I'm currently writing an essay for uni and doing it on the graffiti scene in Amsterdam. Having been in Amsterdam at the start of the month it was obvious for me to see there seemed to be a massive graffiti culture, certainly compared to where I stay.

Just interested to see what peoples views are on good graffiti, do you see it as vandalism? Especially anyone from the Netherlands as it seems to be more tolerated over there.

To get the ball rolling, my view on it is that I think cities should embrace it a lot more. I know that some places are sticking boards up for graffiti which is a start but working with graffiti artists cities could look so much more colourful. My nearest city being Aberdeen, the granite city its as a dull as it gets. Everything is gray!

Keiran

Well for a start the people who do it are pretty talented people but when it gets seen as vandalism it must get them down. Some of it does look really good but it has to be in the right places.

Sometimes it's alright. The big blue building there, for example, took some skill and planning. But tagging just so you can see your own name up on something is pathetic and looks crap.

If it's a picture of something and it's done well, I'd much rather see that than a row of peeling posters.

Depends where the graffiti is, I do like it as art unless its just someones name tag. However its still vandalism by definition and they are still defacing other people's/entities properly. I've seen some cool graffiti, but I've also seen some offensive or crude graffiti (such as swastikas, and sexual based ones)

I wouldn't like to own a building and to have it all painted over without my permission.

You opinion is to work with graffiti artists would turn it into a consensual act, and the fact that they would be chosen graffiti artists; the art in particular will be more aimed to please the masses. Which I personally would agree on completely.

i hate taggers (dunno what the rest of the world calls them, but those who just tag a name with a pen/sharp intrument/paint). If it's proper art however, it can enliven an otherwise dull environment.

In general 99% of them are just random texts or penis pictures and most importantly, it's not your property. Doesn't matter if you find nice clean wall boring, it's not yours to "decorate".

How would you feel if someone sprayed graffitti all over your car just because they through paintjob looked boring, that is already happening with tards spraying vans.

Quote from Crommi :

How would you feel if someone sprayed graffitti all over your car just because they through paintjob looked boring, that is already happening with tards spraying vans.

Well I know a few people who "tag" in the above mentioned city, and a few others besides, and oddly enough it doesnt bother them. They've told me that it is a form of self expression, and I think I understand that. It fits in with the way they life their life.

It frustrates me as I do not like tagging myself, but I do really appreciate graffiti. Taggers and graffiti artists are pretty much all the same people, so it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

If given the choice of living with or without graffiti+tagging, i'd live with it, but I really despise either being done to private/residential property.

I'll sign off with a little feel good story for all you grafitti-haters of one tagger I knew about: The police knew who the tagger was but were unable to get any evidence, for years this girl had had a free reign over tagging her local town in the South of England. Until one day an enterprising officer decided to arrest her anyway with no evidence. Upon being asked to sign here, she duly "signed" what would ultimately prove to be her own confession.

Quote from keiran :

Just interested to see what peoples views are on good graffiti, do you see it as vandalism? Especially anyone from the Netherlands as it seems to be more tolerated over there.

It should be vandalism in nature and it should upset some people (that's their purpose), the moment graffiti is treasured and protected like some sort of art form, it is beinge demolished into just another art direction.

we are now seeing graffiti being adopted by marketeers, it's being use to sell running shoes, games, or even cars. It is an unevitable procession, however I think it's up to street artists to invent new form of expression and push the envelope.

so in short, graffitis being wiped out and covered up is no problem to me, they served their purpose in conveying a message in a particular time, in a particular setting, there's no point keeping it.

Better off being destroyed than some stuck up art critics hail it as the new age pop art and make millions off it.

Depends what kind of graffiti.. if it's one's that a hooded youth would do then I'd do without.

If it's some really nice stuff, like as shown... well, all I can say is bring out the spray cans.

how about some hooded youth that happens to be bloody good.

Quote from JJ72 :

how about some hooded youth that happens to be bloody good.

Well, it's the art rather than the person.. perhaps it was a poor analogy to use!

Quote from Becky Rose :

I'll sign off with a little feel good story for all you grafitti-haters of one tagger I knew about: The police knew who the tagger was but were unable to get any evidence, for years this girl had had a free reign over tagging her local town in the South of England. Until one day an enterprising officer decided to arrest her anyway with no evidence. Upon being asked to sign here, she duly "signed" what would ultimately prove to be her own confession.

Once again, my belief in Karma rings true. BTW while reading that feel good story…I couldn’t help but imagine Stephen Fry telling that in a witty response to some question.





I might need help!

Graffitty, as an art, cannot be condemned IMHO. Most of it is pure vandalism though.

Some interesting views!

Quote from JJ72 :

...snip...Better off being destroyed than some stuck up art critics hail it as the new age pop art and make millions off it.

That's a very interesting post, never actually thought about it in that way and I agree. Whilst in Amsterdam I was in graffiti shop which had canvases with graffiti on them and I have to say whilst graphically they were nice it didn't have the same "shock" appeal as it does on the street.

I love it. The 'tagging' side of it I'm not so fond of, but some of the stuff people produce is bloody brilliant, especially the comissioned stuff. There are plenty of 'taggers' in Oxford who just go around doing their tags everywhere, but a few really talented artists who, although where they paint is technically illegal, it doesn't half brighten up the place. There was a very prolific guy in Oxford up until a couple of years back going by the pseudonym of Leash who painted lots of great stuff, a few examples of which I have included below along with some from other artists around Oxford. Oxford does seem a very under-rated scene for graffiti

This is bad: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi ... /b/b9/Graffiti_tags_2.JPG

This is cool: http://www.saynotocrack.com/img/2006_12/graffiti_stairs.jpg

This is good: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/91/232641874_b10a3f1726.jpg

The more artistic and cheery it is, the better. However, stuff like this: http://www.ihes.com/bcn/spanish/images/blog/graffiti.jpg is just a name and a glorified tag surely? The more mural-like the artwork, the better. I know our council let some graffiti artists spray flowers, landscapes, etc... It's very nice, better then the average "charleen luvs jordy 2k9" scrawled on a wall in black permenant marker. And I made those names up btw.

Defacing someone else's property is a crime that isn't legitimized by "tagging it" as art. It is, first and foremost, a crime.

If you stab someone to death, it's murder. If you draw pretty patterns in their blood, it's still murder. To think it's possible to justify the murder, by "tagging it" as art, is simply an exercise in self-delusion, and also an affront to society.

Banksy. The best.

Quote from piggy501 :

This is bad: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi ... /b/b9/Graffiti_tags_2.JPG

This is cool: http://www.saynotocrack.com/img/2006_12/graffiti_stairs.jpg

This is good: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/91/232641874_b10a3f1726.jpg

The more artistic and cheery it is, the better. However, stuff like this: http://www.ihes.com/bcn/spanish/images/blog/graffiti.jpg is just a name and a glorified tag surely? The more mural-like the artwork, the better. I know our council let some graffiti artists spray flowers, landscapes, etc... It's very nice, better then the average "charleen luvs jordy 2k9" scrawled on a wall in black permenant marker. And I made those names up btw.

I agree quite a lot with that. Good graffiti is good, but when it is just "i woz here b4u" and all that shite, it is just ugly. Graffiti can be very artistic and looks brilliant, vandalism on the other hand just makes everywhere look run down.

Although I see nothing wrong with the Amor tag, as the world needs more love (Amor is Latin for love by the way).

Quote from SamH :

Defacing someone else's property is a crime that isn't legitimized by "tagging it" as art. It is, first and foremost, a crime.

If you stab someone to death, it's murder. If you draw pretty patterns in their blood, it's still murder. To think it's possible to justify the murder, by "tagging it" as art, is simply an exercise in self-delusion, and also an affront to society.

It's a long shot at best to compare it in morale to murder. Everyone does things that are illegal, so where is the line drawn?

Some of these graffiti artists are extremely talented, and yes, while most of them are nothing more than dull and uninspiring names of people who "waz 'ere", some of the things that have been shown in this thread are simply amazing. If I woke up and found my house had been graffiti'd in such a way, I'd be over the moon!

To me Graffiti is nothing bad. BUT only if its done normally. I mean in my oppinion proper graffiti almost makes the city a lot more alive/nicer to look at. However stuff like piggy posted:

Quote from piggy501 :

This is bad: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi ... /b/b9/Graffiti_tags_2.JPG

Is crap and peole who do it must be locked up or something.....

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

If I woke up and found my house had been graffiti'd in such a way, I'd be over the moon!

But if I woke up and saw that was done on my house, while nice to look at I will still be very very pissed off.

a) it drags down the value of the house, therefore come re-selling time, I have potentialy about £10,000 missing from the value.

b) who is going to pay to have it cleaned up, the homeowner.

c) would you feel the same if they did the same to your bike/cat/dog/face? (delete were appropriate)

d) it would feel like an atack on your property, the same way that etching a desgin into the paintwork of a car with a pair of keys would be.

Quote from Mackie The Staggie :

But if I woke up and saw that was done on my house, while nice to look at I will still be very very pissed off.

a) it drags down the value of the house, therefore come re-selling time, I have potentialy about £10,000 missing from the value.

b) who is going to pay to have it cleaned up, the homeowner.

c) would you feel the same if they did the same to your bike/cat/dog/face? (delete were appropriate)

d) it would feel like an atack on your property, the same way that etching a desgin into the paintwork of a car with a pair of keys would be.

True, however I believe that if it was nicely done, some people would pay MORE for it.. however this userbase is small and may indeed knock down the sale price for 'normal' people.. If someone graffiti'd my bike in an artistic way, I'd be equally happy. Not only would I have a lovely new paintjob, it wouldn't have cost me anything.. I'd have to draw a line at my Dogs though.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

It's a long shot at best to compare it in morale to murder.

I wasn't comparing two crimes, I was indicating differentiation between crime and art. I used murder as an example because everybody recognises it as a crime. Some people clearly aren't capable of making the basic distinction between graffiti and criminal defacement of private property.

If you bought a Rembrandt for £350K and some arsehole came along and tagged it with graffiti, you'd be pissed off. If you spent £350K on a building and the same arsehole came and did the same thing to that, you'd be just as entitled to be pissed off.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

True, however I believe that if it was nicely done, some people would pay MORE for it.. however this userbase is small and may indeed knock down the sale price for 'normal' people.. If someone graffiti'd my bike in an artistic way, I'd be equally happy. Not only would I have a lovely new paintjob, it wouldn't have cost me anything.. I'd have to draw a line at my Dogs though.

Funny you don't seem to bothered about the face