The Kidult and Marc Jacobs story goes on (apologies: I can't seem to get enough of it). A tipster here first broke the news last Tuesday morning that a Marc Jacobs store in Soho had been hit with hot-pink graffiti. Jacobs then turned graffitist Kidult's anti-corporate assault around by printing the image on t-shirts selling for $698. Some speculated that Kidult had collaborated with Jacobs, others say Jacobs made the shirt to get revenge on Kidult. It's hard to tell what's what.
My original tipster went back to the scene of the crime and checked out that t-shirt to see if it was real or another joke. It's real. It's on a mannequin in the store window and on another right up front. The tipster sends in some photos and writes, "It's so cheaply made, like an iron-on stuck to a crappy t-shirt. The cotton is really thin."
With a shirt that seems so hastily put together, my tipster concludes, there's no way Jacobs was in on the graffiti bombing. "If this had been planned, the shirt would've been higher quality. Is anyone dumb enough to spend $698 on this thing?" Yes, reported Gothamist, someone was dumb enough.
And someone else is taking the consumerist joke one step further into meta-fictionality (or meta-reality, or meta-something). Tumblr blog Wilfry has printed the Jacobs t-shirt on another t-shirt and will be selling those for $35 each.
I've asked Kidult what his next move will be, and have yet to get a response. I keep wondering: What if he chose a word that no one would want on a t-shirt? What if the whole city was painted in words that disturb? What if the street artists took back the landscape? Can the Broken Windows Theory be reversed? Or will it all end up on $700 designer t-shirts?
Marc Jacobs Attacked
Marc Jacobs Attack T
More Jane, Less Marc
The Future is Marc