Graffiti: A pathetic attempt at visibility or Modern Art?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Rome has built a 10 Kilometre stretch of wall to enable Graffiti Artists to express themselves in the hope that they will then leave other Roman buildings and walls alone.

Is this the way forward?

Would you like a similar wall built around East Dulwich, for example?

[Horsebox]

Has the wall been built 'around' Rome?

Are you comparing East Dulwich to Rome?

Anyway, to try answer to your thread title, which is very different to the questions that you pose in the thread, I say both.

Like most things in life (and you, Tony, with your degree of wisdom and knowledge garnered over your many years in south London and beyond, should know this better than anybody)there is good graffiti and there is crap graffiti.

If somebody has an eye for colour, shape, space and depth they can paint something that will potentially look great and brighten up a drab area or create something that has an element of social commentary to it.

Also, if an artist has gone to great lengths to put their piece in a visible but dangerous / risky place then I'd be more impressed with this than a little shit that had just sprayed or etched their tag on a shopfront or bus window, /shutter/wall etc etc.

This last example shows no imagination or talent.

So it's impossible to categorise all graffiti simply as 'crap' or 'not crap'.

[Keef]

Spot on Horsebox. In the 80s especially, you saw some amazing graffiti. These days, it seems to be more of the stupid tags.

[????]

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Spot on Horsebox. In the 80s especially, you saw

> some amazing graffiti. These days, it seems to be

> more of the stupid tags.

Yeah but Keef you're just showing your age as I now will... up until Graffitti 'art' emerged there used to be some great actual sloganised graffitti that was then covered with 'art' in the 1980s....going into Paddington station there used to be this massive "Arise you unwashed proles from infront of your TVs" or something...got covered with shitty graffitti in the 80s. I think that there is still a "George Davis is innocent" somewhere and of course Banksy has moved it beyond the mindless tagging

[red devil]

Human graffiti is no different than animals scent marking their territory...

[Horsebox]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Human graffiti is no different than animals scent

> marking their territory...

Care to expand on this? You don't say whether you think it's a good/bad thing and it's too simplistic to compare graffiti to an animal marking it's territory. Sure, gang signs and names etc are thrown up on Walls but these are rarely of artistic merit.

Can you draw (excuse the pun) no distinction between artists such as d-face (now living in se22 I believe) who has put 3D resin models in the street/ on buildings and which could be still described as graffiti, or Eine, whos 2-tone six-foot letters can be found all over shoreditch shop fronts and under bridges and which bring a real

focal point to some otherwise drab surroundings and which were an antidote to the mindless scrawl which adorned many of the old shops prior to this, and the dripping, mindless postcodes which can be found sprayed all

over estates across London?

(posting from iphone so

apologies

for

formatting, puntuality etc etc)

[red devil]

The OP asked whether graffiti was 'a pathetic attempt at visibility', I think it goes a lot deeper than society's lazy view that all it amounts to is wanton vandalism. Why does it have to be 'a good/bad thing', can it not just 'be'?..

[Horsebox]

Red Devil, I don't understand the point you are trying to make. You say graffiti goes deeper than being wanton vandalism

but then in the next line appear to suggest that 'it is what it is'.

I'm confused by this.

And to be pedantic, the OP asked whether it was 'a pathetic attempt at visibility OR modern art'. You haven't really offered an answer to this question.

[Jeremy]

In answer to the OP... I don't see the harm in providing this area for graffiti. Many people believe it's a valid artform worthy of merit, etc, then why not provide facilities.

Obviously it won't stop mindless vandalism and territorial "tagging" though.

[Brendan]

Bastards the lot of ?em. The odd comedy penis or your mate?s mobile number advertised as an all night sex line I can deal with but why for the love of god do these spray-can wielding prats insist on covering every concrete skatepark from London to Brisbane with their art (and I use the term lightly). Skateboarding is dangerous enough without someone covering the surface you are doing it on with paint giving it about as much grip as wet glass.

They have some kind of misconception that skateboarding is somehow ?street? and ?edgy? and therefore they will be tolerated or even welcomed. Well it?s not and you won?t Mr Graffitist so just piss off and go deface a Tescos or something.

Yours truly,

Grumpy old skateboarder.

[charliecharlie]

Graffiti: A pathetic attempt at visibility or MODERN ART????

as far as I am concerned... there is no question at all....

go to the next Can Festival, see the artists at work, no one with half a brain could be then left asking that same old question!

open your eyes... look around you, see london for what it is, in all its glory, grit and texture... of course there is some inane rubbish... but there is also some amazing art out there, work that bypasses the galleries and uses the street as it's canvass... bloody brilliant

http://www.urban75.org/london/images/brick-lane-09.jpg

http://pinewooddesign.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/banksy/Banksy3.jpg

http://bartosik.org/scrapbook/cans_festival/cans.htm

http://jetcomx.com/2008/05/06/banksys-art-gallery-from-the-cans-festival-in-london/

watch out... I could be inspired become the EDF online visual vandal if this post runs....

http://www.kabe243.com/blog/uploaded_images/this-is-awesome-graffiti-766765.jpg

[KatoTheCat]

HEAR HEAR! charliecharlie. spot on!

graffiti is far from a "pathetic attempt at visibility".

how could it be so when 99.9% of graffiti artists attempt to remain INvisible, and stay "under the radar" so to speak.

look along te train tracks on your way to work, look at that dusty white van on the shopping street corner, look at this art we display with such DISDAIN!

such would not be of picasso, or van gogh, except if they were still alive???

we must not kill off graffiti artists, and/or make them waste their lives away in prison,

if someone cannot draw, do we take away their paper?

such is the way of the so called "pathetic attempt at visibility" it is practice, and the majority of artists will paint over the old works.

[Horsebox]

Eine's Letters - enjoy. I think they're great.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/38/85439592_ffc1361aee.jpg

[Horsebox]

'SCARY' by Eine

http://www.timeout.com/img/41544/image.jpg

[Horsebox]

And anybody taking the 185 in or out of town must have seen this in Camberwell:

Lex and Sten:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3078/2522117837_4602c61418.jpg?v=0

[Horsebox]

Just to add that the jetcomx.com video uses the awesome "atlantis" remix by LTJ Bukem. Ah, memories.... :-)

[charliecharlie]

http://www.artofthestate.co.uk/photos/eine_mash_the_tate.jpg

hey horsebox are you trying to out visual me??? could be pistols (or cans) at dawn...

http://www.weird-websites.info/Graffitti/images/london-street-art-graffitti-mans-head.jpg

and here's one for the doubters

http://www.cpluv.com/www/medias/peterdzign/peterdzign_453c9dabdea21.gif

[charliecharlie]

ps yes... love the camberwell green L&S piece HB, was wondering if anyone else had got it on their 'list'

http://unurth.com/media/42584/sten-lex_milan_1.jpg

like this one too...

[Horsebox]

charliecharlie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> hey horsebox are you trying to out visual me???

> could be pistols (or cans) at dawn...

>

I'll see your pistol and raise you a Boule Noire...Clack!

[red devil]

photo of the world's first graffiti artist...Pugsy

http://www.piffe.com/funanimaux/dog-pee.jpg

[nashoi]

Saw these 2 recently and thought they were worth a photo.

By the way how do you include pictures in the post?

[The Chair]

Flooding the thread with pictures is not engaging in actual debate. Please get back on track or this thread will be lounged.

[Anyone who can handle a needle convincingly can make us see a thread which is not there.

E. H. Gombrich]

[Jeremy]

Awesome pictures, nashoi.

Chair... I disagree. The photos demonstrate artistic merit, i.e. a direct response to the question in the title.

The problem is differentiating the art from the mindless vandalism, it's not always an easy distinction to make - at least not in written terms. How do you define laws which allow art to be created on a garage or along a railway, but at the same time protect historical buildings, people's homes, etc?

[charliecharlie]

Horsebox said

quell cochon! is all I can say to you Horsebox

or should that be 'cochonnet'?

http://www.duncancumming.co.uk/photos/mambo.jpg

touch?!!!!

can we call it a draw HB????

[plimsoul]

i remember heading down to unity in fulham in the 90's. graffiti has been part of my life since the 80's and all the above definitely prove that it is an art form.

however, i think the mistake (sorry tony.london.suburbs) is asking the broad question (i made the same mistake with the thinkers thread). basically, tagging is like animals on heat leaving a mark. but graffiti is not tagging, i think this has to understood before discussing...

a debate that has raged for years in the graff community questions whether once artists commit to canvass can they still be considered graffiti art?

some famous faves of mine (sadly i have no pics on this computer) include delta and she 1. in my mind they represent both art and graffiti.