The holes we painted (and why we did it anyway)
A bit more than a year ago, we did something a bit weird.
We took a few cans of spray paint and we went out on the street. Not to paint a mural. Not to make art for art's sake. We went out to paint the potholes on a road that the municipality had been ignoring for months. Maybe years. Who can count anymore.
Yes, you read that right. We painted the holes.
Why would anyone do that?
Two reasons.
The small reason: we wanted the holes fixed. People were destroying their cars on that road every single day. We called the municipality. Nothing. We sent emails. Nothing. The usual complaints in the usual Facebook groups went exactly nowhere. So we tried a different language. The language of paint and visibility. If they will not see the hole, we will make sure they cannot not see it.
The big reason: we wanted to show people that you can actually do something. That cursing the government on the bus, cursing the mayor at dinner, and cursing destiny at the kitchen table does not fix a single hole. Action does. Even small, weird, slightly silly action.
“Nothing will change”
That is what some people told us before we started.
“You are wasting your time.” “Nobody cares.” “This is how it is here, my friend, nothing will ever change.”
I get it. I really do. Apathy is the cheapest defense mechanism we have. If you decide in advance that nothing works, you never have to feel disappointed when something does not work. You also do not feel anything when something does work, but that is the trade-off some people pick.
We did it anyway.
What actually happened
A few things, in roughly this order:
- People walking by stopped, took pictures, and laughed.
- Local media picked it up.
- The municipality (surprise) fixed the holes within a couple of weeks.
- A few neighbours who told us “nothing will change” went quiet. A few said “OK, but this was a fluke.”
And then, Sofia
Here is the part I like most.
A few weeks ago, on a street in Sofia, Bulgaria, the same thing happened. Different city. Same idea. People went out, found a pothole that the municipality had been pretending not to see, and made it impossible to ignore. Spray, camera, and a bit of noise. Enough to turn a hole in the asphalt into a story.
This time the TV showed up. A real crew. A real segment. The hole, the bright paint around it, the smiling neighbours, all on the morning news. The municipality, again, suddenly remembered that road existed.
Do I know the people who did it?
Let's say I am not surprised. Let's say ideas travel. Let's say they travel through articles, through conferences, through coffees, and sometimes they travel from one painted hole on one street to another painted hole on another street, in another country, a year later. Let's say I might have a personal reason to smile at this particular news segment.
I will not say more than that.
The point is not who did it. The point is that someone did. Someone watched, took the idea, made it their own, and went out on their own street.
That is how this is supposed to work.
The campaign was not really about potholes
The potholes were the excuse. The real campaign was against something much harder to fix than a damaged road. It was against the belief that ordinary people cannot move the system.
You can. Not always. Not predictably. Not on the timeline you want. But you can.
So here is the playbook, if you want one:
- Pick something small. Not the whole broken system. One pothole. One sign. One absurd rule.
- Make it visible. Spray paint, photo, video, a sticker, a banner. Something the people in charge have to either fix or explain.
- Get one friend. Just one. Two people is already a movement when most people are doing nothing.
- Expect the “nothing will change” crowd. They will show up. Smile at them. Keep going.
- Document it. So the next person sees that it worked, and tries something of their own.
A word about ARTivism
This pothole story is not a one-off. It is part of something bigger that we call ARTivism.
ARTivism is a collective. The idea is simple. Art is not only for galleries. A pencil, a brush, a camera, a sticker, a song, a poster, these are also tools of change, not only of decoration. We try to show people, by real examples, that you can use whatever creative skill you already have to push the world a little.
You do not have to wait for permission. You do not have to be a famous artist. You do not have to have a budget.
Our slogan is short and we mean every word of it:
With one small pencil you can change the world.
That is not a poster line. That is the whole strategy.
If you want to see more examples of art-driven change, take a look at our exhibition SystemErr0.
One last thing
A pothole on a road is a pothole on a road. But a pothole sprayed bright, photographed, shared, and laughed at, is something else. It is a small proof that the citizen and the system are not as far apart as we like to think.
You can do this. Not for every problem. Not every time. But more often than you believe right now.
Some people will say nothing will change.
Do it anyway.
FoxVK
in reply to Schmaker • • •Schmaker likes this.
Schmaker
in reply to FoxVK • •@FoxVK
Jenže ty peníze jsou moje!
.. a tvoje!
j4n3z
in reply to Schmaker • • •To neplatím ani v mezonetu ve starým baráku, který vytápím elektrikou. Možná měla Pekarová s těmi dvěma svetry víc pravdu, než si lidi připouští 🤔
Schmaker likes this.
Schmaker
in reply to j4n3z • •To tvrdím celou dobu. Byly chvíle, kdy byla mimoň, ale tenhle výrok je jeden z nejracionálnějších politických výroků posledních let
Jiří Eischmann
in reply to Schmaker • • •Schmaker likes this.
Schmaker
in reply to Jiří Eischmann • •Že jo! Nehledě na to, že nesvéprávný bratr a prázdnej dům je zcela bezpečná kombinace, kde se nemá co posrat :)
🔩 Adam Štrauch
in reply to Schmaker • • •Známá "rekonstruovala" starý barák. Kousek přistavěla, původní část nezateplila, pak ji došly prachy a minulý rok na podzim volila komouše s tím, že je tu bída. Člověk nad tím jen kroutí hlavou.
Pro některé voliče Bureše, a vůbec celé té aktuální sebranky, to musí být trochu nepříjemné, protože chudáci do ještě větší bídy přišli.
Schmaker likes this.
Schmaker reshared this.
Schmaker
in reply to 🔩 Adam Štrauch • •Když oni ty bídáci v nájmu neplatí dost velký daně, aby mohli vlastníci rekonstruovat normálně, no...
🔩 Adam Štrauch
in reply to Schmaker • • •Schmaker
in reply to 🔩 Adam Štrauch • •Špatně jsi mě pochopil. Narážím na to, jak aktuálně lidi, co si nikdy svý vlastní bydlení koupit nemůžou, platí rekonstrukce nemovitostí těm, co vlastnický bydlení mají a tudíž neplatí ani nájem :)
FoxVK
in reply to 🔩 Adam Štrauch • • •Ona je to vlastně taková ta zabijácká kombinace velkých dvougeneračních domů budovaných mými prarodiči "Aby děti konečně měly kde bydlet když oni neměli" (zdravím ty co si myslí že krize bydlení je něco nového) a totalitní školy kde se místo zateplování rubalo uhlí na rekord
Schmaker likes this.
🔩 Adam Štrauch
in reply to FoxVK • • •Schmaker likes this.
Peter Hanecak
in reply to 🔩 Adam Štrauch • • •@schmaker Zadotovat zateplenie je z pohladu statu/ostatnych ludi rozhodne lepsie riesenie chudoby. Ale:
1) treba odkontrolovat, ze to dostanu iba chudobni
2) treba odkontrolovat, ze to pouziju naozaj iba na zateplenie
Samozrejme ale, ze to nefunguje v kajinach, kde je privela "chytrakov" typu spominanej znamej ci "slovenskych kontroverznych podnikatelov", ktori si zeurofondov stavaju sukromne vily (tvariac sa, ze "penzion") a privela uradnikov, co "prizmuria oko" za obalku. 1/2
Schmaker likes this.
Peter Hanecak
in reply to Peter Hanecak • • •2/2 Toto je IMHO jeden z tych praktickych pripadov, kedy sa vazny ale inak vcelku lahko riesitelny problem stava neriesitelnym len kvoli "drobnym moralnych prehreskom" ktote ale su "spolocenskou normou", t.j. "vacsinou akceptovane".
Cim sa dostavame k "mojmu oblubenemu":
**K svetlejsim zajtrajskom sa neda preklamat.**
Schmaker likes this.
🔩 Adam Štrauch
in reply to Peter Hanecak • • •@phanecak Zelená úsporám byla výborná a měla mechanismy, které efektivně bránily zneužití. Prakticky sis to musel zaplatit a zpětně dostal bakšiš. Rizika přenášela na banky, případně si měl prachy a neřešil to.
Jenže když někdo peníze nemá nebo si nemůže půjčit a tedy spadá do té kategorie "chudý", tak jediná šance je mu poslat 100 % investice ještě před realizací. A kolik takových projektů asi skončí úspěchem? Nepošle to takového člověka nakonec do ještě většího svrabu?
@schmaker
Schmaker
in reply to 🔩 Adam Štrauch • •Ona teda měla i výborný mechanismy, jak zabránit využití příliš malým investorem, žejo...
Zelená úsporám očima běžnýho občana
Schmaker
2022-04-23 19:48:22
🔩 Adam Štrauch
in reply to Schmaker • • •Schmaker
in reply to 🔩 Adam Štrauch • •Já vím proč - aby investorem nemohl bejt malej vlastník, ale musel investovat celej barák.
Což je ti k ničemu, když má celej barák hotovo kromě jednoho-dvou bytů...