Political. Correctness. Gone. Maaaad.

Do you remember the recent hoo-ha about the Bretonside graffiti? It all seems like a long time ago now but it was only the beginning of last week. Which is a shame because it gave everyone who piled into the debate the chance to feel terribly smug and ever-so right-on, daddio. The work, which depicted a black man holding sticks of dynamite, was a kind of Rorschach test for the meedja masses, with journos saying it was inappropriate since the July bombings and even blaming it for a rise in racist attacks in Plymouth. But one voice was conspicuously absent from the ‘debate’. That wasn’t through lack of trying, says the graffiti artist responsible for the controversial piece, who talked exclusively to the People’s Republic.

Hello Mark. How’s fame treating you?
“Ha ha. Well, I missed it all on TV because I’ve just got back from Australia. The media have added two plus two and come up with five. Mental, isn’t it?”
How do you feel about getting dragged into the whole Danish cartoon controversy?
“I can’t believe it. It’s just 9/11 paranoia, I suppose. People who know my artwork think it’s ridiculous but it’s weird it’s been put in that area.”
What were you trying to say with the piece?
“It’s about how Kalahari bushmen are being pushed off their land by diamond mining corporations.
“The bushman in the picture is making fire by rubbing sticks together but instead of sticks it’s dynamite. It all signifies the evils of capitalism.”
So how would you feel if it was removed?
“To be honest, I don’t care. Graffiti is meant to be disposable. The powers that be are scared of it. It signifies freedom of speech because you can write anything.”
How do feel about people saying that the piece has contributed to a rise in racist attacks in the city?
It’s ridiculous and a bit scary. That’s totally ignoring things like war, poverty and ignorance.
“I’m not at all racist. The piece has been on display for two years but it’s the first time anyone has seen that in it. It’s a nightmare really.”
Have you explained all of this to the media?
“I wrote a statement but ITV and BBC wanted an actual interview. I refused because I didn’t want it presented at a twisted angle. I guess I had to decide whether I really wanted the publicity.
“I’m not exactly a media man. I think I would’ve opened myself up for a right killing.”
But we haven’t seen your statement anywhere. Where was your right to reply?
“The statement did seem to kill the story a bit, but it was short and to the point so ITV and BBC didn’t follow it up.
“They obviously wanted me to say something controversial but why would I want to stick my head out? It’s not really the sort of thing you want to get involved with. It’s best to just wait for the next story to come along.”
So you’ve not managed to set the record straight?
“The day I sent out my statement was when all the diesel in the water stuff came along so it was ignored. But it’s probably for the best.
“When I spoke to one TV station I said the image was of a Kalahari bushman.
“They were like ‘a what, mate?’ A Kalahari bushman! ‘Oh, right. And where are they from?’ Er, the Kalahari, mate!”

So, just for the record, here is Mark’s statement in full.

“I am shocked and bemused by the accusations that my art piece at Bretonside bus station has been interpreted as being racially offensive. The piece was inspired by the plight of indigenous groups (specifically the bushmen of the Kalahari desert) whose ways of life are being eroded by the activities of multinational corporations.The image depicts a Kalahari bushman making fire in the traditional way of rubbing sticks together. The replacement of sticks with dynamite symbolises the evils of globalisation. This image was never intended to be a statement on race.”

Posted by Thin White Duke