Graffiti

[pango]

I told myself not to... but it's too late now, I looked!
Not my neck of the woods but sad to see, wherever it is.

I'm a lover of ancient rock art and have gone to extremes just to stand and gawp at it. There was an attention seeker in my area who thought it clever to carve incongruous Irish "celtic knots" on the rocks of an ancient Neolithic/British/Pictish/Early Christian site close to my home. But if you can't see the differences then I won't say any more, as only expletives come to mind right now.

Pango.

 

[mr dazzler]

Graffiti is a sad repulsive mess wherever it is done, city or country. Especially done on someone elses private property, its inane and crass; why people try to defend it as some sort of legitmate collective expression is beyond me, its vandalism of someone elses property.

 

[Sideburnt]

Do I spot a Redditor?

 

[tim_n]

Shhhhhhhh these aren't the droids you are looking for.

 

[merrygold85]

I agree that it is not nice to see such an area treated that way. However, the problem here, as far as I can see, is that the people responsible for this mess clearly don't have a suitable outlet for their creativity/talents.

I understand that some may find tagging less tasteful than more elaborate works, but it is a very important part of establishing yourself as a graffiti artist. It's where you start. Where you learn to control a spray can, work out your own different method, your own style, your own identity. It is where the people who make fancy "street art" began, a stepping stone to greater things. There is evidence of this even in these photos. You can see that some have gone beyond tagging to doing figurative work and more accomplished pieces. These are people who definitely have some talent, and a passion for art.

As much as I don't like to see this in this context, and agree that it is wrong, I think I can see why they would do this. I imagine that if these people had access free walls, and positive encouragement to carry this out in a much more appropriate venue, they would.

Don't you think?

 

[sasquatch]

I agree that it is not nice to see such an area treated that way. However, the problem here, as far as I can see, is that the people responsible for this mess clearly don't have a suitable outlet for their creativity/talents.

I understand that some may find tagging less tasteful than more elaborate works, but it is a very important part of establishing yourself as a graffiti artist. It's where you start. Where you learn to control a spray can, work out your own different method, your own style, your own identity. It is where the people who make fancy "street art" began, a stepping stone to greater things. There is evidence of this even in these photos. You can see that some have gone beyond tagging to doing figurative work and more accomplished pieces. These are people who definitely have some talent, and a passion for art.

As much as I don't like to see this in this context, and agree that it is wrong, I think I can see why they would do this. I imagine that if these people had access free walls, and positive encouragement to carry this out in a much more appropriate venue, they would.

Don't you think?

I fully agree but you're preaching to the converted. My friends who do it tend to fill black books with pieces and they spent hours and hours developing their style on paper before going out and blamming. Even when they go out there's a code to follow, pavement and modern materials hit not old brick or stone or anything quaint posh or nice. There's a nice free space fairly local to me and it's a mission to get to so nobody sees it unless they really go out of their way. I'll try to get some pics up tonight or tomorrow even though they go back about 7 or 8 years now. If you can't see the art and talent in those then you're most likely a philistine or lacking any soul in my opinion.

Saying all that it is a shame to see the outdoors soiled like that. The worst we did in my youth was under bridges in the middle of nowhere so only we could see it, we wouldn't dream of doing that in a pristine spot like that. It's stuff like that that fuels the haters and gives the art a bad name...

 

[mountainm]

I fully agree but you're preaching to the converted. My friends who do it tend to fill black books with pieces and they spent hours and hours developing their style on paper before going out and blamming. Even when they go out there's a code to follow, pavement and modern materials hit not old brick or stone or anything quaint posh or nice. There's a nice free space fairly local to me and it's a mission to get to so nobody sees it unless they really go out of their way. I'll try to get some pics up tonight or tomorrow even though they go back about 7 or 8 years now. If you can't see the art and talent in those then you're most likely a philistine or lacking any soul in my opinion.

Saying all that it is a shame to see the outdoors soiled like that. The worst we did in my youth was under bridges in the middle of nowhere so only we could see it, we wouldn't dream of doing that in a pristine spot like that. It's stuff like that that fuels the haters and gives the art a bad name...

Sorry - but I don't think they have the right to decide where they paint unless they own the property - it doesn't matter if they're Banksy or Leonardo Da Vinci. If it's someone elses property keep off unless you have permission.

 

[sasquatch]

Ya but that goes two ways with putting horrible flats up where trees once stood as well. If you take down beauty to put up something ugly it's the people living there making it beautiful again the only way they know how to. It's a can of paint giving someone a voice to express themselves with. All subject to opinion of course. I'll try to get some pics up soon. The place I was on about locally is inside abandoned buildings with no roof that haven't been pulled down yet. You can't see it from the outside so it's doing nobody at all any harm, just providing frustrated kids an opportunity to shine and hone their skills in the arts without having to run or risk imprisonment.

I'd be willing to bet many members of this forum have had an overnighter where they shouldn't or dug up a pignut without express permission from the land owner or tapped a birch tree that wasn't on their property. Of course anyone that did do any of the above would have done it respectfully. The same can be said of good graffiti. I know people that make decent money from spraying VW vans, the inside of people's garages, business properties inside and out as well as walls in homes. It's not all bad is what I'm saying, it all depends on how and where it's done. As for the illegal stuff, the bright colours and flowing lines cheer me up no end on a miserable day sat on a train looking out amongst all the rubbish and dismal filth next to the lines. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that...I'm not sticking up for the stuff in the original post at all. We all have our opinions and mine happens to be in favour of free art done well on horrible buildings that have little or no other aesthetic value put into them when being built. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind but I just can't see how it can be dismissed as petty mindless vandalism considering the talent and skill that goes into a good piece.

Just a little edit here; I think the damage of graffiti pales in comparison to the amount of bagged dog poo I see strewn throughout the hedgerows and trees in the countryside. I've never understood why instead of even kicking it off the path people would go to the hassle of bagging it up in plastic, tie it off then throw it into the trees to hang there for untold periods of time?! That really annoys me when I'm out, more so than most things.

 

[mountainm]

Ya but that goes two ways with putting horrible flats up where trees once stood as well. If you take down beauty to put up something ugly it's the people living there making it beautiful again the only way they know how to.

.....

I'd be willing to bet many members of this forum have had an overnighter where they shouldn't or dug up a pignut without express permission from the land owner or tapped a birch tree that wasn't on their property. Of course anyone that did do any of the above would have done it respectfully. The same can be said of good graffiti.

First point - regardless of whether you agree with it the people building sought and gained permission
Second point - Graffiti is permanent, it requires a lot of time and effort to clean up. Aside from the pignut example your other examples provide no lasting damage.

Without permission Graffiti is simply vandalism regardless of intention or quality.

 

[sasquatch]

As I said we're both entitled to our views. I know yours and you know mine now. Happy days eh! We're all unique to a degree and that's a good thing otherwise life would be extremely boring and mundane...

 

[mountainm]

As I said we're both entitled to our views. I know yours and you know mine now. Happy days eh! We're all unique to a degree and that's a good thing otherwise life would be extremely boring and mundane...

I think the issue is deeper than that though - my view is black and white, your view injects the shades of grey that gives people the leeway to make their own mind up about what is and isn't acceptable. Who is to say the vandals in the OP didn't think the rocks were ugly and in need of artistic enhancement? I have no problem with this opinion (although I vehemently disagree with it). However the law is there to stop them making there own minds up and doing it. If kids want to express themselves then they can do it without breaking the law.

 

[sasquatch]

This will be my last post with any opinions on the matter as it's kind of pointless going in circles. The paint on the rocks will be gone in 25 years time. I disagree with spraying the rocks as I've stated in every post, I hate to see it but I know it'll be gone oneday. I wouldn't call any of that artistic enhancement either. There's good graffiti and then theres that stuff.

I'm on about putting a nice piece up on a horrible building or wall next to a trainline or a free wall as mentioned in several posts. Illegal? Yes. Art? Yes. Permanent? No. If left alone it will soon be gone due to weather and sun. Unlike the horrible building it's on...

Perhaps a solution would be more legal places to do this sort of activity to avoid the illegal side of it. Makes sense to me. You'll never eliminate all the illegal stuff but I'm sure it could be drastically reduced by having safe places for people to practice and express themselves.

 

[Grebby]

I agree that it is not nice to see such an area treated that way. However, the problem here, as far as I can see, is that the people responsible for this mess clearly don't have a suitable outlet for their creativity/talents.

I understand that some may find tagging less tasteful than more elaborate works, but it is a very important part of establishing yourself as a graffiti artist. It's where you start. Where you learn to control a spray can, work out your own different method, your own style, your own identity. It is where the people who make fancy "street art" began, a stepping stone to greater things. There is evidence of this even in these photos. You can see that some have gone beyond tagging to doing figurative work and more accomplished pieces. These are people who definitely have some talent, and a passion for art.

As much as I don't like to see this in this context, and agree that it is wrong, I think I can see why they would do this. I imagine that if these people had access free walls, and positive encouragement to carry this out in a much more appropriate venue, they would.

Don't you think?

I disagree.

It's not a lack of suitable spaces. It's a lack of respect!

If they want to spray paint on stuff they can use their own walls. If they don't want to cause damage some bluetack and a cheap roll of wallpaper may be of use.

If I find the *person* that tagged the side of my house then they will have a problem controlling a spray can as their fingers may be pointing in the wrong direction. I spent ages trying top remove it and the only thing that worked was an angle grinder with wire brush attachment. Boy was I hoping that they turned up whilst I had that in my hand.

I hope I don't find them as I'll get in trouble