"Humanizing the Streets" or Just Plain Littering? The Art and Ethics of Eyebombing

From Banksy's provocative street art through guerrilla-style repainted bike lanes to seed bombing and yarn bombing, we've featured plenty of ways that people have taken it into their own hands to brighten up/hack/modify/vandalize their urban environment. (The verb you choose will depend on your perspective.)

I'm really not sure what to make of the latest version to cross my radar. A website called "eyebombing" encourages users to "humanize the world" by attaching plastic googly eyes to inanimate objects. It is, we are told, intended to "bring sunshine to people passing by."

But I have to ask, is it worth it?

Given the amount of man-made plastic crap that's ending up in the stomachs of animals, or washing up into the Great Pacific garbage patch, it seems kind of dumb to walk around sticking googly eyes on public objects, where they will only be either removed by authorities/owners or end up falling off and becoming litter.

Besides which, from my perspective at least, it's just not all that funny to see an ATM with eyes on it.

As I noted in my post on why the Occupy Movement must think beyond physical occupation, there are always complex questions to answer when an individual or group decides to break the rulles and utilize the commons for their own purposes.

I'm not saying you should always follow the rules. But if you are going to break the rules, do something that's worthwhile.

"Humanizing the Streets" or Just Plain Littering? The Art and Ethics of Eyebombing
Eyebombers say they are brightening the city by attaching googly eyes to inanimate objects. But is it really worth it?

Related Content on Treehugger.com