Jump to content

Graffiti - Art or Pure Vandalism?


john luke
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, john luke said:

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

0B0A2938.jpg

0B0A2941.jpg

The first few are from the John Lennon Wall in Prague and the later were taken in Armley, an inner city suburb of Leeds.

Art or vandalism; what do members think?

 

 

The John Lennon Wall is a statement of discontent with communism and the need for freedom from repression. It became the John Lennon wall after his death in 1980 as he was a symbol of freedom for many. It has been there for many years, probably back to the 70s or earlier. 

The wall is only one wall and is not represented elsewhere in Prague and I don't call it graffiti but messages of hope. Graffiti to me is just a series of smudges, illegible words and ugly painted art that really has no meaning outside of those writing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Major difference in graffiti to Tagging. I see tagging all over London, defacing property and with absolutely No artistic talent. It seemed to increase during Covid lockdown no doubt due to boredom. I hate it and they do it late, at night. 

Some beautiful graffiti around as illustrated in this topic but few and far between in London unfortunately, particularly in inner city areas

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2021 at 1:04 PM, Stillearly said:

I hate tagging , to me that's just mindless vandalism, but I love street art and will look for it on my travels 

I agree.  Tagging is ugly. destructive vandalism but street art in the proper places is an asset for any city.

Before moving to Pattaya in 2011, I lived in Jersey City, NJ, which is directly across the Hudson River from Lower Manhattan in NYC.  Jersey City has had a public art project for a long time, with professional artists paid to paint murals on public property and private buildings (with the owners' consent).  Some of the artwork, such as the 180-foot portrait of David Bowie, has attracted international attention.

Capture2.PNG

The pub;ic art ranges from straight-up graphics:

Capture9.PNG

... and simple childlike illustrations:

Capture11.PNG

to massive, highly complex projects:

 

Capture10.PNG

Capture8.PNG

Capture3.PNG

Capture4.PNG

Capture.PNG

Capture5.PNG

Capture7.PNG

Capture6.PNG

Since 2003, about 200 murals have been painted on buildings, walls, bridges, overpasses, etc. in Jersey City.

Evil

 

  • Like 3
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bazle said:

No one will convince me that this is "art" of any sort. The perpetrators should be punished with hard labour, and I don't mean Diane Abbott!

 

20211012_133543.jpg

The other alternative is to have their own house, or in most circumstances, their parent's houses daubed with graffiti and see how they react. The above is defacing public and private property without consent and therefore a crime. If they daubed paint on their parent's house then they would have hell to pay. 

If they are that talented then they should look for commissions and be paid for it. 

Hundreds of thousands pounds are spent each year spraying public transport livery but nearly as much is spent cleaning off unwanted graffiti or tagging, which most of it is. 

Maybe the culprits should apply for a place in Art college, instead of doing nothing all day and going out with their spray cans in the early hours of the morning defacing property which is not theirs

Graffiti is art, Tagging is vandalism 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...