Graffiti - Art of Vandalism?

[ddadada]

What are your views toward graffiti?

[ksl]

What are your views toward graffiti?

It can be so obviously both! It's actually how an individual interpreters it, even if it does have value, like the famous Banksy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

I love art myself, and i see graffiti as an outlet for frustration, against many bureaucratic systems, my belief is that Communities should cater for these individuals, so that their expressionism of life's ups and downs may be viewed in a positive light.

Banksy is no doubt one of the worlds best!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

[sierra2469alpha]

...and i see graffiti as an outlet for frustration, against many bureaucratic systems...

KSL, sure, but as long as it's not on your wall, right?

I get frustrated with bureaucracy also, but it doesn't mean I take the s'can to something that isn't mine. I sat on a comittee many moons ago (different country) where we were addressing the same issue - provide them with a "art space" for $X, or spend the same $X on prevention and immediate cleanup. We had an interesting group of people, one of which was a psychologist - who suggested that giving "the youth" an outlet only set them up for believing they will continue to get their own way from society and authority.

An interesting point, I thought.

Mr. P

[ksl]

We had an interesting group of people, one of which was a psychologist - who suggested that giving "the youth" an outlet only set them up for believing they will continue to get their own way from society and authority.

I believe much depends on how far the bureaucratic society as neglected their duties, police, social workers, community, the more neglect the more difficult it is to address the problems.

What we see in most societies today is commercialised policing, that looks at ways of reaching financial targets rather than, fighting crime, only serious crimes have priority...

I was raised on an housing estate where police just didn't give a toss, and i have seen break ins in shops and have called the police myself, only for them to arrive to shine a torch on the damage and drive off, while the culprit was still inside.

When police are in fear of an Estate there is no turning back, although these housing estates are also planned by government and councils, to be manipulated so they can sell off the housing stock.

To clean up areas and house all the prisoners being released they designate areas to dump the trouble makers, in UK. I've seen more than 30 years of it, so I'm afraid i don't agree with all the academic bullshit, some people come out with.

I call it social welfare neglect at its worst, although we can debate until the cows come home, the kids need support, rather than left to peer pressure of bad ass leaders.

The topic is an interesting one, although i am sick and tired of it these days.

The youth are just doped up in many Countries and are all negative in mind. What to do is anyone's guess, academics without first hand experience just don't have much idea in my book.

My old fellow used to pull the trouble makers off the street and into the boxing and wrestling ring right up until the 80's, the communities used to be communities in the 60's but today, the neighbours will rob you, if you turn your back. So its another ball game today, with all the cheap drugs on the street.

The UK have lost that battle long ago, along with Northern Ireland! and the politicians think they are so smart, because of the peace accord, they know all too well, they cannot change hooligans, criminals, and terrorism, no matter how many of them they give knighthoods to. Constructive dialog is the only way in my book, and even then it will be very difficult to get everyone thinking the same.

Some people like myself are born rebels of society and just want to be left alone, I have not a great deal of respect for politics, even though there maybe some genuine people around, they have to change, when they get into the house (ball game) otherwise they are out. Life is far too short to worry.

[Strong Eagle]

People have no right to deface property that does not belong to them, even in the name of "art". They ought to be caned.

[durain]

if it is banksy, then it is art. if it is michael p. fay, then it is vandalism.

[JimH5]

I believe that property rights supercede any artistic freedom that people may have.

Painting on walls or subway cars is just defacing that which belongs to someone else.

[road.not.taken]

Much too complicated a question to be answered here in a binary poll. To think it could be such a black & white issue is to not fully recognize the implications of the question.

Like all Art, Graffiti can have enormous benefits to society, and can only be judged subjectively on a case by case basis.

Strong Eagle by your post the cave paintings in Lascaux would be considered graffiti, and yet they are studied by art students the world over as the birth of artistic expression.

[Vaucluse]

Strong Eagle by your post the cave paintings in Lascaux would be considered graffiti, and yet they are studied by art students the world over as the birth of artistic expression.

Well, not necessarily,, who knows the property tights of 14000bc were, maybe the caves were 'private' property.

I'd agree with SE, private property is different.

Graffiti is also just scrawls, does that count as art? Is there a need to differentiate what constitutes art in the graffiti world or is anything than comes out of a spray-can art and deservedly defaces the wall you've just spent $500 dollars and three days re-painting. (True story from Sydney)

How about graffiti on statues, monuments or how about even the caves in Lascaux? Painting some bad-ass slogans over the bulls and other animals is adding a modern focus on the drawings . . . no?

[sierra2469alpha]

...Graffiti can have enormous benefits to society..

I wouldn't mind hearing some examples of the "enormous benefits". I'm sure other valid contributors here would also be interested in your insight.

Explain your point, for a change...it will be quite refreshing for many, I'm sure.

Mr. P

@Vaucluse - I think the scrawls are called "tags" these days. Of course the "youf" have to tech savvy in the Rudd World! Seen what they did in Paris after the "Lady Di" car crash - shocking

[Edit: spelling]

[road.not.taken]

Explain your point, for a change...it will be quite refreshing for many, I'm sure.

No, I don't think I will, you're spoiling for a fight. And I just don't have it in me.

[sierra2469alpha]

Hardly spoiling for a fight - your ego really is writing cheques your predigious sciolisms cannot cash. Frightening, actually.

You make a point that's not understood and I ask for clarification. Surely you admit that that such a statement is fairly controversial, to say the least. Maybe it's not because you "...don't have it in you..." but maybe a case of "I can't be bothered"? Pretty fair request IMHO, resulting in your usual self-important response. But each to their own...

[Strong Eagle]

Much too complicated a question to be answered here in a binary poll. To think it could be such a black & white issue is to not fully recognize the implications of the question.

Like all Art, Graffiti can have enormous benefits to society, and can only be judged subjectively on a case by case basis.

Strong Eagle by your post the cave paintings in Lascaux would be considered graffiti, and yet they are studied by art students the world over as the birth of artistic expression.

r.n.t - At the time that those cave paintings were done, the concept of property ownership was non-existent; the land had the same relationship to a person as food and their own body... it wasn't owned, it just was.

OTOH, at my last business in the US, I bought and paid for the garage door that was constantly covered with 'art'; defacing my property, which cost me time and money to paint over... many times.

It may be clever but it is also a terrible eyesore... just catch a train in Paris for example... every last bit of rolling stock covered in someone's trash.

Sorry, they ought to be caned.