[adma]

...at King/Queen/Roncy; some clod tagged all over the top part of the lettering on the south face. I'm normally gung-ho t/w graffitiists; but this is vandalism, pure and simple.

(Ah, at least it's the south face, where the "Hotel" part was already effaced by Days Inn. The north face remains pristine, "Hotel" part and all.)

 

[shawnmicallef]

t

Taggers are assholes, and selfish ones. Most "real" (whatever that means....talent? thought put into things) graffitists don't even try to defend taggers. They are different things.

 

[cdl42]

Re: t

Shawn,

Just curious, but why do you keep changing the subject line in your posts to a random letter? It's slightly distracting and won't help those using the search engine to find posts in the archive.

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: t

I'm normally gung-ho t/w graffitiists; but this is vandalism, pure and simple.

All graffiti is vandalism, pure and simple.

 

[nassauone]

Re: t

not so fast AP. If I am a store owner and I commission a graffitti artist to do up a wall on my property I certainly would not consider that vandalism. If on the other hand the punk ass does it without my permission then by all means it is vandalism and I should habve the right to hunt them down and cover their places in paint a'la Sean Penn in Colours.

 

[mgl2]

Re: t

Wouldn't hiring a graffiti artist to paint a wall not be graffit? Wouldn't it then be a mural?

 

[shawnmicallef]

Re: t

Sorry CDl -- i was in windsor over the weekend, and for whatever reason, the subject wasn't carrying over....back in TO and it's working fine again. weird.

the search engines here have never worked for me though.

 

[nassauone]

Re: t

Wouldn't hiring a graffiti artist to paint a wall not be graffit? Wouldn't it then be a mural?

splitting hairs there.

From Wiki (sure not the most relaible source but a quick one): Graffiti a type of deliberate application of a media made by humans on any surface, both private and public.

 

[afransen TO]

Re: t

That definition is too broad. Pissing on a urinal is graffiti by that definition...

Graffiti in my mind is (an attempt at) artistic vandalism.

 

[building babel]

Re: t

The constant linking of the word "art" to "graffiti" is irritating. Very little originality of vision is involved in most of it, though some technical skill is apparent in some of it. No doubt there is a thrill involved in producing it - clandestinely and quickly - as there is with purse snatching or shoplifting. But even the speed required to produce it works against graffiti as a vehicle for raising thoughtful issues.

The art scene picked up on it as a symbol of teenage rebellion, and had gallery shows in the 1980's, but it never caught on with collectors. How much cultural stimulation can you get from something stuck on a gallery wall, when you can see more or less the same thing out there on a hundred walls around town with more or less the same message?

 

[paraone2004]

Re: t

"The constant linking of the word "art" to "graffiti" is irritating. Very little originality of vision is involved in most of it, though some technical skill is apparent in some of it."

Babel I'm so amazed at your lack of understanding and quite frankly a little bit of art-fag snobbery you seem to spout whenever this topic comes up. Massive difference between being a graffiti artist and a vandal. I'm a graffiti artist and I do not vandalise anyone property.

It's no different from any other artist other than the tools used. I'm very surprised to hear you of all people be so utterly closed minded to it considering how arts friendly you seem to be in other posts. I think you should do a little more reasearch into the culture, I think you'd be surprised.

 

[building babel]

Re: t

You can't have it both ways. Either you adopt an outlaw mode - in which case a few quickly spray painted images on the back wall of a warehouse in the dead of night do not an art movement make - or you produce images "in the style of" that approach, and merely pose as a guerrilla.

If you're spray painting clandestinely and on the run then it is the time limitations involved - not the tools - that make it different from other modes of expression. And under severe time constraints, thoughtfulness and subtlety of expression are impossible. And, if you're not spraypainting one step ahead of the law, there is no reason why you should restrict yourself to those same tools tools as if you were.

 

[paraone2004]

Re: t

You've missed the entire point of graffiti as an art form.

Graffiti is not about tagging, it's not about painting at night on the run or anythiing like that. Graffiti is about using aerosol cans to create intricate burners of your handle in outdoor venues, the fact that some people don't ask permission is really an ugly side bar to the art rather than the art itself.
It's not about being a "guerilla" or anything like that. when people say your not a king, you don't "bomb" I instantly know they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. this whole idea of you must conform to this definition in order to be this, is sooooooooo lame. I know who I am I know what I do, I'm a king, no way around it, 17 years and counting.

I think that instead of worrying about this or that, just look at a good burner and admire the art.

 

[building babel]

Re: t

What you describe is craft rather than art - technique based ( "aerosol cans" ), stylistically formalized ( "intricate burners" ), heirarchical ( "I'm a king" ) and co-opted by businesses in the form of commissions and by governments in the form of make-work projects for teens.

The real art world has turned through many cycles since 1975.

 

[paraone2004]

Re: t

again I sense some real art-snobbery in your statements....

your telling me that graffiti is not art?