|
Graffiti Fine Art? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| PivotTechno |
Sure it is - otherwise you're just tilting at imaginary windmills.
Let me guess, you live in the 'burbs and no one has ever tagged the side of your house, right?
You live in a large metropolitan centre, you're going to have graffiti. You live anywhere where a large number of kids have little to do and lots of time on their hands and you're going to have graffiti.
So, the obvious solution is to get rid of the cities and the kids - viola, no more hypothetical tags on the side of your house! |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
Sure it is - otherwise you're just tilting at imaginary windmills.
Let me guess, you live in the 'burbs and no one has ever tagged the side of your house, right?
You live in a large metropolitan centre, you're going to have graffiti. You live anywhere where a large number of kids have little to do and lots of time on their hands and you're going to have graffiti.
So, the obvious solution is to get rid of the cities and the kids - viola, no more hypothetical tags on the side of your house! |
So because someone lives in a large metropolitan centre and the kids have nothing to do that gives them the right to destroy someones property?
The solution is to enforce the law to the highest level and make examples out of these punks. |
|
|
| EarnYourKeep |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
So because someone lives in a large metropolitan centre and the kids have nothing to do that gives them the right to destroy someones property?
The solution is to enforce the law to the highest level and make examples out of these punks. |
so the chalk lines on your sidewalk isn't the same as the paint on your wooden fence? both can equally be rid of and both are equal expressions of art, in the same right why aren't the children arrested and made example of for drawing in chalk on the sidewalk as the spray paint on a fence
it's retarded to deliberate this especially if we want to talk about 'FINE ART' and bringing the law in to justify it is even more ironic because like i said...FINE ART comes with a price tag, the price tag is judged by the value of the name, the name's value is only increased by it's legitimacy and the legitimacy is only proven by the work done to create the legacy
If you saw the video, Sao Paolo is a major metropolitan city with art all over why even mention the fact that vandals should feel the brunt of the law, no need to straddle the political fence on this one maybe we just need to actually open up to it instead of shunning by governing body...kinda like how we realize the war on drugs is failing |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by EarnYourKeep
so the chalk lines on your sidewalk isn't the same as the paint on your wooden fence? both can equally be rid of and both are equal expressions of art, in the same right why aren't the children arrested and made example of for drawing in chalk on the sidewalk as the spray paint on a fence |
There are fundamental differences between the chalk and paint examples... the chalk washes off and/or wears off in little time with no costs and on it's own; paint does not. In order to equate the two the paint would need to be such that it had a finite lifespan of hours to days at the very most. Additionally, the side walk is property of the municipality, failure on their part to enact legislation prohibiting the use of chalk on the sidewalk or procecuting those that break those laws (if they exist) is tacit permission; however, the fence is property of an individual from whom one would need to secure permission in advance to paint in order to avoid violation of any applicable laws.
Don't get me wrong here; I respect the artistic expression; however, if the artist does not own the medium being used to carry the art or has not secured the owners permission to use same then it is vandalism (irrespective of any artistic merit it may have). |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
Sure it is - otherwise you're just tilting at imaginary windmills.
Let me guess, you live in the 'burbs and no one has ever tagged the side of your house, right?
You live in a large metropolitan centre, you're going to have graffiti. You live anywhere where a large number of kids have little to do and lots of time on their hands and you're going to have graffiti. |
Wait... so what you're arguing is that because something is probable to happen we should just accept it as being permissable? It's probable that people will be murdered... I suppose we should stop enforcing that whole prohibition on homocide. |
|
|
| netroM |
| quote: | Originally posted by EarnYourKeep
yet you go to the movies and queue up to see the release of Exit Through The Gift Shop because it's cool |
I bought the DVD.
It came with "Special 2D Viewing Glasses"
Instructions on them said: Put on glasses, turn on movie, look outside the window.
Fun glasses. Especially in complete dark with only one bright light source. Or a mobile phone :D |
|
|
| PivotTechno |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Wait... so what you're arguing is that because something is probable to happen we should just accept it as being permissable? It's probable that people will be murdered... I suppose we should stop enforcing that whole prohibition on homocide. |
Wonderful leap of illogic, right there - how big do the springs need to be on your boots to make the jump from graffiti to murder in the first? |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
Wondeful leap of illogic, right there - how big do the springs need to be on your boots to make the leap from graffiti to murder in the first? |
I don't see anything illogical with that. I think your initial argument that graffiti is going to happen so just accept it is illogical. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
Wonderful leap of illogic, right there - how big do the springs need to be on your boots to make the jump from graffiti to murder in the first? |
Your argument was that if something is probable then it should simply be accepted... my retort is simply an extropolation of your argument. Just because something is likely to happen does not mean it should be accepted. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
I love street art. I love the seditious nature of it, even - that's sort of the point, is that you're making a statement to throw in everybody's faces much in the same way we are assaulted with advertising by people who shell out big money for it. Mass advertising strips away people's decision to see it - sure, they went through all the appropriate channels, but it still really undermines the sovereignty of individuals, much in the same way that tagging undermines the sovereignty of supposedly faceless corporations.
That being said, if I were a small business owner who paid for a billboard or other sign of some sort, and some heel decided it'd be neat for him to scratch his name all over it. Well, all that idealism. BRING ME THE BLOOD OF PUNKS. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
I love street art. I love the seditious nature of it, even - that's sort of the point, is that you're making a statement to throw in everybody's faces much in the same way we are assaulted with advertising by people who shell out big money for it. Mass advertising strips away people's decision to see it - sure, they went through all the appropriate channels, but it still really undermines the sovereignty of individuals, much in the same way that tagging undermines the sovereignty of supposedly faceless corporations.
That being said, if I were a small business owner who paid for a billboard or other sign of some sort, and some heel decided it'd be neat for him to scratch his name all over it. Well, all that idealism. BRING ME THE BLOOD OF PUNKS. |
Everyone keeps talking about corporations like those are the evil people here. The funny thing is how many times do you see graffiti on a big corporation's building...never. Its usually on the side of older buildings owned by small business individuals or property owned by the city. Defacing these peoples property only hurts these already struggling businesses because they have to pay to have it removed....which can cost is the thousands of dollars if you want to do it right. Also, as a tax payer I don't think its right that I have to pay for the city to remove this graffiti from city owned property. These individuals need to be held accountable and forced to pay the hundred of thousands of dollars cities spend removing this so called art. |
|
|
| EarnYourKeep |
| sometimes you have to just realize that peoples perspectives are sheltered and not even begin to dig into the wrongs and just accept that they've had limited exposure |
|
|
|
|
