Graffiti -Art or Vandalism?

Technocrat

Graffiti -Art or Vandalism?

zogger

Sat Aug 02 14:41:00 -0700 2008

Politics

manage

Depends on whether you are the guerrilla urban artist or the wall owner. That's been the operating discussion for a long time, but now that it is getting violent, is it politically correct to just call it all vandalism, and that any societal "benefit" is outweighed by the nature of the art and the artist's behavior?

"We have seen a marked increase in these graffiti-tagging gangs taking to weapons and fighting to protect their walls, their territory, their name," said Los Angeles County sheriff's Lt. Robert Rifkin. ed.z.: Oh darn, I am forced to be non PC about this..oh well... enjoy your culture!

Everyones alleged "culture" has good points and bad points to it. All of us, no exceptions. You have to take all of it, not just bits and pieces of it and just ignore and wish away those pesky bad parts of it.

Here in bubba land we have drunk and methed out rednecks, with the associated crime and misery and depair that goes with that, and no one is trying to ignore it, it is just reality and we can talk about it and it isn't racist or being insensitive. It's just reality.

In areas like LA and a lot of other big cities across the nation you've got 100,000+ *real* terrorists, with numbers rising fast and a lot of them are now third generation serious criminal gang bangers, who get a mostly a free skate and a dodge in "sanctuary" areas, and graffiti is the mildest of their anti social crimes. Unless it is your wall and you have permission, nothing you spray paint on them is going to work like those pills advertised in SPAM emails, it is not enhancing your name nor your "machismo".

And let us not confuse anonymous bill posting in the past against a rogue and exploitative King and his minions versus gang bangers tagging what they claim as "their" turf, one is an act of political resistance against tyranny, the other is just..stupid crime, now apparently getting even stupider.

I think about this stuff when I am stuck at the railway crossing here and watch west coast box car after boxcar and containers going by all tagged with that inane graffiti. And I stare at it and stare at it, car after car, and I just can't see a single cool or societally enhancing thing about it. Just a waste of time to create ugly, it isn't even nice to look at, about as ugly as overly riced out cars, just lame. But! that is just my opinion, I would welcome a defense of graffiti and "protecting turf" and "your name" and fighting over scribbles and swirls on walls. Show me any good from it all, I'll reconsider. I will. Not the nice artwork I have seen where it is quite elaborate and was commissioned or authorized, I mean this gangbanger stuff.

Is there a defense for it at all? What am I missing here that makes this so culturally important that the needs of that "community" should supersede the needs and wants of the actual wall owners and the other people in the community who have to look at it? Note: I feel the same way about big giant neon corporate logos advertising to the sky and the space aliens, and like with billboards as well, I see no cultural good from it at all, just pure waste and machismo organ waggling. There's a technical legal difference in that one set of what looks ugly to me is legal, put on property owned by the folks or they contract to use it, but the overall societal benefit..not seeing it.

Graffiti -Art or Vandalism?

Charles E Hill

Sat Aug 02 15:51:48 -0700 2008
manage

I fail to see how painting gang symbols or names can even remotely be considered "art". Nor do I think the people doing the tagging are thinking of it that way. They're marking their territory.

There are graffiti "artists" out there who can do some very nice murals. The problem is when they do it on private property without the owner's consent.

But the tagging they're talking about in the article is the society equivalent of dogs pissing on everything to say "mine".

Graffiti -Art or Vandalism?

Philip Hunt

Sat Aug 02 17:13:15 -0700 2008
manage

The question which is the title of this article is a stupid one, as are all questions of the form "$X: $Y or $Z?" where $Y and $Z are not mutually exclusive.

Graffiti -Art or Vandalism?

disco

Sat Aug 02 17:24:06 -0700 2008
manage

It is both vandalism and art. Just because you don't like it and think it's talentless (I'd agree with you for most of it) doesn't make it "not art". Quite frankly if I saw a Jackson Pollock on a wall I'd have a hard time accepting it was more "artistic" than a teenager's scribbles on a neighboring wall. Even if it were a masterpiece that doesn't make it not vandalism.

Graffiti -Art or Vandalism?

AB3A

Sat Aug 02 18:48:50 -0700 2008
manage

It is can be both. However, the "art" is often being perpetrated in a public area with no permission or review by anyone, most of all, the property owner.

I have no problem with graffitti-inspired art in a gallery. I have no problem with a designated wall or bridge truss in the urban environment dedicated to the moving art of grafitti. I call it a problem when it shows up where it isn't wanted.

Five Nines

archanoid

Mon Aug 04 06:46:18 -0700 2008
manage

As someone who has been both a tagger and a taggee, I can easily see both sides. Although, for most of it, "art" is a bit of a stretch. Mostly it is just gang signage or marking of territory. And a lot of it (just like when I did it) is done for recognition.

There's a bit of notoriety to it in those circles. Which is why, when I've had my property spray painted, the first thing I've done (and the most important thing you can do) is remove it IMMEDIATELY. The quicker it's gone, the better.

Imagine a teenager spray painting the side of your house or garage or car even (all have happened to me) then later when he brings his friends by or tells them about it and it's gone already...it's actually embarrassing.

If it's gone every single time (and it can take a few times) the tagging will stop, plain and simple. Well, it doesn't actually stop, it just moves to an easier target. NIMBY so to speak.

I used to live in a rough neighborhood. The drug dealers, prostitutes, pimps, and people involved in those types of activities for the most part only mess with others involved in it with them. You leave them alone and they'll leave you alone. (That's not to say I haven't called the cops on them a few times but the cops rarely actually do anything other than harrass them a bit.)

As for the hoodlums, it's largely a matter of letting them know they need to take it down the block a bit. You respect me, I'll respect you. That's a message that gets through *most* of the time.

I've seen some really nice grafitti that I would be saddened to see it removed. I never produced anything that good. And ever since I owned property, I've seen it more like (to borrow from another topic) five nines of vandalism and 0.001% art.