Wow, I'm glad I read this! I knew the bull was guerilla art (put there without permission), and I knew (thought) that the girl was, too. And as such I thought it was a brilliant work of appropriation, and should stay.
But it turns out the girl is the result of a marketing campaign by a global advertising corporation for a giant investment fund. That changes everything.
Companies should not be let to use individual artists' work for their own corporate agenda. That's not right, whatever the message.
Di Modica, who still owns the bull, should put it somewhere else -- maybe in a different city.
But it turns out the girl is the result of a marketing campaign by a global advertising corporation for a giant investment fund. That changes everything.
Companies should not be let to use individual artists' work for their own corporate agenda. That's not right, whatever the message.
Di Modica, who still owns the bull, should put it somewhere else -- maybe in a different city.