Trees Are People, Too


According to the Marxist Supreme Court, only Corporate Trees are people.
Hipster trees.
yarn bomb.

seriously, that's what it's called.
Awsome. Trees have fashion sense. The sweaters will go well with the leaves in a couple weeks.
Yarn bomb clashes with degenerate hobos.
this trees in hot thigh-highs fetish might really be a thing, i mean, why not?
These were in Occidental Park all summer, I guess they are just moving them around the city. You might know this if you left the hill every once in a while.
these were the same ones that were in occidental park. i think its neat that they are moving them around town because they are endearing and make me smile but i imagine a prolonged stay on the same trees could be harmful. so shake it up and share some sweaters with the less endearing trees for a while. neat.
Are these made of organic local yarn using native plant dyes?
why not waste your time and yarn by making something useful. I'm sure there are plenty of folks in need of scarves, hats, and mittens for the winter. These just scream clueless yuppie's who think they are benefiting society by making trees endearing but all i see is a waste of resources. I'm sure some of those precious 1% for the arts funds were used to install and de-install this trash.
If this is art, it tells a story of a monster, who thinks trees aren't pretty enough to appreciate in their own right, and who'd rather knit a sweater for a tree than for the homeless, sweaterless people huddled around the Park of Sweatered Trees.

It's brilliant—an even sharper indictment of hipster values than "The Future"...
@10 - That's how I feel about yarn bombing in general. What a waste of yarn and effort.
I know, right? Think about all the canvas that goes to waste, strapped to frames, covered in paint, and hung on walls by hipster artists when it could be used to clothe children.
If I had more time, I'd love to talk about what art is and what it isn't, and why yarn bombing isn't art (in my opinion - which you are welcome to disagree with).

But I don't, so I won't.
As someone who worked with the homeless for many years, I can tell you that every year we were inundated by bags and bags of hats and scarves knitted by very sweet and generous people. I can promise that no one is going to go cold this winter because the trees are wearing sweaters. Now, if someone was wrapping trees in brand new pairs of underwear, socks, bras, winter coats in all sizes and sneakers (the things shelters really need you to donate), then we'd have an issue.
I for one am glad that Fremont signed the Non-Proliferation Of Tree-Mines treaty.

Altho Oktoberfest this weekend may endanger us with other things on our trees.
@10, Warm for Winter does just that every autumn:…
Why can't someone use yarn on an art project while also knitting sweaters for the homeless? Why can't someone spend $5k for their dog to have an operation while also donating money to a local soup kitchen? How come, on this blog, every time somebody makes a choice to do something they are accused of prioritizing something over something else? Aren't you all wasting countless minutes in front of your computer typing meaningless words when you could be doing and typing things I personally consider far more meaningful and important?
@18: simple, because @10 is doing concern trollage 101. like in getting a B+ at that as well.
Those trees are more fashionably dressed than I am, and I'm okay with that.
@14, I for one would be very interested to see what kind of argument you would put forward to argue that (in your opinion) these are not art. Assuming someone put them there to spark discussion, and here we are, discussing them -- sounds like art to me.
@21 - People discuss the Holocaust, but that doesn't make it art.

Thread over!
@22, if I recall correctly, the Holocaust was not intended to provoke discussion. Do you seriously think that the yarn bomber was interested in keeping trees warm, or genocide for that matter?

On the separate matter of Godwin's Law:

>>Godwin's law...states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."

>>Corollaries and usage: ...There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized corollary that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful.>>

Nice try, MacCrocodile.
Ugly, stupid, and trite!