Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
pelhamlocal

(4) Tagged.....

Recommended Posts

Fair enough.

 

 

 

 

When I refer to graffiti, I am not talking about "street art*", as most people refer to it - I am referring to the atrocities made by a**holes with spray paint cans that are frequently vulgar in nature found on the side of buildings, inside abandoned stations, or on this train.

 

* Great term for distinguishing between said ugly atrocities and paintings worth a damn.

 

 

I have never denied that there can be a**holes in this hobby that take this shit too seriously. But the point is that the main point of this hobby is not to deface public property.

 

 

Hence, my comment about appropriate venues.

 

 

No, the graffiti is disgusting because it's frequently just a bunch of colors smeared across a canvas, with much profanities and a general eyesore, made by worthless little punks who suffer from the delusion that owning a can of spray paint makes them an 'artist'. You can find a lot of this garbage on photos of the NYC Subway from the 1980s, such as here, here, and here. Or just go to the first post for another good example - I could also throw a bunch of colors at a canvas, but that doesn't make me an artist.

 

Some "graffiti" may be in good tastes, but NEVER looks like the shit on the photos I posted above. I don't know about this memorial you speak of, but I would be very shocked if it did mach the nonsense on the train photos.

 

Assuming the 9/11 memorial indeed looks how I am imagining it, is what I would define as street art or a mural, because usually the subject is much more comprehensive and it looks like the artist actually took time to make it look good, instead of just smearing a bunch of colors at a canvas, but if they made the mural without permission I am against it as well. If it was your property, I doubt you'd be so welcoming to it. There are ways people with actual talent can get permission to display their stuff, so there's no excuse.

 

And here is an example of what I refer to as street art:

 

1337912438.jpg

 

Additionally, I am not a fan of all art either - there are some ugly ones I have found on the internet that just look too ugly for my tastes.

 

I would disagree with that. I have already said that I am not against street art and murals, so long as permission is obtained.

 

There was a bylaw in Edmonton passed forcing property owners to clean up graffiti 2 weeks after it first appears, or risk a fine. Penalizing the victims, idiots.

Exactly. In reference to what I highlighted in bold, that's how I see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1337912438.jpg

 

Here's where a double standard can come to play.

 

A "street artist" as you call it, can do this with permission and be called street art.

Loophole, a graffiti artist can do this same exact thing without permission, but now it's called vandalism/graffiti.

 

As I said in another thread, people will have a different understanding/definition/use of words in context.  Like you said, you use street artist, I'm sorry I call everything graffiti artists.  People say "foamers" and seriously I never heard of that term until I've joined here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a difference between legal graffiti art and illegal graffiti art. Graffiti art in itself is a form of art just like renaissance era painting. Of course where it comes to defacing MTA property, it is wrong, and I don't appreciate it. Not arguing that point. But what I don't appreciate on the flip side is the negative references made to a what is fundamental part of classical hip hop culture. The pic posted by TCC, that is stencil graffiti art. Hipsters in NYC uses this style of graffiti art to vandalize as well but that hypocritically is acceptable. While hip hop graffiti art is not even if it is often legally expressed in public gathering places and on the street scene. That's my gripe.

 

Again, nothing beats a clean NTT. Vandalism is illegal, period. Obviously, as a straphanger and an active transit enthusiast also who likes to take photographs I will say so. However I think that graffiti art is not as much a demonized art as these hardcore conservatives may like us to think. Particularly when hipsters use stencil graffiti art to vandalize in the city.

 

Keep in mind that photography in itself is an art. Where it pertains to railfanning, I've always stated that is a form of multimedia art which I enjoy being a part of. Very much so.

 

So the same way it is with graffiti art or the stencil spray paint art TCC was alluding to, which we also see in the city here in New York. In all these are forms of art and there are legal guidelines to follow. No double standards here. Art is art. It's not too hard to understand I would imagine.

Edited by realizm
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A "street artist" as you call it, can do this with permission and be called street art.

Loophole, a graffiti artist can do this same exact thing without permission, but now it's called vandalism/graffiti.

 

I wouldn't refer to it as graffiti, as that would put in mind tagging, which is disgusting and filthy, whereas most murals can have some type of artistic merit.

 

Where the concept of vandalism comes into play however is the idea of respect for the property owners. Nobody wants to wake up one morning and see some illegal painting on the side of their building (especially in a city like Edmonton, for reasons I stated previously), regardless of its artistic merit, even if, had they been consulted before hand, they might just have agreed to put it up. Similarly, some parents may have an objection to you taking out their car without permission, even though, had you consulted before hand with them, they would have agreed.

 

 

 

 

As I said in another thread, people will have a different understanding/definition/use of words in context.  Like you said, you use street artist, I'm sorry I call everything graffiti artists.  People say "foamers" and seriously I never heard of that term until I've joined here.

 

True, true. I guess it all boils down to someone's personal views, though I maintain that street artist is a better term for distinguishing between tagging and the more classy murals and paintings.

 

Hipsters in NYC uses this style of graffiti art to vandalize as well but that hypocritically is acceptable.

 

Well, I don't know all the ins and outs of graffiti types, and just found something which looks nice, so I linked it.

 

If they used the same tools to write some explicit message on the side of a building, I would be against it as well.

 

THANK YOU!!! About time someone has some damn sense!

 

What, being against vandalism means someone lacks sense now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how do these taggers get into the yard to do this? Or how do they catch a train laid up in the tunnel? I kinda question the security or surveillance. In Sunnyside yard there are many cameras and a watchful eye on whats going on in the yard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.