Ars: časopis Ústavu Dejín Umenia Slovenskej Akadémie Vied (43.2010)

three forms of violence in the images of public
art that interact with one another. The hrst is the
image of an act or object of violence, where the
image is violent to its beholders, or is the subject
of violence, such as vandalism. The second is the
image as a weapon of violence, where the image
subtly dislocates and insinuâtes violence towards
a certain hind of public space. The third is the im-
age as a représentation of violence, where a violent
past is celebrated as a kind of memorial or trophyT
Mitchell comments: 77*0/ Lvrp/GF
o/' ^
It can be argued, drawing from Mitchell
and Lefebvre's understanding of public spaces and
art, that underlying the code of space is an inherent
systemic violence that is consistently both kept in
check and advocated by the production of space
and the authority of a greater public.
Landin's work can be violent if a choice is made
to see it as violent. This is the relational ambivalence
of the work; it présents a humanizing and friendly
invocation that can nonetheless still be equated to a
violent act. The spectator can be consumed by the
work. It can be argued that the works convey the
monstrosity of capital as an ail consuming Frank-
enstein-like création that society has no control over
and to which the greater populace must submit to as
it consumes, which is an argument that was leveled
at early graffiti practices and the loss of control felt
by the larger society. The différence in Landin's work
is that it can be removed as easily as it is applied. If
someone regards the work as violent, they can re-
move it. Rather than promoting a violence that the
greater public is under threat from, the work engages
the spectator to be aware of the dangers inherent
to our society, yet be cognizant of the positive as-
pects and engagements that can be afforded in the
everyday. There is a lot to be said about an image
that smiles at you.
The faces activate, quite remarkably, Grant Res-
ter's theory of affordances. Rester comments that the
value of a thing is perceived directly and immediately.

43 MITCHELL, W. J. T: The Violence of Publie Art: Do the
Right Thing. In: P%M7 bf/Gř. Ed. W J. T. MIT-
CHELL. Chicago 1992, pp. 37-38.
44 Ibidem, p. 38.


& GtvR/?? RzGA.* LLhhG, 200& PA/o.* Gwtiňyy T G. L?GA.

The affordance of the object or thing, because it is
invariant, is always there to be perceivedT Following
this idea, it is possible to posit that the architecture
and the objects appropriated by Landin's practice
afford a humanization of the landscape because they
are human créations. Rester comments that any sub-
stance, surface, or layout has an affordance that can
be either bénéficiai or harmful. The theory is inher-
ently dualistic, each affordance can continually point
to both the environment and the observerT The
activation of an affordance between the spectator
and their environment is a resuit of Landin's work.
The things look like faces because they are faces, and
consequentially, the way in which they are activated
in public space through perception points to both
43 RESTER, G.: The Theory of Affordances. In: PALrVcgPG
H/pTwd? /o R!%TP<?ny3/Àw. Ed. J. L. GIBSON. Boston 1979,
pp. 127-143, particularlypp. 138-140.
43 Ibidem, p. 141.

81