Graffiti...Art Or Eye-Sore?

[Captain_Crunch]

What do you think? Art Or Eye Sore?
Now i'm not talkin graffiti as in someone with a brush that has sprawled his name on the side of an underpass 'TAM WIZ ERE 99', no no, i'm talkin mad ass graffiti spray-can art. And i think tags should come under that category too!
So; your views please.

aye aye

 

[A4Ever]

Graffiti is art. I have seen some beautiful examples.

But graffiti should not be put above the right of property. When someone has a nice house with a big white wall, he should not have to repaint that wall every time to get rid of the graffiti.

The problem with graffiti is the illegal aspect of it. Give graffiti artists permission to paint one wall, and they'll paint another too. That is not right.

A possible sollution is that the government allows graffiti on their property, like undergrounds and busstations. They could ask to send in designs and then let someone work on a design in peace.

I know that it takes away much of the rebellious aspect of graffiti, but I think it is the only sollution to keep a balance between the rights of common people and the rights of graffiti artists.

tagging is the quick painting of an initial or something, right? That's usualy just plain vandalism with no artistic value. It should not be encouraged nor tolerated.

 

[Congrats]

Neighborhoods should designate special 'grafitti districts' that tolerate graffiti, because I actually find it, even in its roughest state, a beautiful expression of the urban condition. A wall without graffiti has much less character than one with graffiti.

 

[Bebelina]

Grafitti is definitely art. I think people should be grateful that these kids take time and effort to decorate subway trains and other boring pieces of materia.

 

[*stRgrL*]

Ya, I agree Bebelina. I frequent San Francisco alot, and there is beautiful graffiti painted throughout the city. On Haight street, there is a big mural of Bob Marley. I dont know if that was graffiti or if someone was actually paid to do it. Anyhoo, it brightens up the gray dull subways and alley ways.

Take care

 

[Captain_Crunch]

Graffiti art is supposed to be illegal thats what gives the artists the insperation to go out and spray-up a wall etc. because it is illegal and the more wild the weirder the places are that gets spray painted e.g. on the top of a tower of flats. If it became legal many would not carry it on further as the main reason that they do it is to get the adreneline buzz of doing something that is 'wrong'. (I# think) Whats the weirdest place you have seen a peice of graffiti?

 

[orthogonal]

The problem is that while you might enjoy graffiti, others surely do not. No one forces you to go into a public art museum, yet we all are forced to look daily upon the "art" of the kid with a can of spray paint. Would the kid like it if society forced him everyday to listen to old people's music? Why should he complain? We are only bringing our "art" into his boring world. Sarcasim aside, no one person should presume to subject others to his personal "artform."

Society as a whole decides what sort of architecture we will have. If people are outraged by a new mode of architecture, they have the right to make their voice heard at city council meetings. If enough people complain, then the building ordinances are changed. A democratic and open society has the right to collectively decide what colors it wishes to paint the world with. If society as a whole loves to see graffiti, then we should pay the artists for their work, or at least provide them with the canvas and the paint.

Michael

 

[Captain_Crunch]

The problem is that while you might enjoy graffiti, others surely do not. No one forces you to go into a public art museum, yet we all are forced to look daily upon the "art" of the kid with a can of spray paint.

this is like saying some people like rain but others dont, meaning that the others should'nt be exposed to rain because they dont like it. its not gonna happen, people put up with things that they dont like. i dont know if that made any sense to you but it made sense to me and thats allll that matters.
graffiti shows expression on the bland urban landscape, personally i think there should be more designated legal graffiti areas.

 

[orthogonal]

graffiti shows expression on the bland urban landscape...

Hey there Cap'n,
The moon's surface is rather bland. Perhaps we Americans should have painted a gigantic "Stars & Stripes" across the surface of the moon when we were last up there? Would you like to sit out with your girlfriend on an October evening as the lovely "Harvest" moon rises; only to see a gigantic American flag blazened across its surface? Another possibility is that we use the moon for advertising. Would you mind seeing the words, "Drink Diet Coke" on your moon? Actually, any geek with a rocket-ship and a big enough can of paint could "tag" the moon with his gang's colors. What do ya think Cap'n?

If you don't care about the moon, then how about your mother's grave marker? Would it bother you if I decided to "beautify" it with my funky designs?

Well, I'd never do such a thing because I realize that I've no right to force you to live with my personal conception of art. No individual has the right to subject the community to his personal whim. Power should belong to the People, not to a dictator, not to an individual with money, and not to a single man with a can of paint. Only the community or commune as a whole, has the right to choose what color they wish to paint their world. I'd think as a Communist, or at least as a Socialist, you'd agree with me rather quickly on this one Cap'n.

Our state has the only American capital city without a McDonald's fast-food restaurant. McDonald's tried to conquer us a few years ago but we made our voices heard and they backed down once again. You've no idea how proud I am that the people stood up and told the rich and powerful what they could do with their "Golden Arches."

...people put up with things that they dont like

It sounds as if you would have told us not to have bothered fighting against MickyDees, that we should just "put up with things we don't like." Well Cap'n, I reject that advice. The moon is as much mine as anyone else's. No one person or group has the right to put their rag, their tag, or their advertising on what belongs to us all. If my village decides that we don't want a McDonald's, no one has the right to force one down our throats. Gosh Cap'n, it's beyond me why you of all people, would take up the banner for the Elite rather than for the People.

i dont know if that made any sense to you but it made sense to me and thats allll that matters.

So why didn't you post your reply in Greek or Swahili? If your opinions only have to make sense to you, then why post anything at all? I post my opinions because I care what others think. I care what you think. If I do something that will affect you, then your opinion matters all the more. I have to take into account what you might think before I decide to "beautify" your "bland" car with my can of spray paint.

Finally, you might argue that only public property is fair game for graffiti, whereas I shouldn't spray paint your car because you personally own it. I would point out that public property (a subway car, a tree, the moon) is actually owned by everyone. Wow, I still can't get over having to defend the concept that we should respect communal property to a Marxist. Tell me it's not so Cap'n

Respectfully,
Michael

 

[wet1]

Now I don't see much graffiti in my neck of the woods. I have seen some on tv or the news once in a while. I suspect that it was picked because of it's beauty.

I would resent coming outside one morning and finding the side of my house "repainted" into whatever the designer thought was hot that day. Many cities spend a lot of money in sandblasting and repainting walls, buildings, trains and whatever to remove graffiti. I think I recall there was some talk of using a special paint on some of the more constant targets for graffiti. This paint did not accept spray paint as it would not adhere to it. But this paint is also expensive and not something you want to paint everywhere.

I would suggest that if the vandals are caught that they spend public service time covering said "art". I would suspect that for every artist that has developed a style that there are gobbs of mistakes before he got it down to a fine "art". If you like that sort of thing, how about you lend a few walls of your house to beginning artists?

 

[A4Ever]

this is like saying some people like rain but others dont

People can protect themselves from the rain with umbrellas and raincoats.

Rain is mostly temporarily.

 

[Captain_Crunch]

because graffiti is illegal you are not going to have it plastered everywhere.
if you actually read what i said, nowhere there did i say what the bland urban landscape was. i did not define it as being private property or public property.hell, i did'nt even define what i think 'bland' is, so please do not put words in my keyboard. i would not like my mother's grave plastered in graffiti no.
Addressing the space advertising thing, pepsi-cola was actually planning on tagging the nights sky with the pepsi logo.
whereas the moon is buetifull it does'nt need graffiti art to make it look less bland cause it is'nt bland in the first place. just the same as the leaning tour of pisa should be left alone because it is already beutiful.

p.s. i was really stoned when i posted the last post

 

[orthogonal]

Oh Captain, my Captain,

Graffiti art is supposed to be illegal thats what gives the artists the insperation to go out and spray-up a wall etc. because it is illegal and the more wild the weirder the places are that gets spray painted e.g. on the top of a tower of flats. If it became legal many would not carry it on further as the main reason that they do it.

Here you are telling us that the very fact that graffiti is illegal is the inspiration to do graffiti.

because graffiti is illegal you are not going to have it plastered everywhere.

Yet here you say that since graffiti is illegal, people will not do it.

Cap'n, you need to either make all your posts while straight or all your posts while stoned; that way the logic will match up. Nah, just kidding, please don't take offense.

You never did define what constitutes blandness. I only made suggestions. So I will ask you; who decides what is bland? As it stands, the guy with the can of paint decides. Is this as it should be? A kid might easily see the Leaning Tower of Pizza as bland, when you see it as beautiful.

I agree with your idea of designated graffiti zones. Yet I've seen similar attempts to keep the walls clean in bathrooms. Haven't you ever been in a place where the proprietor provided a chalkboard and chalk in the bathroom for the expression of ideas, and yet the walls still had graffiti on them? I think your first post hit closer to the truth; kids seem to graffiti "because" it is illegal, and they are the one's who effectually decide if your car, or the subway car you ride on, should be "improved" with their art.

I dislike legal graffiti (billboard advertising) every bit as much as I do the illegal sort. I'm lucky that the people in my state have outlawed billboards. It makes it all the more ugly for me to behold when I travel to other states. I don't remember seeing such things in Northern England. Do you have these gargantuan billboards in Scotland Cap'n? The legal and the illegal sort of graffiti often coexist here in Amerika. I'm thinking of ghettos in the big Amerikan cities where no one at all respects their enviroment. It appears to be a race to see how ugly they can make their world. People with ugly souls generally make ugly things.

I spent the first part of this week traveling down to Providence, Rhode Island to visit family. On my way down to this city of strip malls, abandoned factories, and billboards, I stopped at the college town of Amherst, Massachusetts. I love to wander through old New England College campus landscapes. The older architecture is wonderful. Yet it never fails that amid these beautiful old structures, towers a Cubist / Stalinist concrete monstrosity from the 60's or the 70's. It's as though a generation of architects and town planners suddenly lost their aesthetic minds. These buildings are the equivalent of three dimensional graffti to my eyes. I know you've got similar things in the UK, because I remember the tiff Prince Charles got into when he blasted the architects in the UK for imposing these brutal monuments on society. I know little about Prince Charles, but he has my support in the fight to blow-up these awful buildings.

Beauty is a big deal to me Captain. Though there is clearly a subjective element to art, there is likewise a strong thread of common agreement about what is beautiful. There is enough agreement about what is beautiful to allow us to build structures that uplift our artistic souls, rather than depress us. Nature itself is rarely ugly, it's often the most beautiful of all. Yet the hand of man doesn't have to only desecrate. I'm thinking of the lovely villages I saw in Yorkshire during my walk across England. I'm thinking of the university townscapes in Cambridge and Oxford in England, and Harvard, Dartmouth, and Middlebury in America. Many of the small towns in Switzerland, Austria, and Bavaria are equally as beautiful.

By the time an urban landscape has degraded to the point where you might think graffiti would improve it, it's usually far too late. The only way to improve such places is with a wrecking ball and explosives.

Just my opinion,
Michael

 

[Captain_Crunch]

no offence taken. The moral of the story is: dont post when your stoned, however fun it may be. Looks like i cant win, you either like graffiti or detest it, there does'nt seem to be a happy medium. It depends on where the graffiti is: for example an underpass or on the side of a derelict falling down building. I would say this was o.k
I would say because graffiti is illegal people do it to get an image, it fuels them to go out and do it, thinking it cool (?). i dunno.
because it is illegal there are only certain places they can do it without getting caught: hence it is'nt gonna be plastered everywhere. Although the case maybe if it were legal. Also it being illegal stops some 'would-be' graffiti artists.
personally i dont think it should be legal. just more legal graffiti areas or walls.
I dont know who decides what is bland, all i know is what i find bland others may not as you've already said. I cannot stand billboards either. Capitalist dog's tool into brainwashing people to go out and buy their product. lol. only kidding although the latter is true.

Haven't you ever been in a place where the proprietor provided a chalkboard and chalk in the bathroom for the expression of ideas, and yet the walls still had graffiti on them?

no, i havent. But i know what you mean in that the walls of toilets are marked up with pen n stuff. I would not classify this as graffiti but vandalism. In general there is no artistic talent behind this sort of vandalism and basically it makes the place look a mess.

towers a Cubist / Stalinist concrete monstrosity from the 60's or the 70's

yeh, we have them in Scotland. they are the most ugly buildings around. Tower blocks are just there to provide cheap accomodation at maximum profit, not for the architects to express themselves which is ashame.

aye aye.

 

[Apocalypse_kid]

Hi Cap, this does look like an interesting place.

Graffiti, graffiti, graffiti.

I note that the amount of graffiti gets less when the area is already nice and colourful. take an area near where I live, large concrete wall always taget of graffiti. The local council commissioned a large and attractive mural and it hasn't been graffitied (is that a word?)since (nearly a year now).

Is that cause the graffiti artists don't like competition? or because their tags etc don't show up against the background.

I am against ugly graffiti, but that opens up a whole new raft of problems. Maybe my ugly is beauty to someone else.

Cya

 

[Captain_Crunch]

hey!

alright Apocalypse Kid! you took my advice then? nice one. look forward to many more posts from you. lol. maybe they just attack the same wall cause its easy to get to. dunno. i think graffiti artists like competition.

 

[ratbat]

Welcome, Apocalypse. Looking forward to getting to know more about ya.

Now, as a former tag artist, I would say. The artist's, that are serious about their work, respect each other's art. Those jerks, which cover up real art, are assholes. They are jealous of anyone with real talent, so they ruin the art. If those guys haven't tagged over the art on a wall, your lucky. Although crap taggers are becoming more & more rare, these days.

 

[Captain_Crunch]

they call these kids 'toyz' here. what was your tag? it had to be asked. lol.

 

[wet1]

Welcome to sciforums, Apocalypse_kid.

 

[ratbat]

Originally posted by Captain_Crunch
they call 'em 'toyz' here. what was your tag? it had to be asked. lol.

For the "tag" or signature on my art, I used a stylized P. I guess it looked like the flags you use as corner markers, in Futbol.