Graffiti, Street Art, Urban Art, etc...

[IJesusChrist]

The word and idea of graffiti [as we know it] arose in New York City, specifically in the inner city ghettos and projects. It began by people writing their names in permanent markers on street corners and signs, (the "first" NYC graffiti guy wrote his name on the walls in middle school). However, graffiti has been found in human history as long as we have had walls to write on. The concepts, styles, and ideologies behind each paint stroke have changed throughout the years, but the action of putting one's art, intentions, or ideas on a public wall has still remained.

When graffiti first began to get popular, again - in NYC, it was due to the subway cars and the infrastructure that housed them. Writers knew they could paint a name here and it would show there, essentially a moving platform of fame within the world of graffiti. Of course the city of saw these as direct attacks of its own property - and retaliated as such, making graffiti illegal and setting up a funding system from tax payers to remove graffiti from the streets - attempting to remove what seemed to some as "dirty", "unsafe" and "urban decay".

As years went on, more and more youths joined crews [distinguished from gangs *until the early 90's] and the popularity (or infamous status) of graffiti grew. Other cities around the US began to follow in toe, as well as around the world. It was in the 70's that the hip-hop style of graffiti in New York started to spawn, but was not until the 80's that the world began to develop its own styles and flavors.

[this will get beyond the history in a minute, but it is important to see the transition's, ideas, and history that created what graffiti is today.]

During the 80's the styles got much more complex and in my own opinion, more artistic.

And, of course, in the 80's [and earlier] we see graffiti take over the berlin wall

But one artist will take the cake, and turn graffiti into something no one else had even conceived of before, he writes as Banksy, and even to this day his identity is unknown. Perhaps the most famous of all the street artists in the world, Banksy had developed a style and ideology so great that he has sold out dozens of art shows around the world, masterminded a very odd movie [See "Exit Through the Gift Shop"], and has become an icon of Europe's counter culture:

An art show by Banksy:

"Great things lay in plain sight, yet most of us never stop to look."

Graffiti have rise to one of my favorite artists, Daim:

It gave rise to president Obama's "Official Photograph" which is being held in the white house, alongside every other President's picture:

This picture held Obamas' supporters together, figuratively, and became the first picture in the white house to be done by a street artists (and probably the last). It was done by Shepard Fairey, the man who popularized Andre The Giant stickers, and the "Obey" logo:

Now, let us get into the academics of this phenomenon that seems to drive a good percent of the population to write, draw, paint, and stencil on walls.

There are plenty of people who have done many studies on the effects and consequences of graffiti, and it is increasingly interesting to note that a study done in new york city in the late 90's found that neighborhoods with graffiti had a significantly lower crime rate than those with very little graffiti [gang graffiti was omitted]. And here stand the basis of the rest of my [our] argument.

Richard Florida, a geography professor, argue's in his scholarly papers that beyond the idea of economic capital - I.E. Money, cities, towns, and neighborhoods contain what is called "social" capital - i.e. an attractive culture, group, or ideology that brings in other social populations. One can easily argue that different districts in town offer up various types of social capital, but almost all have a grand amount of social capital, with the exception of very industrial places and dense office spaces. The areas with social capital tend to attract tourists, night-goers, the "hip", and bohemians. Those without social capital are usually deemed places for work only [no play].

Social capital is important for neighborhoods and towns that wish to create "safe streets" and a steady economy. My specific neighborhood plans to put in some brand new murals along a very large wall near my house. This would be an example of economic capital being spent on the arrival of social capital - something that increases the viewing pleasure of an area, as well as the imagined "social interactions" with the land scape. A mural, as you know, is an interaction with a person and his land scape...

After Richard F. began to talk about bohemians and the rise of social capital, it became apparent to others, see Bloch, Solja, that graffiti has the ability to do the same, however with a much different crowd. Unlike pretty murals that attract all types, graffiti is often looked down upon by most, yet loved by some. The belief with graffiti being dirty and a sign of urban decay comes from propaganda and stigma from years long since passed. More often than not, when a scene in a holly wood movie is suppose to depict a dirty drug deal, a dumping of a body, or something of the underworlds' crimes emphasis on graffiti in the background or foreground is placed. We grow to accept that graffiti is attributed to gangs or the people who write are often very violent.

Bloch makes an exceptional argument that graffiti is a very powerful, magnificent tool for the urban landscape. We will forever [until we die I suppose] see the expansion of urban cities and streets that very little of us every take notice of (both in their absolute purpose and their facade). These urban streets are often painted "egg-shell white" and tan, to make the most bland of objects as possible. Yet, as Bloch says, we continue to contest these boundaries, we spray our names, we write a note on the wall, continually contesting and pushing the boundaries of the cities walls and structure. We bring to the table what was once not there - a sense of interaction with the environment. We bring social capital.

This will not be easy to grasp for all of you, but please, have an open mind. Imagine the streets and highways of years long passed, completely blank, painted that beautiful creamy beige, that wonderful egg-shell white, that magnificent tan color. Imagine if that were today, that there were no images of love and angst upon the walls of what facilitates you're driving to work.

Can you not see that this is an expression of art, that this is an interaction with the landscape, that this is social capital? As an example used before, how many of us will become wealthy enough to erect our own buildings, our own structures, our own sculptures within a city? Very few - yet, with the power of color an impression can be made upon the landscape that is equal to that of a large building.

When millions of us drive to work every day (not including me) we stare at the back end of a bumper until we arrive at work. Often housed by bland walls, and repetitive colored cars, possibly the highlight of the drive is a funny billboard, which we think about on our way. The majority of those millions will see none of the graffiti, none of the art, simply passing it by as if invisible. Once prompted to look, again the majority will say nay, dirty, and decay. Foolish are they to shoo away such an inspirational interaction with the physical world. An impression that last's as long as it can until the tax payer's unknowingly cover it up.

My ideology is that color, being one of the most powerful stimuli of the senses, not that any of us psychonauts would understand that - can be used as a contestation to the city's overwhelming power and presence in our daily life. The possibility of seeing a new piece of art, much like a flower popping out of a soccer field, intrigues me. I am forever viewing and observing this art, wherever I go, whether it be a John Hancock of a fellow writer;

A master piece down a back alley:

A wheat paste poster:

Or a quick throwie on the side of the highway:

I see more than art. I see more than contestation. I see the interaction of an individual with the environment in which he is forced to live within. There is great benefit to seeing color, hence "color therapy" given to many americans during the winter months. Hence, we like seeing colorful paintings, hence, we love a field filled with flowers, the list goes on.

When you see dirty decay, that is your own fault for succumbing to the propaganda, bias, and stigma handed down from above. When you fail to see the interaction, the passion, and the art - that is on you, and I am sorry for that.

So please, clean up your act, and think twice the next time you belittle graffiti:

 

[Crimzen]

that last one was you wasnt it IJC? if i remember your name correctly..

I've always been a fan of graffiti, it having always been fairly prevalent in most of the areas i've lived in
You spoke about daim and banksy, probably the most famous and my 2 favourite graffiti artists

Good read :thumbsup:

its worthy to note that graffiti has existed since ancient times though with an entirely different style (obviously) to modern graffiti
its been found on ancient greek, roman and viking ruins (and these are only the ones i've heard of)

 

[ophiuchus]

depends on the building as well... spraying a bar of soap on, say, a daycare, will not carry the same message/effect as spraying a bar of soap on a federal building.

 

[ararat]

I can see, though, why people do it illegaly. getting permission always means to ask someone, and that someone is afraid that it might cost something for him, or even worse you'll have to go through a bureaucratic process which is likely to fail if you don't know anyone sitting in these premises.
there's one guy in vienna, he's spreading poems to pluck, i.e. he puts them up somewhere with adhesive tape for people to pluck, mostly on lanterns, trees, columns and walls. to my knowledge he also used permanent marker every now and then, but that's it. he got a total of 1109 criminal charges for his work, which I consider an important and good work. there's no place for "getting permissions" for what he's doing. it would be insanity to get permission for every tree or lantern to put up the chits.
I tried to translate some of the poems but they only really work well in german, because words like power (Macht) and doing (machen) are very alike.

"who has no power,
has to do
what the power does

who has no power
has no right
to do his right"



like banksy, he had to swim against the current of property rights for some time, now his pluck poems are considered "approved art" by the high court.
in some street-art, the overstepping of laws is part of the art work, or just pure necessity, or assholery as you say.

but then again, I think humans are very noble beings if they aren't restricted by some crazy system or line of thought (and even then) and be open for this kind of thing. the best graffiti I've seen, as in spray can stuff, was in places where it was legal to do. it's quite logical, there was no pressure to do it fast.


we also have to look at why something like graffiti comes to exist. if we say that it is because of assholery (not accusing you, aemilius, of saying this) we are buying into a view of humans that isn't brotherly at all. there must be different reasons.
I was about to go on a rant about how the privatization of the commons might call for graffiti, as a reacquisition of the commons, but then I got high. also I went outside into the woods. maybe I'll write some later.

 

[ararat]

BananaPancake “I can see, though, why people do it illegaly. getting permission always means to ask someone, and that someone is afraid that it might cost something for him, or even worse you'll have to go through a bureaucratic process which is likely to fail if you don't know anyone sitting in these premises.”

So, because the community may not like or want it, you can see why someone would just say “fuck the community” and go ahead and do it anyway? If you can’t get permission from the community to do something, that should give you a clue that the community doesn’t want it! So how does an individual come to feel they have the right to force this crap on everyone? You do mention one thing that almost makes sense though, if they are going to say "fuck the community" and do it anyway they could at least do it in chalk or some other water soluble medium, or just put them up with adhesive tape, which would at least give the people in the community the option of removing it without endlessly having to repaint or sandblast the surface. But like I said, from what I've seen the kind of people that do this kind of stuff and just say “fuck the community” are not usually what you would call “the sharpest tools in the shed”, so I think it will continue to be a problem.

I explained my case, you only have to read it. I'm not saying that a "fuck the community" is absent in all street art. this is a broad subject we are discussing. maybe, just maybe there are also reasons someone would feel like this. graffiti can be seen as a symptom of a society that works like ours do.
the artist I told you about wouldn't have been able to do what he wants to do if he hadn't just said fuck the law and put up things that don't even create any damage. similar thing with banksy. houses even gain value when he paints on them, and the graffitis are protected by law.

have you been, by any chance, a victim of graffiti? it would explain your emotionally laden responses.

disregarding property rights, how do you come to feel that you have the right to force your pictures on us? not meant as an insult, I accept our past conflict as an immaturity on my side. there are people in here who got annoyed, and some love your pictures, same thing with graffiti. it's not like all of our community is against graffiti, just because it is illegal in many places. my mum thinks that they are quite beautiful actually, every time she sees a train with some on it she thinks that it's beautiful, and I think so too. so many things in our world are replaceable, exchangeable, impersonal, everything is the same everywhere you go. I'm not surprised that people put graffitis on these things, I even welcome it. minding that it happens on public stuff rather than private stuff. you may say that it is unacceptable because there are places that don't exactly benefit from graffiti, and I agree. I prefer the benches in a beautiful park to be normal ones, and when something is being written on them, it is by young teenagers in a daze of hormones and hopes for love, or in drunken anger, too. or I'd feel quite annoyed too if someone put it on my (hypothetical ) car. but that hardly happens, for these people are humans too, with a sense of right and wrong.


if it comes to being force fed crap, I prefer any graffiti (and I find many quite worthwhile actually) in my doorway* over any advertising, billboards, "information screens" aka hypnotizing devices in the subway or the hollow obnoxious music in grocery stores which is employed to make you buy more. the fact is, living in a city, or even on the countryside, much of the landscapes and public places (from latin p?blicus: “pertaining to the people”) are defaced by artificial smiles and photoshopped models with The Perfect Body selling you crap you don't need with the promise of being Happy and Good or whatnot. by any means, how does this not include a "fuck the community"? modern economics fucks the places we live in so hard that we don't even take notice. that doesn't restrict to visual pollution, but any kind, really. (talk about misery index..)
but to stay within visual pollution, take the bank in my hometown. where I come from, there is an old citysquare from the 12th century, in other words, it's historic. the buildings may not be that old, but they are really beautiful and speak of older times/architecture, some probably are older than the USA. a year ago a bank came along and just built a gruesome building which doesn't fit in there at all, but they could because they had the money, and thus it was OK to do that. I wouldn't mind if it was a modern interpretation or allusion to the old architecture, but this building is just an affront to any sense of aesthetics.
what I'm getting at is that many people fuck the community, with the difference that some do it in bright daylight and derive profit of it and are even congratulated for that while they actually take away what should belong to everyone: unspoiled land and cityscapes. I can very well understand why people do graffiti, because the situation isn't exactly fair. those with money get to spread their stuff, and those who don't have money get to shut their mouths. furthermore, most of the graffiti I see in vienna is on those noise protection walls and bridge columns, which are so boring that they can only profit from being painted on. I don't know how it is where you live (where do you live?), but here private houses are painted on quite rarely.

there's one place in vienna that I love, it's the donaukanal, it's a small arm of the danube that goes right through the city, it is full with graffiti and I feel that this is a big part of this place, it makes it feel organic, alive.

you know, people live in the city, they go outside their small cube which they don't really own, and walk around in a city that solely belongs to anonymous people, go to the shop that is the same no matter where in austria you are, to buy some processed, homogenized food (perfect for a processed, homogenized life), pay an anonymous exchangeable cashier, go to work, in which they are easily replaced as well, go home through streets that look the same in any part of the city. in our culture your being is reduced to this sack of meat with a bubble of psychology in it, we live fragmented lives. it is of no surprise to me that people feel an urge to expand themselves into the city that they call their home and make this grey, depressing place more colorful by painting a bit of themselves on a wall that is just grey to begin with. and if only they put their tag-name somewhere to make the small capsule that they feel they are a tiny little bit bigger.


* there's a guy in vienna who writes "Luxury" in every doorway possible. it annoyed me in the beginning because it doesn't say shit, but well, I hope he gets tired of it.

 

[IJesusChrist]

but if you had a house, building, business or business vehicle and came out in the middle of the night to find someone in the act the act of spray painting something on it I seriously doubt you would run back in to grab them a beer and either join them or just stand by while they finished their "project". I think it's more likely you would run back in and grab a baseball bat and pulverize the little fucker.

Don't be so quick to judge. Especially such a judgment as this, after I have clearly demonstrated that I see all graffiti as art. Vandalism, however is the intention to degrade the property that it is laid upon, or the person housed within - or to spread fear. Hence I would call a Nazi swastika vandalism, or some type of racial remark on a building vandalism.

I would GLADLY allow anyone with talent to write on my house - I am not antagonizing you, this is real. In fact, it is one of my "goals", I guess you could say, to erect a large concrete slab on my property for legal graffiti. I am not joking, you are just not able to sit in my [our] shoes.

It is yet another funny and coincidental story that my friends had come visited me yesterday to go see a great movie (I recommend "When a tree falls" to all of you). My friend wanted to go see some graffiti, so I took him to a wall with a great deal of (in)famous writers in my town. As we were leaving a man was standing at the entrance and I became somewhat nervous. He had a large dog with him. I approached anyways as I had no cans and had done no wrong other than possible trespassing, and waved at him as I got closer.

"Hi." I said,
"You guys painting?"
"No, no just looking around"
"Oh, well I'm cool with it."
"Really? No shit."

He proceeded to explain that he had worked with a famous hip-hop artist in the area and was responsible for many outlets of merchandising for the said hip-hop guy. A good deal of the people he worked with were writers and he let them paint on the side of the wall. He advised, however, that the adjacent building does not agree with it and that it would be smart to not paint over there. I was overly delighted [really fucking pleased] with the guys attitude towards the situation, and had turned my innate fear of running from this Emile - type person to a very friendly acceptance, for he wasn't an asshole at all!

So you see Emile, it really is all about perspective - and you seem to be lacking what allows [us] to see the art through the crime. I hope you can lift that veil that has obviously been placed upon you by this society. Again, I'm not antagonizing you - but your perspective is why I do art with a bit of panic every now and then... but adrenaline isn't always a terrible feeling.

As Banana said - I will forever welcome a person's art over a god damn billboard for coca-cola or mcdonalds, or even a beautiful model. I don't want to see that shit. I don't want that to be planted in my brain's real-estate. We have so much memory and thought dedicated to all the advertisements we are subjected to every day.

The problem is not the art, the problem lies in the viewer's opinion.

I could go into a discussion about property rights in general but I'm not going to. I tried it once with you are just a bit too stubborn. It would be nice if you could accept a new vantage point once in a while without the overwhelming sarcasm that has bogged down most of your replies. Not that they are negative, but they are overwhelmingly nonconstructive!

Now, to happily read the rest of banana's posts.

- lovely posts banana! I think you and I are in the same boat.

Ain't that purdy? Nah - it's powerful. I love it.
PS: Soap picture's comment by original poster = "Whatever it is it's tight." Oh someone likes it.

I've got plenty more to contribute to this thread... I'll just wait till the time is right.

 

[Illegalsmile]

wow great stuff guys, i love graff and i used to lurk on a writers forum on myspace.com before i came here, so this thread is like gold to me.

i love graff but my rules and most nice writers i think believe public property is ok, NOT PRIVATE PROPERTY. thats a big difference when u damage someones house or car. public property like buses, trains, walls, is ok cause they're the public. for example, the freeway walls and in az. they are blank and don't really belong to anyone but the city so a citizen can paint on it. the window of a local store is doable, but kind of low, just like tagging a house or school. most writers will call you a toy for doing those things. even tagging over another writer's graffiti is disrespectful, unless the piece has already been messed up in some way.
be creative and discrete thats how its supposed to be

also one way graff can be harmful is how gangs use it. depending on the neighborhood, writers are more likely to get trouble from gangs instead of cops and gangs are WAY worse.

graffiti is something eternal i think. there was always some guy who drew a big face in the sand or carved something out of a mountain. it will always exist and i love it so much

some great graff movies:
infamy
dirty hands 1, 2, 3
War 1,2,3 (kinda gang-like but so dope)
men in black 1,2,3
stylewars

 

[Crimzen]

without graffiti the only colour you'd see in a city would be advertisements..

there is of course shit graffiti which i am happy with people removing but most of what you see (or at least most of what I see) is good art with a small percentage being fucking excellent art
I enjoy seeing good art and love seeing excellent art and i hate seeing advertisements
therefore i would prefer if all advertising was covered up with graffiti

of course people will disagree and dislike graffiti, it pretty much goes without saying because:
A) they dont understand the artform (seeing it simply as vandalism without giving any credit to it as art, i'd say this covers the majority of people who dislike it)
B) they have genuinely observed the artform and specifically dont like it, it not being their particular taste
C) they are the government and would only accept graffiti if it was paid for/taxed or was an advertisement

 

[ararat]

Now, to happily read the rest of banana's posts.

- lovely posts banana! I think you and I are in the same boat.

nice to hear that someone is reading my posts. usually when I saw such long posts as those that I produce these days I wouldn't bother to read them

 

[ararat]

Don’t be absurd (that’s my job). I’m not forcing anyone to look at anything. I don’t see how you could be unaware of the “Friends & Foes” feature of the “User Control Panel” that says it minimizes the visibility of posts you don’t wish to see (I haven’t actually tried it yet). Anyway, the forum isn't really the same as private property, and I think in view of that feature your (implied) analogy is faulty bringing it up in connection with this topic, but I think I sort of understand what you're saying.

well, you know, if I blocked you a great deal of conversations on here would cease to make sense, you're an integral part of the forum right now. and in a way the comparison applies because this here is public and so are the places we find graffiti most often. it doesn't apply because the removal of the "graffitis" is infinitely easier here, and it is not necessary for me to read the forum, contrary to walking in the street I live.

I appreciate your point of view BananaPancake. I’m sure there are many reasons that people with issues, and eccentric artists (basically the same thing) act out, and advertising is definitely a pain in the neck, there’s no doubt about that! You and IJC both fall into the eccentric artist category I think. The issue here though is not so much about which form of crap you would choose to be force fed if you had to settle for this kind of crap to be force fed or that kind of crap to be force fed. I think it’s more about people who go out (whatever the reason) and force feed you more crap on top of all the crap you’re already being force fed, so when you take all that extra crap you’re being force fed, and add it to all the crap you were already being force fed, all you end up with is a much bigger pile of crap being force fed to you than the pile of crap you were being force fed before.... I think that wraps it up for me, talk to you guys later.

nice and indirect way to say that we have issues I don't do graffiti personally, though. I like to think about what people drives to do what they do, it is a kind of yoga. this applies to everyone, even the most murderous people, even if it is quite (to make an understatement) hard to imagine sometimes.
I can see your point though, living in a city one is being force fed a lot of crap. there's always many ways to see something.

 

[ararat]

I figured that it wasn't meant the way it was written, don't worry about it.

 

[IJesusChrist]

So people who like graffiti are weird or have issues, got it! Thanks for that clarification Emile. Makes sense because you know all the people who do graffiti, and are apparently well rounded in the area, so thanks for speaking for us.

To begin on property rights! This will never, ever be agreed upon, but this will make you think. Actually, no I take that back, it should make you think - but no promises.

Most of us are probably aware or remember from our childhood teachings that Native Americans did not believe in property rights. They believed in use of a certain area meant the user had claim there, i.e. "I hunt here - you can't, it is mine", "I farm here, do not farm here, it is my tilled land."

Basically, they believed that if they interacted with the landscape, it was theirs. However, to not glorify the Native Americans too much, they too became engulfed in wars over land and hunting grounds. None of us humans are perfect. But to take their idea into this century would seem catastrophic. Impossible. The thousands of houses, cabins, apartments that go unattended for months due to the wealthy owning many homes is ridiculous to me. The thousands of abandoned buildings that are no longer in use, yet still claim they are "owned" by somebody with a receipt. The thousands of industrial buildings, in which the workers or owners never bothered to look at the outside, instead leaving it a large blank slab of ugliness that most of us don't even realize how dull it truly is. So common is that white, large building that we have no idea what goes on inside, nor does it sit with any character, artistry, or creativity that it saddens some [me].

Yet, even the outside of such a building, which imposes such a dullness and painful boring tinge of white, is 'owned' by somebody. Why? Because he bought this building. He paid money to purchase a building to house his business - yet the exterior has no means of communication, purpose, or expression. It keeps the wind and rain out and that is it.

Yet! When a [asshole] writer comes in and places a tag, anything from a beautiful mural to a simply handy, the owned becomes shocked! Dismayed! How DARE this stupid asshole little kid write on my wall.

*Due to the extremity of my view - I would like to clear this out first - I would not use this to defend my painting habits. This would be foolish not due to the reasoning, but because no one in the united states with a business or a concrete wall would ever, EVER agree with this. But I will go on.

This person, with the high walls, the dull paint, and the absence of imagination has done damage to me. These lines of white and tan and brown and sand that poka-dot many neighborhoods disgust me. I honestly get sickened when driving on the freeway due to the awareness that they are there, a feat many americans have drowned out from their senses. These walls are not used. They are not interacted with. They are stagnant sores on a once-beautiful organic landscape, now protruding with these cancerous machine houses.

Yet, when I see a writer's name, I can identify. Since I've been there, I agree. I endorse. I like. I enjoy. I think. I wonder. My brain is stimulated - "who was he?" "how long ago was that?" "I wonder where he is now?" "holy shit that one was ugly!" "holy shit that one was amazing!" He now owns that wall. He has used that facade. It is his now in my eyes. He owns that wall - but that will not get anywhere in the US. You need a receipt and documentation.

I DO TAKE THIS VIEW TO PERSONAL PROPERTY. I highly doubt any of you will agree with the extremism here, but I need to say it to clarify things;

The house you live in, how many colors does it contain on it's skin? 2? 3? 4? Great! You are like every other house, replicating what seems like an absolute necessity to paint your house exactly like your neighbor, but to change the color. Why is this so common? Why are houses not often reflections of the people inside?

Because people don't own the outside of their house. They believe that those viewing it do. They believe that it is in the interest of the majority that pass by the house to respect and understand the outside of that house. So, if a graffiti writer was ever intelligent enough to hit a house with a beautiful color scheme I would have nothing against it.

Why is this so uncommon to have art displayed on a house? The same god damn fucking reason people believe graffiti is a crime. It's been instilled in us since birth, and some of us would call it brain washing, but I would refrain from such a term.

Beyond that, to clear up more in the realm of which you seem very ignorant in (no offense, I'm sure you'll agree) Emile, real writers do not hit houses, cars, or places that deserve respect. Places like schools, churches, and community centers are not places that writers often hit. If they do two things are possibly occuring;
1. the person is about 13, 14, 15 years old and is not an actual graffiti writer, they got their hands on some paint and are just going crazy.
2. The writer is what we call a 'Toy' - like IllegalSmile said. Meaning he is not respected in the graffiti community, and will often be pushed or banished from most graffiti spots. It is never smart to spray paint things other than white walls on businesses/industries/government + city buildings. But it does happen.

I would like anyone who isn't well versed in graffiti to go around their town and try to pick out one name. Follow that name, see how many times it shows up and where. You will see that someone who has some kind of style is often not seen on places you would respect.

And Banana = about the guy who writes luxury. There is a man in here in LA that writes Oiler or OIL and he hits everything. They have no intention of art, they are there for the ego and the fame, which I can understand but do not agree with or necessarily identify with. It is yet another subculture of graffiti.

 

[ophiuchus]

So any talk that people welcome it and like to have it around is just fantasy in my opinion.

mmm, dunno about that. you're definitely leaking personal bias when you say it's "bad" in that paragraph i quoted. the younger generations really don't have problems with this sort of thing for the most part, not to imply that you're out of touch, but i believe that you may be out of touch with the younger generations.

personally, i welcome it. i wouldn't mind if people did graffiti on my house. i would give permission, and put a disclaimer on the windows, that's it. as long as it's not interfering with the function, the usability of an object, so long as something is not ruined, i can see out my window, then imo, there is no problem. it is up to the viewer to dislike it or like it, just as i disapprove of many advertisements that i am forced to witness. it's our right. and it's your right to not like it(graff) as well. and i don't mean it's ones right, as in, it's included in ones list of rights, i mean it's ones right, because it is possible . anything that is possible is ones right to do, it is simply the way of the universe. trying to control reality in such ways as to take steps to go against these things, and take it personally when it doesn't work, and become irritated or upset over it, claims a (freudian) "anal retentive" trait in that aspect(if you're familiar with that work). it's a lesson that one can either overcome and let go of, or continue to cause oneself unnecessary grief over...

there are bigger issues to focus on in ones experience.

i'd also like to make a distinction here...

wastes of space (what i consider "tagging"):

and nice contributions, beautiful pieces:

these are by totem, but there are many more quality artists out there even better than him

these are just some random ones i found:

whether it's tagging or graffiti, i don't become bothered when i see it. it simply just is. it can't be prevented, not that id want it to be. and so i just let it be, physically, and mentally.

anyone interested in street art should check out this site http://www.woostercollective.com

(edit: dunno why it cut off the red and blue one...)

 

[Crimzen]

i get what you're saying aemillius about the stonework and the graffiti over it but its not like the majority of graffiti is done over the top of something nice, generally speaking its done on plain bland walls and concrete

ijc when you say "Yet! When a [asshole] writer comes in and places a tag, anything from a beautiful mural to a simply handy, the owned becomes shocked! Dismayed! How DARE this stupid asshole little kid write on my wall. "
i think that says it all
its funny that anyone can get upset about someone putting something worth looking at onto something bland and ugly which is never paid any attention in the first place




on a slightly different note
theres this guy who throws up 'sulk' EVERYWHERE around here, he doesn't over do it, just a couple tags per area but somehow he gets everywhere, from 3 different areas i've lived in, to the city which is about 40 minutes from my place to the buses i've ridden on and in completely separate distant suburbs
this guy must just drive around the state and stop every 10 minutes, get out, tag and then drive on

 

[IJesusChrist]

I would compare graffiti to advertisement simply in that they are made for public viewing. Beyond that the entire paradigms that push their creation are at complete opposite ends of the philosophical and political spectra.

Don't try to put advertising capitalists and artists in the same box. You're squeezing these two ideas into very small confines, and neither deserves that.

 

[Illegalsmile]

also advertisers pay for permission so it really gets people angry when someone does it for free. and alot of writers eventually become advertisers cause they need a career at some point. some people like SEEN from new york became a tattoo artist.

and graffiti is site specific art. if you took it off the wall it is no longer the same. so it is impossible to achieve the same effect by hanging a canvas next to the wall and painting on the canvas.

 

[IJesusChrist]

This is my nation's favorite art:

I'm not from here, but due to the popularity of the color, I would most certainly not be wrong in assuming that the majority really enjoys this color scheme. Right?

 

[Illegalsmile]

a big part of the whole thing is to make people see it,

not all graffiti artists have the same goal, some want to be famous, some want to cause thought in the population. so they dont all plan their locations based on how many people will see it like advertisements.

writers could also choose a location to mark dangerous areas or chill spots to paint for other graffiti writers. sometimes it is a place where someone died and there is a mural for them. even artistically, a canvas would not have the same effect because of texture (brick, wood, glass, there are different looks for different surfaces), color, lighting, motion, pretty much every visual element could be changed depending what it's painted on.

in my opinion, the best graffiti is the stuff you have to look for like a canal tunnel that is normally full with water. ive seen great art under school desks where no one would think to look.

were the egyptians graffiti writers OR advertisers when they built pyramids? what about the people who carved mt. Rushmore? there are many reasons someone would choose to alter their surroundings for others to see. probably too many to explain

 

[IJesusChrist]

Emile, whether you realize it or not you have just put graffiti writers and advertisers in the same box. Whether you directly say it or not it is implied.

good work!

And welcome to my world. White walls are abound. Every corner, every block, every mini mall.

And you're right, I don't know what the population wants. But I make the assumption they'd rather see color. If you think that is a bold assumption, then you are an ostrich. :wink:

 

[IJesusChrist]

LETS TEST MY HYPOTHESIS!

or

I like the second, how bout you?

or

or

or

?

NOW, I will say I would like these to remain untouched:

and plenty of others. Being that a good number of buildings and construction areas are aesthetically pleasing. The places that aren't , however, I would love to paint. If you want to see gray buildings everywhere, I've got news for you Emile, you are a very, very small part of the population. Much smaller than the graffiti community.