Sheffield Forum
Your message here

Should There Be Legal Areas For Graffiti?

Home > General > General Discussions

Reply To Topic
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
01-02-2007, 22:17   #41
King Rat
Registered User
King Rat's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Total Posts: 1,081
Following on from the last post why not have some consultation with the local community to decide if they think graffiti art would be appropriate for all the bland boring concrete unimaginative walls which blight our cities & towns ?
  Reply With Quote
01-02-2007, 22:20   #42
King Rat
Registered User
King Rat's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Total Posts: 1,081
Also what is wrong with people wanting to express themselves or show their imagination by graffiti art for others to see & appreciate?

Last edited by King Rat; 01-02-2007 at 22:23.
  Reply With Quote
01-02-2007, 22:26   #43
JoeP
A Regular Joe
JoeP's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Dun Moddin'
Total Posts: 14,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by fr8neck View Post
It's not a value judgement: it's an aesthetic judgement- anyone can make one. If only the 'owners' of space had the right to make judgements it would reduce expression to that of corporate entities and the rich, why should we presume that their aesthetic values are 'best' or even acceptable if we don't get to see the alternatives?

The public have every right to decide if they want it or not: if you don't like it paint it over or strip it off.

As for the 'mind space': I don't recall signing away the public spaces of my country to "****" or "McDonalds" or "N-Power" or anyone else so that they might profit by it's uglification.

The entirety of the government owned/built structures has been paid for by the taxes of the public; some portion of that public appreciate the chance to see the works in their proper setting; I don't think it's so outrageous that these views are given some consideration and space for expression.

edit: the auto-thing has stripped out 'ef-see-you-kay': nuff sed!
I would agree about aesthetics - but the argument is exactly the same. You still don't have the right to force your views of art on others. And neither do advertisers - I'm as against advertising hoardings as I am against graffiti, actually. It all screws up the environment.

Government built structures have indeed been paid for by the public, but the point remains - you have no God-given right to impose your idea of art on others. Even if some portion of the public like it, there is still some portion that doesn't. When you deal with things that impact on everyone, you have to get at least soem sort of concensus.
_______
"I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - CG Jung
My homepage : http://www.joepritchard.me.uk
  Reply With Quote
01-02-2007, 22:27   #44
JoeP
A Regular Joe
JoeP's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Dun Moddin'
Total Posts: 14,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Rat View Post
Also what is wrong with people wanting to express themselves or show their imagination by graffiti art for others to see & appreciate?
Again, nothing if it's done where all the people viewing it have agreed to view it.

When it's done against the will of the local community, it's arrogance by the artists who consider that they have more rights than others.
_______
"I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - CG Jung
My homepage : http://www.joepritchard.me.uk
  Reply With Quote
01-02-2007, 22:33   #45
King Rat
Registered User
King Rat's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Total Posts: 1,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeP View Post
Again, nothing if it's done where all the people viewing it have agreed to view it.

When it's done against the will of the local community, it's arrogance by the artists who consider that they have more rights than others.
Thats why I suggested local consultation for approval.
  Reply With Quote
01-02-2007, 22:45   #46
fr8neck
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: Broomhill
Total Posts: 815
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeP View Post
I would agree about aesthetics - but the argument is exactly the same. You still don't have the right to force your views of art on others. And neither do advertisers - I'm as against advertising hoardings as I am against graffiti, actually. It all screws up the environment.

Government built structures have indeed been paid for by the public, but the point remains - you have no God-given right to impose your idea of art on others. Even if some portion of the public like it, there is still some portion that doesn't. When you deal with things that impact on everyone, you have to get at least soem sort of concensus.
It's not altogether about 'art' though, is it? Is a blank concrete or steel wall/fence 'art'; or aesthetic expression in any meaningful sense?

When structures are designed and built the usual factor is cost, not decoration. As these exist in the public domain I see no reason why the public shouldn't decorate them as they please.

If you don't care for what is put on them: blank it out or put something better, and we'll go on this way until there is something there that we all like.
_______
You never get what you 'deserve': you get what you negotiate.
  Reply With Quote
01-02-2007, 22:57   #47
King Rat
Registered User
King Rat's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Total Posts: 1,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by fr8neck View Post
It's not altogether about 'art' though, is it? Is a blank concrete or steel wall/fence 'art'; or aesthetic expression in any meaningful sense?

When structures are designed and built the usual factor is cost, not decoration. As these exist in the public domain I see no reason why the public shouldn't decorate them as they please.

If you don't care for what is put on them: blank it out or put something better, and we'll go on this way until there is something there that we all like.
I totally agree but the trouble is there will probaly never be something we all like no matter what it is but I think something which the majority like by means of consultation would be a good idea.

Joep: I think this would be more than a fair solution considering there are all kinds of buildings, advertisements road diversions etc forced upon us every day without any warning or approval by the people who are inconvenienced or who have disapproval.

Surely something is better than nothing on all the drab concrete walls 7 buildings in our cities & townns?
  Reply With Quote
02-02-2007, 09:30   #48
KenH
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Total Posts: 4,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Rat View Post
IJoep: I think this would be more than a fair solution considering there are all kinds of buildings, advertisements road diversions etc forced upon us every day without any warning or approval by the people who are inconvenienced or who have disapproval.
?
Complete rubbish. Advertisments are on private property (even if it is owned by the council) and go through a planning process. If you want to paint a mural then you can do the same. If you want to simply paint anythere you like then this is criminal damage.

We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that graffiti is a crime and this forum shouldn't be used to encourage or justify criminal behaviour.
_______
I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the communist party.
  Reply With Quote
02-02-2007, 18:31   #49
King Rat
Registered User
King Rat's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Total Posts: 1,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenH View Post
Complete rubbish. Advertisments are on private property (even if it is owned by the council) and go through a planning process. If you want to paint a mural then you can do the same. If you want to simply paint anythere you like then this is criminal damage.

We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that graffiti is a crime and this forum shouldn't be used to encourage or justify criminal behaviour.
I never said people should be able to paint graffiti art anywhere they want, nor did I say no planning application process shouldn't happen. I actually suggested consultation if you read my previous posts, not all billboards are on private property in fact on the contrary most are council owned which means their not private property if their council owned.

You also should realise that the UK has free speech where people can voice their opinion as long as it's not to cause hatred or stir up trouble, forums are for discussing all issues & topics & not everyone agrees with the current laws which are implemented which is why we have a democracy.
  Reply With Quote
03-02-2007, 22:04   #50
Gypsy Hack
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Gangway F, Sheffield.
Total Posts: 1,128
My thoughts:

1) It is absolutely absurd to compare graffiti of any form to crimes like child-molesting or burglary. The child-molesting comparison in particular is actually offensive.

2) I don't like basic 'tagging', for the simple reason that it's self-obsessed. However, I think kids who do this kind of thing need guiding towards better forms of the art rather than shopping to the cops.

3) I get told I'm inferior every day by advertising billboards out in public places. I have no choice whether or not to see these monstrosities, so I'm not going to ask permission to scrawl replies on them.

4) Legalised graffiti areas are a great idea, but will not replace graffiti on billboards, or other well-placed political or social graffiti.

5) Graffiti artists - those who are serious about graffiti - tend to be extremely conscious about where they put their work or slogans. If some idiot tags a car or a house window or something, they'll get a clip round the ear from their peers.
  Reply With Quote
03-02-2007, 22:22   #51
Mr Goose
The Honker
Mr Goose's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: Woodseats
Total Posts: 1,771
When I glanced at this thread title I thought it said
"Should there be legal areas for giraffes"
_______

Mr Goose
"Honk Honk Honk Honk Honk Honk Honk Honk Honk"
  Reply With Quote
07-02-2007, 15:22   #52
superchrome
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2005
Total Posts: 611
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinger View Post
well they can do it on canvous and try an get it in to a galorey
we do do canvasses and the galleries wont touch us with a barge pole.
  Reply With Quote
07-02-2007, 15:40   #53
superchrome
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2005
Total Posts: 611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gypsy Hack View Post
My thoughts:

1) It is absolutely absurd to compare graffiti of any form to crimes like child-molesting or burglary. The child-molesting comparison in particular is actually offensive.

2) I don't like basic 'tagging', for the simple reason that it's self-obsessed. However, I think kids who do this kind of thing need guiding towards better forms of the art rather than shopping to the cops.

3) I get told I'm inferior every day by advertising billboards out in public places. I have no choice whether or not to see these monstrosities, so I'm not going to ask permission to scrawl replies on them.

4) Legalised graffiti areas are a great idea, but will not replace graffiti on billboards, or other well-placed political or social graffiti.

5) Graffiti artists - those who are serious about graffiti - tend to be extremely conscious about where they put their work or slogans. If some idiot tags a car or a house window or something, they'll get a clip round the ear from their peers.
well said gypsy hack.
  Reply With Quote
19-04-2007, 12:06   #54
4ny1ne
Registered User
4ny1ne's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: .
Total Posts: 915
Send a message via MSN to 4ny1ne
Quote:
Originally Posted by redrobbo View Post
Whilst there is a perception that Mount Pleasent is a legal site, it isn't. It is a council owned playground and ballpark, which has never been sanctioned for graffiti writers. It is not overlooked by any houses, and is thus difficult to police.

There are problems with graffit writers. Firstly, by their very action of painting (or 'writing') on the ballpark walls, they prevent legitimate use of the ballpark for what is was designed and provided for, namely, playing ball!

Secondly, there is creeping graffiti blight in the locality, including the external walls of the ballpark, adjacent buildings and nearby walls.

We are seen from the house's when painting, ive never had problems there, we let the lads play football and have a good joke around with the people that live there. Alot of people (strangers) comment on are work and enjoy it, where giving out art for free at are own expense, the writers and people you meet are amazing, how an earth can you have a mardy over a wall painted and painted again but yet never painted over by the council itself, if the council dont paint over are work where not costing them anything. Not to even mention the Jam we hold every single year POLICE PATROLED!
  Reply With Quote
Reply To Topic

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:56.
POSTS ON THIS FORUM ARE NOT ACTIVELY MONITORED
Click "Report Post" under any post which may breach our terms of use.
©2002-2017 Sheffield Forum | Powered by vBulletin ©2018