Graffiti

Post Reply New Topic

Most advertising I see out in the street is an annoying, noisy corporate graffiti and it deserves to be torn down on grounds of taste alone - never mind defaced with another form of graffiti.

Meanwhile - I saw some really nicely painted graffiti (at the base of a derelict viaduct and almost hidden by bushes, for those of a delicate sensibility) and it said "ART". It seemed to say something quite profound, and really made me stop and think.
But then, on the other side of the viaduct pier, I saw some examples of the more talentless tagging type - and realised that the one I liked actually said "AFC" - the initials of a football club.
That made me think too, but for entirely different reasons.

Most of the walls of concrete on each side of a certain stretch of railway track I used for commuting to/from London were covered in graffiti - some of it just messy tagging, but much of it was very cleverly done and a joy to see.
I see no harm in that, even though it's done on someone else's property - and apparently the owners agreed because it was never cleaned off.

It doesn't matter what I think of corporate advertisement. The fact is graffiti is against the law and rightly so. It is not okay to destroy other peoples' property.

When did I claim to be an authority? We all have opinions on what deserves respect. Quit being so confrontational.

Yeah, I should probably go do something more productive.

Unless you're (say) McDonalds and grease the right palms - then it's apparently Ok to cover large parts of property and pollute people's vision with advertisements for utter crap.
So, even Banksy should be slung in jail for "destroying" property with his witty street art? Even though some local authorities make efforts to protect it once it's discovered (often on their properties)?

Grafitti?

I like good grafitti more than I like corporate advertising which I see as little more than gang tags for capitalism and generally about as contributive to peoples lives. I really like good stencil work but I am biased as I was a prolific poster and stencil street artist in the late 80's and I even made a point of attacking the corporate industry and attempting to subvert it's impact. Of course I must also confess to reaching that point via being an adolescent punk rocker spraying circled A's and band names all about.

The argument that it 'destroys' property does not fly with me, how can taking a boring publicly owned concrette wall and covering it in art be considered destructive? Ok, so when some adolescent gangster wannabe tags someones fence then they are defacing a piece of private property and it sucks but as a symptom of the breakdown of society I find it more disturbing than I find it intrinsicly offensive.

In some cultures the public ownership and beautification of walls etc is normal and not done secretively in the dark of night, I would like to see that around me and less corporate propaganda which I find more demeaning of society.

peace j

i adore graffiti. all of it. the earliest known graffit was in ancient rome and much of it was equally 'tasteless'. i have some interesting pix of local graffiti so i'll see what i can dredge up - tagging this thread for later lol. my favourites are randomly philosophic or poetic phrases, though i do love Banksy style art too.

Banksy was wicked but now he's on t-shirts

peace j

That doesn't make it okay to deface their property. If you don't like what they're allowed to do in terms of advertisement, a better approach would be to go through legal channels.



Don't know or care who that is. I think it's wrong for someone to get away with defacing property.

Didn't find something more productive, then?

Me too. I don't know if anyone knows the depth of loathing I have for advertisement. I fantasize about living in a world free from all that clutter.

However, I love this. http://www.unp.me/f44/amazing-shadow-gr ... art-58691/

Sure did! Thanks for your concern, though.

I hate it with a passion. Absolutely hate it!
Love it!

This I would be okay with. My main gripe is the fact that graffiti is illegal because public ownership here = government property. There is no distinction. One should be made, though.

I'm not quite sure I follow you?

Are you saying you can accept graffiti on government owned structures if it is public art or that as government property is still owned by someone and ergo graffiti bad?

peace j

Neither. I'm saying there should be a difference between public property and government property. Public property should be communal. In some areas, this actually is the case. Big cities like where I live? Not so much.