G i totally agree although blinding them perhaps a little extreme
making them clean it off would be a far more useful and effective way of punishing them/ teaching them the error of their ways
It's all crap. If you want to spray on the wall buy your own wall.
---
[img] 
[/img]
I've yet to see any graffiti that improved the place.
You haven't been looking!
[img] 
[/img]
the stw old codger count is ticking away.....
[img] 
[/img]
oops double post
You haven't been looking!
While I agree I dont actively hunt graffiti, I do notice things. And I notice that image is a mess. Did they leave a class of 5 year olds with a can of paint and some stencils nearby?
Don't worry, it's gone now. It's a big improvement, I'm sure you'll agree. 😥
[img] 
[/img]
The best graffiti I've seen and sticks in my mind is:
In Shirehampton, Bristol (Poor Area)
"Cop's is ****er's"
In Stoke Bishop, Bristol (Rich Area)
"It's a fair cop but society is to blame."
The irony I like is that they've both sprayed on the wall.
Damn, those building renovations are definitely better than the image. But in all seriousness, you cant keep a straight face and compare a building being worked on to a finished piece of artwork, can you? Mind you, mid-construction of this I thought it looked amazing:
[img] 
[/img]
I think that looks like a hideous corporate legionella-breeding phallus. At least graf can easily be scrubbed off or painted over - something like that building will sit there for decades, looking shabbier each year, until it's no longer economical and someone comes along and dynamites it. Each to their own though eh? 🙂
lol...[img] .jpg)
[/img]
Its actually a very well thought out and designed building, and it looks lovely to my eyes! Fortnately the owner OWNS the land on which it stands and has the right to put it there 😉
Ha! I'm sure building a luxury hotel in the middle of a godforsaken desert like Dubai is the most well thought-out, sustainable thing you can do. 🙄
Just one more example for the "all graffiti is vandalism" types. I'm not sure this did anything to brighten up the place where it was made, but it's cleverly done and very creepy:
http://www.blublu.org/sito/video/muto.htm
Before they built that gorgeous car park so that everybody can drive to Cabot Circus, there was always something clever painted on the billboards at the end of the M32. My favourite was a L'Oreal "Because You're Worth It" ad where they'd sprayed over the "It" and substituted "experimenting on and killing thousands of animals every year" (or something to that effect).
The bit of the Bath Road between Temple Meads and the three lamps is always good for a bit of billboard re-decorating.
I love graffiti. I like the fact that people are changing their environment to suit them, the fact that it reflects people who live there, warts and all. I like the fact that stuff like the daubings below reminds us that life goes on, changes, but still has its roots in the past.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3410/3525907237_56f1677bb5.jp g" target="_blank">
The streets of most cities are far more interesting than a portrait gallery. Why look at a flattering picture of someone who died a couple of centuries ago when you can see the still-warm leftovers of what's going on around you?
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3540/3302292580_0a5d24f71e.jp g" target="_blank">
Whoa Berlin is proper smashed, reminds me of Manchester 86-89 everywhere was tagged up, buses hammered.
Anyway love the old wild-style and london style, nowadays its all crappy stencils and street-art and 'proper' graffiti is a long faded away scene for all but the original 80's guys still doing stuff in their late 30's/early 40's.
I would have loved to been growing up in NY in the early 70's to witness the subways getting nailed.
I would have loved to been growing up in NY in the early 70's to witness the subways getting nailed.
I can't think of many worse places to be than NY in the 70s! But yeah, it would be amazing to see all this stuff appear for the first time.
Bez - Good work there.
I have no idea if Bez is being serious or not. But then I guess if he can find beauty and interest in surroundings that most of us would deem ugly, then it's no bad thing...
erm - i take it your irony filter is on Mr_A try pressing CTRL and F7 i think that turns it off.
The way i see it (graffiti - i'm not too cool for school so i will use that word) it is, like many things, an expression, much of it is too far removed from art to call it that, but it's an expression never the less. Music is also an expression - painting on walls and making noise, either singing, making music etc has been around since year dot. The way i read it thou is that if i were blind and wandered round and the graffiti made noise then Mr_a's birds on wall picture might be a cheery busker, (not too offensive, i'll chuck him a quid, he can play a couple of nice tunes) Banksy's early Bristol stuff might be some White middle class dropout with psudeo-dreads playing old levellers songs and a few of his own chucked in - that guy who used to stick up those A4 letters spelling out poorly informed political commentry on bill boards around Bristol would be a drunk tramp playing a mouth organ and harrassing you for 'spare change' and Bez's war memorial taggers would be a couple of drunk morons kicking a metal bin around outside your bedroom window at 4 in the morning.
None of these 'musicians' will get any radio airplay (except Bansky - who gets a record deal and cleans up) and they won't play wembly standium - there is a reason for that - most people wouldn't want to here it, let alone buy a ticket. So my gripe is, why the hell should minority inflict their 'expressions' on everyone else, it's just plain selfish.
I can't see how coffeeking can find the birds mural, and it [i]Is[/i] a mural, a mess. It was a lovely, cheerful piece of art that brightened up a rather dowdy building. Someone above said that much is far removed from art. Really? You don't appear to visit many exhibits of varied modern art, otherwise you'd know that 'art' covers an extraordinarily wide range of subjects, that happily includes grafitti. Pay a visit to the RA Summer Exhibition sometime. Most 'taggers' are just illiterate idiots, but a well executed, well positioned tag will make me stop and look, as will quality spraycan work. I've got a fantastic book on Japanese grafitti, and it's truly breathtaking. That train photographed above is a stunning piece of work, and I think it's clear when a piece is intended to be appreciated as an artwork by its creator, and when it's just someone spitefully defacing someone's property.
Or maybe it's just me.
Oh, and I support RB's original point in his OP.
Someone above said that much is far removed from art. Really? You don't appear to visit many exhibits of varied modern art, otherwise you'd know that 'art' covers an extraordinarily wide range of subjects
Maybe not recently - but my wife was a professional artist for many years and we met whilst at Goldsmiths, so i've had my finger in the art pudding before - And i stick by what i said the [b]vast[/b] majority of it is jsut plain rubbish. Yes there are some very good pieces, but why should the vast majority of folk have to look at something they just don't want to see, i don't go rounding people up in a bus, drive them to a hideous stadium venue and make them sit through a Cher concert do I? (refering to my music analogy again).
[i]I have no idea if Bez is being serious or not. But then I guess if he can find beauty and interest in surroundings that most of us would deem ugly, then it's no bad thing... [/i]
Deadly serious. Without graffiti the plaque would just be a relic. Without the layers of posters the shop front would just be a plain surface.
We all ride bikes, right? We all dig scars, right? Scars tell stories. At the other end of things you have glossy magazines with airbrushed, Photoshopped skin. What story does that tell? Nothing, it just hides things.
[i]Bez's war memorial taggers would be a couple of drunk morons kicking a metal bin around outside your bedroom window at 4 in the morning.[/i]
No, that's an engraved Roman plaque on an amphitheatre and most if not all of the graffiti are not tags but people writing their sweethearts' names - note "ti amo" in the middle. So in this case they're not drunk morons, they're average Italian teenagers drunk on love and escaping the crowded family house for some stolen moments. "Ti amo" seems to be the most common graffito in that area - in fact apart from a few gang stencils as you move into Naples it's all astoundingly joyous stuff.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3344/3525932581_b036732f29_m.jp g" target="_blank">
Isn't that great to have in your streets?
And the fly posters? That'll be the local hot-shot priests.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3387/3526741546_d513beb9ca_m.jp g" target="_blank">
All of which of course you'd miss completely if you take the blinkered view that anything that doesn't resemble a Turner painting can't be good and anyone who scrawls or airbrushes in public is disillusioned, or malevolent, or a drunken yob. But for good or bad it reflects what's going on around you. It fascinates me - it's real stuff. I end up wandering off round back streets whenever I visit anywhere, and don't forget of course that unlike most tidy and sanitised art galleries, it's free 🙂
Where's the harm in the whole urban environment being a living work of art? It is after all a work of science, of engineering, of geography and politics - why can't it be a work of art as well?
Saboteurcherie and ernie_lynch are having a day off then
Where's the yawn smiley
*Edit* Its Bez now
Where's the yawn smile again
Sorry Mr_a you were right! I just could not believe anyone could be serious! Bez your an idiot.
Or just a Troll.
[i]Bez your an idiot.[/i]
What is it that makes me an idiot?
And by the way, no, I'm not trolling, otherwise I wouldn't have a Flickr photostream where half my photos of any European cities I've been to are of the graffiti there.
I even think - occasionally - tagging can look good. Or at least interesting.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3101/2651296202_a9181567e3.jp g" target="_blank">
""What is it that makes me an idiot?""
I just spent 5 minutes writting a reply, read through it, and realized that you (if you are not trolling) just wouldn't get it. 🙄
I think I'd probably 'get it'. But then I think I'm not an idiot. (Edited - just noticed I misinterpreted one of your earlier comments.)
In any case, why's it pointless posting your reply if I'm not trolling? Surely it would be pointless if I [i]were[/i]...? 😐
Tagging is just calligraphy by another name. When it's done well, it looks amazing. Check out the guy writing his tag on a pillar at 2:30:
Shoefiti, your graf/busking comparison is flawed. I've yet to see a writer who put a hat at the bottom of his piece and expected people to put money in it. Most buskers make me want to stab them in the face.
I did not say that they were - it was an analogy, in terms of likening bad tagging to art. A cat sprays urine to mark where it's been and it's territory, your average tagger is doing something akin to this, it is not so much telling us of some multifaceted multi layered society that adds colour to our own lives and gives us a sense of place. It should however remind us of our need to be able to create and express ourselves and impress ourselves upon the world in a way that sets humans apart from animals. Failure to understand this, to me, makes you an idiot.
Most buskers make me want to stab them in the face
I on the other hand quite like them. Especially a good Saxophonists on the underground. And if you think that Grafitti is enirely altruistic then i'll have to disagree with you on that point too. 😆
[i]I did not say that they were - it was an analogy, in terms of likening bad tagging to art.[/i]
Yeah, sorry, I misread your earlier post and while you were writing that I edited mine to reflect the misunderstanding so now it looks a bit of a hodge-podge - my bad 🙂
[i]A cat sprays urine to mark where it's been and it's territory, your average tagger is doing something akin to this, it is not so much telling us of some multifaceted multi layered society that adds colour to our own lives and gives us a sense of place. It should however remind us of our need to be able to create and express ourselves and impress ourselves upon the world in a way that sets humans away from animals. Failure to understand this, to me, makes you an idiot.[/i]
Well it would, but I do understand that. Furthermore I agree. Tagging is every bit like cats spraying. Whether or not to be overly concerned by the desire to 'elevate' all of society beyond that level is a subjective thing, and to be honest not one I feel strongly about either way unless it's manifested in violence or oppression. I do understand this, I get it. So we hopefully agree I'm not an idiot 😉
But as you say, all these visual artifacts tell us something - however small - about the world (not just the space, but the time) we inhabit together. And my point, or at least my opinion, is this: that it's perfectly possible to find beauty in [i]the simple fact that it's interesting[/i].
Looking 'nice' isn't usually interesting, but it can be beautiful. And interesting stuff often doesn't look nice, but it can still be beautiful. And even if it's not beautiful, being interesting is still an improvement on most stuff in towns 🙂
""But as you say, all these visual artifacts tell us something - however small - about the world (not just the space, but the time) we inhabit together. And my point, or at least my opinion, is this: that it's perfectly possible to find beauty in the simple fact that it's interesting.""
On that i agree with you. Yes it is possible to find beauty in fact that it is interesting. The world would be a very boring place indeed if we all found the same things intersting and beutiful, and being force fed sanitised images of stereotypes isn't healthy.
I live in the countryside now, I also did for a time when i was young. To many this was a place of beauty, i found it claustrophobic and opressive as it was all around me. This i now feel about much of the tagging in urban areas, it's all around you, and i find it oppressive, it ceases to be interesting (to me!) due to it's prevalence.
I'm wholely in agreement with shoefitis busking analogy, only I think my cut-off between acceptable and ****ing annoying is very much away from the busker end. I find the stuff Bez is posting is a disgraceful mess that truly degrades cities and towns.
And going back to Mr_A's point about the building, sure it's not "sustainable" but people LIVE in that desert and people holiday there, the building is created with great inginuity to make good use of the available energy and the structure is full of simple and clever creations such as harmonic dampers to reduce wind-induced sway etc. I find beauty in that creation and application of the technology to solve a problem. I guess its my "Banksy" and most normal houses and car parks are your average street graffiti. But then my view of the building is not "tainted" by its use or its intention, I enjoy it for what it is, not what it is trying to say. Likewise with the graffiti, I see it as a mess (99 times out of 100) and really dont give a crap about the underlying obvious political commentary and questions. Some may say art should raise these questions, I do not believe it adds anything - I can and do discuss the political comments with colleagues daily without the need for someone to present it in a scabby painting as if no-one ever thought about it before and they need it painting on a wall to get it.
go paint.
I'm with CountZero.
There are some real fuddy-duddies on this site. 🙄
I find the stuff Bez is posting is a disgraceful mess that truly degrades cities and towns.
Oh dear lord. I bet the naysayers here think that modern art is all Damien Hirst-style rubbish, music isn't "proper" unless it's made by white people with guitars, and if their kid drew them a picture they'd screw up their face and say "Yes, well done, but if I'm being honest it looks a bit shit". 😉
Oh dear lord. I bet the naysayers here think that modern art is all Damien Hirst-style rubbish, music isn't "proper" unless it's made by white people with guitars, and if their kid drew them a picture they'd screw up their face and say "Yes, well done, but if I'm being honest it looks a bit shit".
Did you actually LOOK at the mess he posted?
Most modern art I find a bit overly abstract and having chatted to a few over beers (modern artists,not art!) I/we concluded that at least 50% of them just bluff the explanation of the work and just make whatever random tat comes into their heads.
I've no idea why you'd think my music taste would only include white men with geeeeetarrhhs, though I do like some music produced by white men with them, there is a lot of crap that out there, I dont care who makes it. And no, if my kid gave me something I'd be impressed, but since none of the above seems beyond the level of a kids capabilities yet is being done by adults I conclude it's tat. 😀
Im not keen on modern "art" and prefer music with a tune and meaning to its lyrics instead of an incessant beat and inane pointless lyrics, however that doesnt make me *wrong* in any way, it simply means I dont value the stuff you seem to like. None of that has anything to do with graffiti, an illegal and mostly ugly blight on the streets. Apart from anything, the "good" graffiti encourages little scrotes to have a go on every other wall in the area, leading to a total mess in very little time. People need to think of the consequences of their actions.
LOL!
Kid comes home, all excited and proud of their latest painting, parent looks at it, screws it up and throws it in bin. Kid is traumatised, and never succeeds at anything... 🙁
Some inertesting onions, and I think Bez has posted some of the most insightful and intelligent comments of anyone.
Im not keen on modern "art" and prefer music with a tune and meaning to its lyrics instead of an incessant beat and inane pointless lyrics,
In other words, guilty as charged. 😉
[i]at least 50% of them just bluff the explanation of the work[/i]
But does that matter?
A perfectly valid purpose of art (or indeed anything) is to make other people, the observers, talk. A lot of modern art is intended purely for that reason.
Inevitably, the artist creates something and then just releases it into the wild. What happens to it from that point is out of their control. The meaning the artist chooses to give it is worthless - it's the meaning that the viewer brings to it that's of value, regardless of whether they've been given guidance from the artist or a critic, and equally regardless of whether they've accepted that guidance.
The problem with being dismissive of modern art, of course, is that it equates to saying that the viewer needs to be fed a digestible lump of something. It's a lazy approach where all of the meaning has to be expressed by the artist. Bringing your own thoughts and ideas to something that's at least in part vague or abstract is an important part of the process. And the more you can put in, the more it can affect you.
[i]People need to think of the consequences of their actions.[/i]
Couldn't agree more. And the consequence of graffiti is almost entirely the act of distressing some very conservative people. Which I think is an utterly commendable end 🙂
The act of imprisoning these [strike]vandals[/strike] artists is merely performance art 🙂
Bez expresses my opinion far, far more eloquently than I, a iggerant country yokel ever could. Coffeeking just leaves me shaking my head at his narrow, conservative, (with a small c, of course), attitude. His reference to 'modern art' just shows how little he knows about modern art, as the breadth of it covers just about every style, from photorealistic to totally abstract via traditionally figurative. I love work by Gormley, Mack, Hirst, as well as Turner and Constable. And Banksy, and BELX2, Sklawl, Missile, Emar, SCA, Fate, and Shizentomotel. They are all Japanese grafitti artists whose work I would be proud to have on a wall of mine. Check out [i]Graffiti Japan[/i] by Remo Camerota, and broaden your outlook just a little.
Kid comes home, all excited and proud of their latest painting, parent looks at it, screws it up and throws it in bin. Kid is traumatised, and never succeeds at anything...
[img] 
[/img]
First of all, I don't even know what this is. If it's supposed to be a dog, then it's the shittiest dog I've ever seen. F
[img] 
[/img]
Ding Ding! Here comes the shit-mobile. I've never seen a fire truck that needed to be shaved. I would rather be burned to death than be saved by this hairy piece of shit. F
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=irule
LOL @ grumms post, very good - I think the problem with this thread is that now you have a very black/white issue, which of course it isn't. Countzero seems to be a follower of art modern or otherwise. Mr_A seems to just disagree with anyone that displays any amount of white middle classness no matter what there opinion, I'm not sure where this is coming from, maybe he wasn't allowed to stay up and watch The Young Ones when he was 9 and he's taking it out on everyone now? I still can't decide on Bez 😕
Clearly the guy's who sympathise with the graffiti 'artists' should be able to make some distinction between art and vandalism, it really isn't that hard a distinction to make. For example some kids keep scratching some shape, not really sure what it is, hard to tell, into the perspex window of a bus shelter near where i live, this is graffiti by definition, but is it art, no! is it performance art, no - there was no audience, at least i wan't invited. Does it make the place look untidy, in my mind yes. Does it cost money to put right? I'm afraid it does, money which could otherwise be spent on renovating the local park maybe? I for one like art, and if and i am pretty sure that a lot of tagging etc is a social nusiance, not art. I may sound 'white, middle class, fuddy duddy' but i am in my late 30's have a wife, two kids, dogs and a house - what do you suggest i do, start listening to brazilian bongo music, smoking weed and living in a ****in teeppee? Maybe whilst i'm at it i'll 'home school' my kids and knit my self a poncho out of my wifes arm pit hair. Get over yourselves - people are different, and if you want to live in a crap hole so much move to Sao Paolo so you can wax lyrical about it's diverse and colouful culture, rather than sitting in front of your computer in the nicer cities of the UK calling people who quite like the original look of the local bus stops 'fuddyduddys'.
[i]what do you suggest i do, start listening to brazilian bongo music, smoking weed and living in a ****in teeppee[/i]
sound like u could do wif a spliff to me
Yes - drugs and parenthood is a great combination. 🙄
teetotaler then?
I only drink Absinthe, as i find it best to consume a product that gives me the chance of a halucinatory effect, a glass of wine or a beer just won't allow me the degree of visual/auditory distortions necessary for being in a position of responsability. Also i get the wife to mix it with Listerine, in random measures, that way i can be sure that i'll not have a clue of the strength of the drink too! 🙄
Rude, you know very wellwhat you need don't you?
Really? That's nice to know. Never really thought that, meself. I'm a follower of music, and what goes on on this forum, but as for art, well, I just know what I like, not what supposed intellectuals tell me I [i]ought[/i] to like. I go to the Summer Exhibition every year because it's an opportunity to see a wide variety of styles by an equally wide variety of accomplished artists who I would otherwise never get to see in one venue. And have the possibility of purchasing a piece as well. I was brought up in a working-class home, had a Secondary School education, never had an opportunity to go to University, but I was brought up to not have a closed mind to anything, to make my own mind up, regardless of what others with supposedly "superior" intellects might say, be it art, music, religion, whatever. I enjoy well executed grafitti, but abhore mindless vandalism, and if certain people on here see a dicotomy there, then blame my poor education. After fifty-four years I see no point in changing to suit other people's narrow views.Countzero seems to be a follower of art modern or otherwise.
I guess the trouble is Countzero is that a lot of Grafitti, due to it's nature, well executed or otherwise is often in the public domain. Whilst I can appreciate the aesthetic of certain pieces or work, be it actual grafitti, street art, or commissioned work I [i]personally[/i] believe that if the place it is painted belongs to someone, be it an individual, company, public and it is done without permission then it is extreamly arogant. If I want to practise my 'art' (playing the guitar) then I don't drive round the streets with a Tannoy on top of my car blasting out tunes, as by my own admission i'm pretty piss poor and i'm pretty sure it would get people backs up.
I'm sure a lot of the posters in this forum can also appreciate the skill required to do much of the work - and many probably think that quite a bit of it does make the dull streets look more interesting and vibrant. They probably just don't like it being where it detracts, rather than adds to the enviroment.
It's all about context:
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
❓
[i]I still can't decide on Bez[/i]
Good. Decision is the end of the thought process and, given the subject at hand, the whole point is to not stop thinking.
[i]They probably just don't like it being where it detracts, rather than adds to the enviroment.[/i]
That's entirely subjective, though. To my mind expanses of concrete, blank rendered walls and corporate colour schemes and logos detract from the environment.
coffeeking - Member
kimbers, I'm 27 and very definitely not "old fashioned".
Blimey; I hope you mellow out a bit by the time you get to my age, mate (37 and still childish and irresponsible)!
To my mind expanses of concrete, blank rendered walls and corporate colour schemes and logos detract from the environment.
I agree. A blank wall is a blank space, like a blank canvass is. It is not natural, or within our Humanity, to be surrounded by blank spaces. It is praps almost instinctive, to want to fill in a blank space.
Of course, this needs to be done with sensitivity and consideration. Unfortunately, this is virtually impossible to achieve, as it would need someone to oversee operations; this would undoubtedly introduce individual agendae, and therefore be constrictive. And you can't just say 'oh, it's ok to graffiti a boring motorway support, or a warehouse wall'. Because not all motorway supports/walls would be in locations where graffiti is appropriate.
I do object to the amount of public space that is festooned with advertising hoardings. I don't believe the vast majority of adverts add anything to the aesthetic appeal of places. In fact, many are just downright offensive; 'Buy, Consume, Spend'. Obscene. But I have little say over this. Because it is allowed by Law, public spaces are fair game.
Why not have billboards that artists can fill with material of their choice? I know there's an element of 'control', with this, and not all would want to participate, but it would act as a showcase for individual talent and expression.
Question: What is socially more damaging; a bit of graffiti on a railway siding, or an advert objectifying female sexuality, reinforcing ideals and stereotypes?
Good question RudeBoy - one I don't pretend to know the answer to. I like your thinking on the boarding space thing, although i very much doubt it would work, those with real talent might want to 'exhibit' their work, others without much probably wouldn't get much out of it, I don't know, it's not anything i've thought of doing?!? I liked your point also:
""Of course, this needs to be done with sensitivity and consideration. Unfortunately, this is virtually impossible to achieve, as it would need someone to oversee operations; this would undoubtedly introduce individual agendae, and therefore be constrictive.""
I thought along those lines also - but as it is subjective, it would be next to impossible - i guess that is why there is the blanket policy of criminilization, as there are no set parameters of what constitutes art, all 'grafitti' must be criminal? Otherwise you could argue fly tipping was a performance piece, and you were adding to the mise-en-scene of your local beauty spot, if nothing else you have to admire the perseverance of someone that is willing to drive that far with a washing machine and hurl it over a 6 foot wall when the council will pick it up from right outside your house for a fiver! 😉
Graffiti is great, when you compare some graf artists talent to the likes of Tracey Emin and Damien Hirst, they are clearly (excuse the pun) streets ahead.
The amount of people young and old who bang on about Banksy when he's selling chin strokers pieces for thousands, but conveniently forget that he too is a graf artist.
Art is subjective, if its somone who sprays a c0ck on a wall because he thinks it's funny I would say it's vandalism, if it's someone who does this:
[img] 
[/img]
Deserves recognition as an artist.
For me, it brings a bit of colour to drab surroundings and proves to me there are better artists who do it for the love than the artists who spunk on a tent and try to pass it off as art for money.
We were all young once and did different thigs to be creative, some of us just never grew out of it, and thats a good thing
OK. Many people, like myself, obviously enjoy looking at the more 'artistic' side of vandalism.
So lets start a register. If you wish to have your property (house front, garage etc) sprayed, sign up and get put in touch with a local artist.
They get to practice their art and loads of free publicity, you get an original artwork.
Of course, anyone caught spraying where they don't have permission would be used as a mobile deterent themselves:
Sprayed with their own paint and whipped through the streets like a common dog.
Sound fair?
On Rochdale Canal between Tod and Hebden Bridge:
[img] 
?v=0[/img]
This is an old one, gets redone every few months.
Blimey; I hope you mellow out a bit by the time you get to my age
I'm completely mellow matey, just know what my opinions are and stick by them unless presented with a decent argument against, which I haven't seen yet and probably wont because its a personal choice thing. By suggesting I'm not mellow you seem to assume I must be ranting and raving against graffiti - I'm not, I just think its a disgraceful mess and believe it shouldnt be allowed, thats a calm and considered thought. I dont do "non-mellow" - I'm so laid back I might fall off my seat. Likewise, just because my choice of music is not hip-hop and my choice of art isnt meaningless shapes that can be interpreted any way, or can't be interpreted in any sensible way at all, doesn't mean I'm a fuddy duddy old whinge-bag, it just means I value things that seem to be somewhat lacking in a lot of modern "art" (both brush/sculpture and musically).
I'm mildly amused that people can accuse me of being an old man and not seeing the worth of modern art as if I'm somehow blinkered, yet those same people are so blinkered as to think I'm incapable of seeing their point of view and simply disagreeing with it. Just because it's modern and different doesnt make it worth while or worthy of praise or forward thinking in some way. I've considered the points that are raised for it and consider them to be wrong, in my opinion. This isn't an old vs new art thing, I dont like giant wall hangings of tapestry and dislike the latest pop tunes, I simply dislike most modern art sculptures (like those god-damn awful gormley statues at Crosby beach) and dislike most of the grim crap that gets sprayed on walls as "art". What I'm trying to say is just because I dont like the same things as you doesnt mean I'm wrong or old fashioned, simply that I value things not present in a lot of modern art of all kinds. I do like a lot of modern buildings. I have a whole heap of modern CDs. I have a have a whole heap of modern DVDs etc etc.
Some of the above graffiti is indeed vaguely interesting as art, but if they are actually "artists" then they should find the correct route to publicity rather than spray it on walls assuming everyone on the street wants to see it. The ultimate question is would they (do they?) spray the outside of their own house with it? If not, why not? Because it looks shit.
Because it looks shit
😆
Another question might be, how would some people like some 'artists' to redecorate their own living rooms in a manner not of their choosing. Probably not very much i'd imagaine.