< War on Graffiti
- Started
- Last post
- 125 Responses
- MLPROJECT0
please shut up.
--------------------------------...
graffiti without permission is a crime, through the process of "tagging" it encourages other groups to "tag" other areas perpetuating the problem which results in supporting crime...
graffiti with permission is not a crime, but I do not believe it is art. The people that create it may have some artistic skill but from what I have seen in NYC there is no exploration of different styles making it look all the same...not very artistic is it?
speed_d
(aug 2 04, 07:43)
- ********0
Denouncing graffiti per se is as damaging as some wee prick spraying his tag 40 times down the side of a boarded-up shop.
There are worlds of diversity in graffiti, personally I think that Edinburgh has some beautifull pieces, loads of nice stencils in the past few months too, but there's some wee shite "tagging" every surface (s)he can.....
seriously the same friggin' tag anywhere you look I genuinely hope (s)he gets caught.
- rasko40
there are toys in all walks of life. Web design would be a crime if I took some of the shite I see as standard.
"perpetuating the problem which results in supporting crime" - wtf is that? Is that supposed to be some kind of researched theory or did you just pull that out of the air? thought so.
The point is, there are crack heads robbing houses and mugging people, there is a huge problem with homelessness, there are kids on estates terrorising shit because they have nothing to do. But you think that they should spend all this time and money on catching writers and making criminals of them, putting them in jail, the kids that aren't out robbing people, the kids that want to create something.
And mrleroy whatever, unless you want to post your own site up there dont go peeking looks just to get yourself some cheap 'ammo' you peurile imbecile.
- speed_d0
please shut up.
MLPROJECT
(aug 2 04, 07:45)
--------------------------------that is how you argue your point...
grow up.
- speed_d0
just because there are worse crimes doesn't make graffiti any less illegal. That is a weak arguement.
and no, i have not done graffiti research, just common sense
- hooked0
now this on he otherhand is an interesting site.
www.afflictedyard.com/banksy.htm…
- tfsmag0
i like the idea of graff zones, also, i pretty rarely see graff on new or well-kept buildings... usually it is on old-run down condemned buildings or rusty old train cars...
but that's just been my experience.
the idea of graff zones are cool because it's encouraging people to be creative without fear of being arrested.
- hooked0
sorry let me put that in better:
http://www.afflictedyard.co m/banksy.htm
- hooked0
ah fucksake
http://www.afflictedyard.com/ban…
- algorithm0
The so called movement of "graffiti" Blows! F-ing self righteous, Castro hat wearing little peons. Most of the stuff around here makes the city look like an eyesore, the rest is just a bad cartoon.
They should nab all the little glorified malcontents who think they really make a difference and make them HUFF all their damn paint...
- JamesEngage0
If the underground wanted their tube trains to have grafitti on them don't you think they'd be commissioned to start with. They're not... and why? coz most people don't fucking like it, and don't want it forced upon them.
And the reason they're not as effective at fighting so called 'real crime'? it's because they're paying out 27 million have to cover up some inspired poetry that someone felt we all needed to see.
Ask your mum if you can spray paint her living room?
she'll probably tell you to fuck off too... if shes not smokin crack upstairs with the mailman.
- snizl0
Here in america us taxpayers pay for "public" space. Why is is that big corporations can pay all kinds of money to put thier advertisements in "public" space but graffiti writers or street artists can't put thier stuff up in "public" space? All the taxpayers shouls have equal access to the so called "public" space.
The british police should be doing better things with thier time.
- rasko40
James, dont talk like some street urchin you snobby prick. Some people might punch you in the neck for talking like that.
happy days whatever...
- MLPROJECT0
well, if you can't see it now, nothing i say will change your mind. i'll walk through your post point by point:
tagging can encourage more tagging - whether via rival crews, inspiring more kids to get up, whatever. if you classify tagging as a crime, yes it could spread crime. this part i agree with. vandalism (especially etch tags) is destructive, but i still i like it because i can see into it and know what's behind it. its not some kids throwing a brick through a window or smashing up cars - there is an artistic inspiration behind it, nothing malicious. kids say "let's go paint something..." not "let's go fuck shit up."
----------------
graffiti with permission is not a crime, but I do not believe it is art. The people that create it may have some artistic skill but from what I have seen in NYC there is no exploration of different styles making it look all the same...not very artistic is it?
-------------------this is the part that really got me - in how you say it has artistic skill, but isn't artistic. open up your eyes. maybe because you've never paid much attention, you'll see that almost every writer has a different style. for example -
• COPE 2 -
• EWOK.COM -
• TWIST -
• SHEPARD FAIREY -
totally different styles, with the latter of the two (all 4 in smaller circles) have achieved pretty solid gallery, commercial and street credibility.
- JamesEngage0
Haven't got a clue what you're going on about, and threatening people doesn't help either.
Stop showing off and trying to get a response from everyone.
- pascii0
calm down.
- hooked0
law- although very often a nuisance is there to keep the strong/aggresive individual from rapaciously imposing their own will in any manifest form over the will of the many.
there are obvious politicalironies here which could be discussed elsewhere.
fact is in terms of ethics graffiti is not innately a "good" or "bad" thing. but for the part of the poulation that doesn't like it- its is every bit as annoying, and no more intrinsically creative than people singing drunkenly on buses or talking too loud in pubs. sorry if that sounds bourgeois.
everyone likes a nice piece for two weeks or so, it makes people smile. then for fucks sake take it down you messy urchins
- hooked0
law- although very often a nuisance is there to keep the strong/aggresive individual from rapaciously imposing their own will in any manifest form over the will of the many.
there are obvious politicalironies here which could be discussed elsewhere.
fact is in terms of ethics graffiti is not innately a "good" or "bad" thing. but for the part of the poulation that doesn't like it- its is every bit as annoying, and no more intrinsically creative than people singing drunkenly on buses or talking too loud in pubs. sorry if that sounds bourgeois.
everyone likes a nice piece for two weeks or so, it makes people smile. then for fucks sake take it down you messy urchins
- hooked0
law- although very often a nuisance is there to keep the strong/aggresive individual from rapaciously imposing their own will in any manifest form over the will of the many.
there are obvious politicalironies here which could be discussed elsewhere.
fact is in terms of ethics graffiti is not innately a "good" or "bad" thing. but for the part of the poulation that doesn't like it- its is every bit as annoying, and no more intrinsically creative than people singing drunkenly on buses or talking too loud in pubs. sorry if that sounds bourgeois.
everyone likes a nice piece for two weeks or so, it makes people smile. then for fucks sake take it down you messy urchins
- Bluejam0
Could we please stop justifying the usage of 'war on______'. It's old hat, a cry wolf caper and so far no shots have been fired. And GWB uses it all the time.