Diary for a New America:

August 1, 2002 8:12 AM

Diary for a New America: Because a toilet seat is a terrible thing to waste. Poison drummer Rikki Rockett says the "days of useless acts of hotel destruction are over." Now he's leaving his artistic mark in hotel loos nationwide. See for yourself in the gallery.
posted by acornface (12 comments total)

I'll bet Viperr would think this is really cool.
posted by Fabulon7 at 8:26 AM on August 1, 2002

What an amazing link. I couldn't care less for Poison, but this type of "art installation" is so cool, I could weep. Oh, and some of the "projects" are not safe for work, but you can probably tell that from the thumbnails.

Great post.
posted by ColdChef at 8:41 AM on August 1, 2002

But is he available to airbrush the side of my van with a winged demon? 'Cuz that'd be tuff.

(This is pretty cool, I just couldn't resist a lil' slam to "Kustom Kulture")
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:45 AM on August 1, 2002

Any bets on how long it takes one of these to find its way to eBay?
posted by Cyrano at 8:55 AM on August 1, 2002

Few ideas are more beautiful a flame job on a toilet. excellent.
posted by whatnot at 8:59 AM on August 1, 2002

From the Why? page:
Besides, I like hotels. I have lived in them a good chunk of my adult life. Truth is, some are better than others.

Truer words were never spoken.
posted by haqspan at 9:23 AM on August 1, 2002

Is this my cue to weep for humanity? :)
posted by byort at 9:52 AM on August 1, 2002

No, but Chris Offili might be. Or maybe not. Maybe art can take many forms, including screwed to the top of the crapper. Or not: I know these guys would probably hate it.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 10:02 AM on August 1, 2002

Is there a certain fascination with female genitalia in almost all the images, or is that just my dirty mind?

Does he do the bowls too, or just the lids?
posted by bonehead at 10:18 AM on August 1, 2002

um, I'm sure we don't want to see what he does to the bowls.
posted by whatnot at 10:27 AM on August 1, 2002

Is no one troubled by the fact that, while more attractive than most graffiti and certainly less destructive than prior acts of stupidity, it is still vandalism?
posted by IPLawyer at 1:39 PM on August 1, 2002

Is no one troubled by the fact that, while more attractive than most graffiti and certainly less destructive than prior acts of stupidity, it is still vandalism?

Ummm...nope. Not me. I probably should be troubled by it, but...well...
posted by ColdChef at 1:59 PM on August 1, 2002