back from Europe. Grafitti there is at an all time high. This is how it started. Curb it now or it will get worse. This is not art, this is not the venue. This is defacing property and will only escalate. If it were painted on the side of your home, your car, etc do you still think it would be "art"

Art has a place, this is not it.

Anonymous said...

art does not have to be locked up in a museum to be appreciated. Grafitti is a whole 'nother subject.

Sweetseminole said...

Thank you...No! Art work does not have to be locked up .Some of the people here.Should be.

jaded1 said...

Art implies a personal unanalyzable creative power.

If what you believe were true, anon 9:56, then artists like Keith Haring would have no place.

Anonymous said...

I didn't say art had to be locked up, what I meant was ILLEGAL art is not the place. If you want to do graffiti art that is one thing. To do it illegal, without persmission is another.

Anonymous said...

Heaven forbid Tampa become anything like Europe. HA!

Wasnt the Tiki on the ugly metal box nicer to look at than the ugly metal box?

Anonymous said...

Tampa is already like Europe, Dirty, littered and graffiti everwhere, and a bafoon for a leader.

Anonymous said...

I think you guys are missing the boat. If the art is not painted with permission it is illegal graffiti. What if it were gang signs, is that still acceptable. Where do you draw the line. I agree, I like the picture, but do not encourage everyone running around with spray cans.

Anonymous said...

if you go to look at any of the mentioned subjects you will see that it is a paper product applied with what I assume would be wheat paste or some such similar - it is not a permanent install nor is it spray paint that won't come off without effort. I say bring on the spontaneous art attacks!

I have more issue with all the signs at the intersection "Move in now" "buy my house" - "I'll buy forclosures now!" They are illegal signs on the right of way. If the intersections are trashy they why should people cutting through bother to find a waste can for their trash - just throw it out the window next to all the foreclosure for sale signs.

That has more of a damaging effect on the image of the neighborhood verses some paper art plasterd on the right of ways! Get you panties in a wad about the right issues. Pull them up every time you see them. The House of Meats has a great dumpster they can be deposited in!

ARTist said...

Yes, I am going to form an arrangement of mcDonald cups up and down nebraska as a sign of art. Hope you don't mind. It is just a temporary install so should be fine.

Anonymous said...

Should be spelled ARSEtist

Anonymous said...

It is the "give 'em a break" attitude that keeps a neighborhood stagnant. If more people would speak out, maybe the grafitti artist would realize they are defacing someones property. Grafitti is a form of disrespect. As for it being temporary so are the posters. People are constantly postering the buildings at Nebraska and Osborne, the arts school, etc. Not only is it ugly it is a nuisance to the business owners. What about the graffiti that is continually sprayed on the trailer at N. Bay, the underpasses, etc. Those are not exactly permanent, does this make it ok. What if every where is Tampa experience this problem, imagine what a crappy place Tampa would be.

Anonymous said...

you mean what a crappy place Tampa is.............

shawn-non-anonymous said...

The poster may be put up with some sort of "temporary" glue, but it was strong enough to resist a determined attempt at removing it. Last time I saw it, someone had tried to peel it away and only got small shreds of it. So now it's even uglier.

Is anyone else bothered by the choice of subject and pasted in direct view of an elementary school? A woman holding up two large fruit in a manner suggestive of large breasts?

inquiring minds want to go said...

Shawn,isn't the pineapple lady a little out of your area of expertise? I heard your tastes ran more toward kiwis.

Anonymous said...

In a society founded by puritanical christians, the need is felt to "protect" ourselves from the human figure because it makes some uncomfortable. I personally see nothing wrong with children seeing implied nudity. It's not sexual, it's just the human form.
It's not like it's "form studies" taken to the degree that Robert Maplethorpe did (not judging on sexual orientation, just content). If it were something like that, well yeah, I might say that it's a bit over the top for public display, but it's far from being that.

Anonymous said...

As a parent, I would rather be the one that decided, when, where and how my child is subjected to nudity, or any suggestive form thereof. I support the earlier poster that art has a place and this is not art, This is a printed subject no better than the concert fliers that are used to deface building and street poles.

Anonymous said...

public property (not private) was altered in the making of this statement.

Anonymous said...

EXACTLY.........man the tight a##es are crawling outta the wood work on this one.

While I am not a nudist and don't necessarily condone unappropiate nakedness most children have the innocence to not make being naked an issue - note kids taking off their diapers every chance they get and our prior neighbors 5 yr old daughter having the habit of walking down the street with the skirt of her dress pulled over her head - it was an innocent jesture until the old lady next door went nuts while the rest of the street laughed at the girls innocence. It isn't a sexual issue until the purtanical bible thumpers have a cow over it.

Anon poster8:41 - your children look and see a lady holding pineapples - you look and she is soliciting to give blowjobs - I feel sorry for the uptight children you will raise - you will do more damage than the innocence of a little skin now and then.

shawn-non-anonymous said...

If it's implied nudity, why couldn't they use a fruit closer to the natural and normal size of a woman's breasts? :-) Could one make the argument that the pineapples are intended to imply that only pineapple-sized breasts are beautiful and kiwi-sized breasts are not?

(Yeah, I am very fond of kiwis. Especially big sweet ones.)

Anonymous said...

You mean like melons? Well that would just be too obvious. Maybe ditch the fruit altogether and use some owls.

kombatrock said...

Absolutely fascinating debate this has stirred...

the count said...

street art! keep it coming!

where is the outrage over corporate logos and advertisments on bill boards?

people just suck up that eye-pollution, yet when imagery comes from the street level proletariat and not some vested capitalist interest - oh how they'll complain of the horror!

i'd rather look at the crappiest gangsta tag scrawled across my door any day than some billboard of a grinning idiot behind a fox news logo or a palstic surgery advert.

as Nas sez "when it comes the revolution, all they gonna do is squeal..."

Mouthwatering Monkeys said...

Now that leads to an interesting argument; billboard space is leased, graffiti and street art space is essentially stolen. Do I enjoy some of the street art shown here? Yup. Do I like seeing gang tags thrown up on the side of a building? Nope. I'm all for art and expression. But I'm not all for a gang marking it's territory - tends to lead to more crime.
So, where do you draw the line? If it's tasteful and creative? In who's eyes?

Anonymous said...

The count is right, billboards make a city so ugly.

Anonymous said...

biilboard advertising comes with living in a working class neighborhood, it's an inexpensive way to get wage slaves to part with their $.

Anonymous said...

can't say that i ever thought anyone on this blog would quote Nas! THAT is why i love SH peeps-and its affiliates.

Anonymous said...

EXACTLY.......you never know what direction a simple post will run with.

Gotta love it!