Graffiti Images, Art, or Nuisance

[sidewalks]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Seems like a rather ivory tower view of the world. I might agree that there is plenty of great graffiti out there, but its affect on the community is seldom positive. From a 'quality of life' and policing/crime point of view, graffiti is a harbinger of disorder. That might not matter to you as an art enthusiast, but it doesn't sit well with residents who can't walk down their street at night.

 

[yigal]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

The discussion of of the validity of art criticism is interesting, but I'm more interested in the discussion of "Is graffiti a true art form or just vandalism?"

I say art and like all art you have good art and bad art.

I find it extremely upsetting that you guys condone the destruction (yes, that's what it is) of private and public property.

 

[ablarc]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

The discussion of of the validity of art criticism is interesting, but I'm more interested in the discussion of "Is graffiti a true art form or just vandalism?"

I find it extremely upsetting that you guys condone the destruction (yes, that's what it is) of private and public property.

I'm with you, yigal. Graffiti is arrogant, coercive, tyrannical and antisocial --like rape. It appropriates property without permission --like theft.

I seem to recall statler once arguing that bad architecture was worse than bad art because you didn't have the option of ignoring it. Graffiti is like bad architecture in that regard.

If graffitistes are artists, they can demonstrate their seriousness by painting on canvas and trying to persuade a gallery to carry the product. If they're good they're likely to succeed.

But this stuff is vandalism --violence perpetrated against property. No danger whatsoever of throwing out the baby.

 

[Beton Brut]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

If graffitistes are artists, they can demonstrate their seriousness by painting on canvas and trying to persuade a gallery to carry the product. If they're good they're likely to succeed.

That is the story of Jean-Michel Basquiat. Julian Schnabel's 1996 bio-pic is a classic, one of my very favorite films.

Can art be elevated simply by changing its venue? I dunno. You can certainly make lots of money off of it, though -- just ask Shepard Fairey.

Part of the artistry of graffiti is that it requires the artist to take very real risks. You don't just need to be able to paint (quickly, with non-traditional equipment and techniques), you've gotta have balls. You might die (fall, get hit by train) or get locked up. If graffiti artists are given a canvas (real or figurative) and their work can take place in absence of risk, will the work suffer as a result? Someone a lot smarter than me will have to answer that.

I don't condone vandalism. As I've said, the graffiti in my neighborhood is a sign of menace, as it's typically evidence of gang activity. But the part of my brain that loves Hunter S. Thompson, The Sex Pistols, Jackass, and Boogie Down Productions admires the kids back in the 70's, who'd break into the NYC trainyards in the middle of the night with milk crates full of Krylon.

Like KRS One said: "You are not doing hop hop, you are hip hop."

 

[ablarc]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Art is not so important that we should suffer and subsidize these creeps and the harm they do for the rarer-than-hen's-teeth Basquiat that emerges once a decade.

 

[czsz]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

I can't believe the "graffiti is indicative of social decline" argument still has force several years after it became the inspiration for luxury apartment buildings in New York, continues to decorate mansions in Germany (where owners regard the "desecration" as free speech) and continues to pervade neighborhoods that are otherwise stable and gentrified/gentrifying. The correlation is tenuous at best.

As for "is it art?" - this is not a question I have ever been comfortable letting judges, lawyers, or government policymakers answer. Creativity should always be encouraged; let's judge aesthetics after the fact.

 

[briv]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

I suppose whether or not graffiti is art is debatable, but would you agree that it is, unless explicitly solicited, vandalism and the product of anti-social behavior?

Also, I wouldn't consider the fashion sensibilities of wealthy New Yorkers -- a group famous for their cultural peculiarities -- the barometer of anything outside of the insular little bubble they inhabit. The same goes double for rich Germans.

 

[czsz]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

I'm not sure why anyone's "cultural barometer" is more valid than another's. I will say that great art throughout history has been driven by wealthy patronage, and majoritarian notions of what constitutes art have typically been comparatively anti-creative. (Architecture, with its implicit implications for social organization, might be the greatest exception to this rule.)

As for vandalism, we get into tricky territory when we talk about this and how it relates to public property like bridge abutments or retaining walls. As I said above, I'd prefer to encourage creative, open use and then deliberate over whether it belongs. I recall the paint splashes on the Longfellow Bridge a few years ago - there was intense disagreement over whether they constituted legitimate art, but it's unlikely they would have made it past a committee. And here's the rub - while a post facto debate over the worthiness of given art can encompass a vast range of perspectives, a pre-screening process for public art would be implicitly biased toward the more narrowly tailored views of whomever is deemed entitled to decide.

It also seems curious to me that private property owners are allowed to commit what are, in my mind, outrageous aesthetic malfeasances simply because they have the legal and financial power to possess. One must ask why society accords property owners greater rights to contribute to aesthetics in public sight. In light of this somewhat less than obvious position, I see no reason why those who lack the ability to express themselves on their own property (or who do not own property at all) should not be able to contribute to the same extent, and with the same protections, as those who do have property rights.

 

[briv]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

What are the limits of your wait-and-see, let-art-be-art approach? Where would we draw the line? Afterall, as a mode of expression, paint on a flat surface is so 19th century. Wouldn't taking a sledge hammer to the wall be more up to contemporary artistic standards? And I'll bet there's loads of meaning that can be gleaned from the act of, say, hurling a molotov cocktail or stick of dynamite through a window -- assuming no one is hurt, of course.

 

[yigal]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

One must ask why society accords property owners greater rights to contribute to aesthetics in public sight.

*** deleted ***

 

[czsz]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Yigal, thanks for that contribution. Do I have to spell out the fact that I'm talking about public property in capital letters?

What are the limits of your wait-and-see, let-art-be-art approach? Where would we draw the line? Afterall, as a mode of expression, paint on a flat surface is so 19th century. Wouldn't taking a sledge hammer to the wall be more up to contemporary artistic standards? And I'll bet there's loads of meaning that can be gleaned from the act of, say, hurling a molotov cocktail or stick of dynamite through a window -- assuming no one is hurt, of course.

Insofar as public amenities have uses, they're not impacted by paint, but they generally are impacted by wanton destruction. You can argue that passing motorists should just deal with a shocking mural, but not with a collapsed bridge. So, yeah, I would probably stop there.

 

[ablarc]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Art:

Like a roomful of orangutans at typewriters: will one of them write King Lear?

Did Basquiat have to be a vandal before he became an artist or would he have been an artist anyway?

If Basquiat had never come to be, would this have been worth it?

He did come to be ... and was it worth it?

Those folks in the subway: Are they art connoisseurs? Do they just love that Basquiat came out of all this? Did they make the willing sacrifice? Do they think it was a fair deal?

Really, if all that had been a prerequisite for this coming into existence ...

... would even that have been a fair deal?

(Even for us quiche eaters?)




How much should the average joe be asked to endure for the possible glimmer of art?

Ah ... l'art pour l'art!

 

[yigal]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Czsz, I apologize for the inappropriate comment. That said, I disagree with your arguments. You can justify anything using this logic.

 

[czsz]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Note how ablarc's post presumes "art" means high art (i.e. the canon of Western art up to the impressionists), and slanders graffiti by visually associating it with (in the case of the first and second photos) slobby, miserable commuters, and (in the case of the last) with decay, desertion, garbage and filth. We all know this is a poorly constructed argument that owes a lot more to subliminal prejudices than reason.

Can a room full of orangutans write King Lear? No, they'd write something else entirely. One doesn't expect a graffiti artist to reproduce Rembrandt any more than one would expect Mondrian to (I'll spare the forum an exploration of just who ablarc's "orangutans" are).

Juxtapose the subway of the 70s with Jackson Pollack, replace the filthy hallway with a bright and colorful wall (perhaps composed in the form of some social commentary) and the wording of much of his post becomes absurd.

yigal, please explain how my logic "justifies anything".

 

[ablarc]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

You're right, those slobby, miserable commuters should show more respect. They're a disgrace to their surroundings.

 

[yigal]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

czsz, I'm honestly trying to understand your point of view: Do you really think graffiti should be allowed on any public space? Only on places like bridges, train stations etc? My take is that of course if you give the power to decide to a committee of pundits they will make some wrong decisions, but what are you gonna do? You might try to diversify that body of decision makers, but still some good stuff would slip through the cracks. Should we do nothing and wait for the one-in-a-million piece that anyone would want to preserve? I'm yet to see one of those in Boston. I think you would agree yourself that in many cases graffiti is an eyesore. In practice, what do you think should be done about it?

 

[ablarc]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

^ yigal, you better pack it in; we're in over our heads. When dealing with an intellectual, you have to know when to back off.

I'm outta here.

Intellectual

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An intellectual (from the adjective meaning "involving thought and reason") is a person who tries to use his or her intelligence and analytical thinking, either in their profession or for the benefit of personal pursuits.

"Intellectual" can be used to mean, broadly, one of three classifications of human beings:

1. An individual who is deeply involved in abstract erudite ideas and theories.
2. An individual whose profession solely involves the dissemination and/or production of ideas, as opposed to producing products (e.g. a steel worker) or services (e.g. an electrician). For example, lawyers, professors, politicians, entertainers, and scientists.
3. Third, ?cultural intellectuals? are those of notable expertise in culture and the arts, expertise which allows them some cultural authority, which they then use to speak in public on other matters.

Role and failures of intellectuals

Intellectuals have been viewed as a distinct social class, often significantly contributing to the formation and phrasing of ideas as both creators and critics of ideology. Intellectuals as a whole may be thought of as upholding the existing order and broad culture, but some undoubted intellectuals specialize in dissent against the establishment, such as U.S. linguist and writer Noam Chomsky.

In many definitions, intellectuals are perceived as impervious to propaganda, indoctrination, and self-deception. Yet problems arise from the historical response of many intellectuals. It is often questioned how those described as intellectuals actually responded, in the face of repression and crimes committed by the Soviet Union, the Third Reich, and by other regimes of authoritarian-totalitarian ideology. The question invited is: How and why can intellectuals be vulnerable to indoctrination despite their intelligence? In other words, there is a large debate on the fallibilities of intellectuals and their lack of self-criticism, from Julien Benda to Paul Johnson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual

 

[briv]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Insofar as public amenities have uses, they're not impacted by paint, but they generally are impacted by wanton destruction. You can argue that passing motorists should just deal with a shocking mural, but not with a collapsed bridge. So, yeah, I would probably stop there.

Oh, I think there are plenty of public amenities that can absorb a pretty substantial amount of "artful reinterpretation" without becoming structurally unsound or dangerous. For example, the Longfellow Bridge, which you've mentioned in an earlier post, could easily do without its towers, sculptures and decoration and still never be in danger of falling into the Charles. Parks and other public spaces are also chockful of similar non-vital, potential canvases of unbridled expression.

 

[ablarc]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

^ Searchin' for those emoticons.

 

[Suffolk 83]

Re: Pike Pictures (Not Pretty)

Graf is certainly an artform: it's up to you to see through your colored glasses and see the beauty. Of course, seeing beauty in something is individual, but if you can throw your predjustices to the side and see and listen you might find something very interesting.

www.grafitti.org

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCU-qgR_4bM