Graffiti - Page 2

catzenpewters · 01-10-2002, 03:48 PM

I think it's both, sometimes. Just spray painting your name would be hard to consider art, but you never know. But it is darn annoying. If you want to create art, create it on something you own, not someone else's property.

Djinn Raffo · 01-10-2002, 03:52 PM

People throwing up tags i dont like at all. But i do love big pieces thrown up, especially on frieght trains. Its an underground thing that sucks if its done on the front door of a business...but on the walls of an abandoned warehouse or side of a frieght...i think thats awesome.

Axil · 01-11-2002, 01:59 AM

I really like it, I think it looks very nice, and I think what happened in Stockholm (kulturhuset, wasn't it?) is despicable!
What's the use of a democratic society, when someone else tells you what art is..

Sir Byronas · 01-11-2002, 09:25 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Beaumanoir:
There Are Some I Like And Some Not So... I Love The Cool Arty Graffiti, Where They Have Big Colourful Letters And Such, Like So:

But I hate It When People Just Write: DK Woz Ere Y2k... Thats Just A Pain..

I totally agree with you, Beaumanoir!

Sazerac · 01-11-2002, 10:12 AM

Man, it's a tough question. First you have to tackle the definition of "What is Art?" which critics and philosophers have been tussling with for generations. If you take the stance that Art is an expression of idea and emotion into form, then graffiti *would* fall under the definition of Art; at least some forms of it would.

I know for a fact that some of the coolest art I've seen is on the walls of buildings in downtown Dallas (Deep Ellum and the arts district), where proprietors actually PAY young "starving" artists in the area to paint the walls of their businesses with graffiti. It is a riot of color and fantastic expression, and people do come down there just to see it, which, of course, attracts them into the businesses, so it's good for everyone.

What someone defines as Art, though, may be completely different to someone else, and there are no real standards or definitions.

Let's look at what Leo Tolstoy said about it at the end of the 19th century:

"In order correctly to define art, it is necessary, first of all, to cease to consider it as a means to pleasure and to consider it as one of the conditions of human life. Viewing it in this way we cannot fail to observe that art is one of the means of intercourse between man and man.

Every work of art causes the receiver to enter into a certain kind of relationship both with him who produced, or is producing, the art, and with all those who, simultaneously, previously, or subsequently, receive the same artistic impression.

Speech, transmitting the thoughts and experiences of men, serves as a means of union among them, and art acts in a similar manner. The peculiarity of this latter means of intercourse, distinguishing it from intercourse by means of words, consists in this, that whereas by words a man transmits his thoughts to another, by means of art he transmits his feelings . . .

To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling - this is the activity of art.

Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and also experience them."
-TOLSTOY, "What is Art?", 1896

So, according to Tolstoy, Art is a form of non-verbal communication on an emotional level. I disagree with him that the artistic impression must be the same for everyone who views and participates in the art, but just that an impression is made and communicated. What I see in art may be different from what others see, and yet we may all be correct, like the blind men examining the elephant.

In this case, I would consider the form of graffiti you were speaking of, Sir ReGiN, as "art", as it was a conscious form of emotional expression. The city of Stockholm was misguided, IMO, in shutting down the exhibit, as those who participated felt that their expression was being prohibited, and took retaliatory action in a less pleasant manner. It is a classic case of taking a general rule and applying it mindlessly to a situation that was an exception.

Cheers,
-Sazerac

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: Sazerac ]

Cloudbringer · 01-11-2002, 10:29 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Sir ReGiN:

You don't need to comment on the specific example, it was only meant to describe some of the consequences of graffiti..
Oh and not everybody are blonde, just the virgins
And the chef on the muppets isn't swedish, man..you live in a dream [img]tongue.gif[/img]

ROTFL! HE isn't? OH NO! You two have shattered my illusions!

I love the Muppets! [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

As for grafiti, I guess I'm not fond of it if isn't actually art. Who wants to see phone numbers or obscenity scrawled on a building? And I think alot of it is also gang markings in places like LA, that Milamber mentioned. But I have seen some very nice artwork done occasionally.

Cloudy

Cloudbringer · 01-11-2002, 10:30 AM

quote:
Originally posted by catzenpewters:
I think it's both, sometimes. Just spray painting your name would be hard to consider art, but you never know. But it is darn annoying. If you want to create art, create it on something you own, not someone else's property.

Good point! It isn't their property, even it it's an unused warehouse etc.

Sir ReGiN · 01-11-2002, 11:44 AM

Very interesting post there, Sazerac..
I think I share most my opinions with Tolstoy..except that about everybody gets the same "artistic impression"..
But there is also another side of the whole "graffiti-living", and I use Stockholm as a reference...
The swedish railways have considered putting up some sort of walls on the back of subways, because many young people "graffers" tend to ride the subways by clinging on to the back of them, and then they get respect from their pals..
Some even jump on subways from roads over the tracks, and sit on the roof..some have died doing this, but still some continue..
And then there's the racking part..
Considering every store as compressed capitalism, gives them a good excuse for stealing everything they want..
And even the true graffiti artists has to write their 'tags' everywhere, and cleaning up all the scribble around Stockholm costs the state many million kronor (ten kronor is about 1 dollar) every year..
So there is of course more to this than the art..

Sazerac · 01-11-2002, 12:09 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Sir ReGiN:
Very interesting post there, Sazerac..
I think I share most my opinions with Tolstoy..except that about everybody gets the same "artistic impression"..
But there is also another side of the whole "graffiti-living", and I use Stockholm as a reference...
The swedish railways have considered putting up some sort of walls on the back of subways, because many young people "graffers" tend to ride the subways by clinging on to the back of them, and then they get respect from their pals..
Some even jump on subways from roads over the tracks, and sit on the roof..some have died doing this, but still some continue..
And then there's the racking part..
Considering every store as compressed capitalism, gives them a good excuse for stealing everything they want..
And even the true graffiti artists has to write their 'tags' everywhere, and cleaning up all the scribble around Stockholm costs the state many million kronor (ten kronor is about 1 dollar) every year..
So there is of course more to this than the art..

Of course there is more to it than the art. I, too, do not appreciate the "ugly graffiti" or the ones that consist mainly of swear words or vulgar sexual ephithet, especially applied towards denigrating females sexually...that is NOT ok in my book. However, I feel that the city of Stockholm may have tossed the baby out with the bathwater on this one. I really can't tell unless I knew a little more about the situation. Do you have an article or reference that can show more about it?

And, like you, I totally agree about Tolstoy being a bit off the mark in saying that everyone gets the same artistic impression. Art is fluid and has a myriad of meaning; as varied and differentiated as the artists and the members of their viewing audience.

Cheers,
-Sazerac

01-11-2002, 12:32 PM

Ok, The Chef on the Muppets was the "Swedish Chef" and he liked Meatballs and popcorn [img]smile.gif[/img] not on the same show but ...well you get the idea, as for Grafitti...Soap Box time: While some grafitti may be artistic, if it is placed on property not your own and you don't have permission to put it there the best definition for it is VANDALISM!

01-11-2002, 01:59 AM	#13
Axil Dungeon Master Join Date: January 4, 2002 Location: Stockholm Posts: 74	I really like it, I think it looks very nice, and I think what happened in Stockholm (kulturhuset, wasn't it?) is despicable! What's the use of a democratic society, when someone else tells you what art is.. __________________ War.<br />What is it good for?<br />Absolutely nothing!<p>-The honourable Tom Jones

01-11-2002, 09:25 AM	#14
Sir Byronas Mephistopheles Join Date: October 2, 2001 Location: Greece Age: 35 Posts: 1,463	quote: Originally posted by Beaumanoir: There Are Some I Like And Some Not So... I Love The Cool Arty Graffiti, Where They Have Big Colourful Letters And Such, Like So: But I hate It When People Just Write: DK Woz Ere Y2k... Thats Just A Pain.. I totally agree with you, Beaumanoir! __________________ <br />I\'ve searched the whole world and ended up back in Ironworks. Home sweet home!

01-11-2002, 10:12 AM	#15
Sazerac Ironworks Moderator Join Date: January 7, 2001 Location: Monroe, LA Age: 60 Posts: 7,387	Man, it's a tough question. First you have to tackle the definition of "What is Art?" which critics and philosophers have been tussling with for generations. If you take the stance that Art is an expression of idea and emotion into form, then graffiti would fall under the definition of Art; at least some forms of it would. I know for a fact that some of the coolest art I've seen is on the walls of buildings in downtown Dallas (Deep Ellum and the arts district), where proprietors actually PAY young "starving" artists in the area to paint the walls of their businesses with graffiti. It is a riot of color and fantastic expression, and people do come down there just to see it, which, of course, attracts them into the businesses, so it's good for everyone. What someone defines as Art, though, may be completely different to someone else, and there are no real standards or definitions. Let's look at what Leo Tolstoy said about it at the end of the 19th century: "In order correctly to define art, it is necessary, first of all, to cease to consider it as a means to pleasure and to consider it as one of the conditions of human life. Viewing it in this way we cannot fail to observe that art is one of the means of intercourse between man and man. Every work of art causes the receiver to enter into a certain kind of relationship both with him who produced, or is producing, the art, and with all those who, simultaneously, previously, or subsequently, receive the same artistic impression. Speech, transmitting the thoughts and experiences of men, serves as a means of union among them, and art acts in a similar manner. The peculiarity of this latter means of intercourse, distinguishing it from intercourse by means of words, consists in this, that whereas by words a man transmits his thoughts to another, by means of art he transmits his feelings . . . To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling - this is the activity of art. Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and also experience them." -TOLSTOY, "What is Art?", 1896 So, according to Tolstoy, Art is a form of non-verbal communication on an emotional level. I disagree with him that the artistic impression must be the same for everyone who views and participates in the art, but just that an impression is made and communicated. What I see in art may be different from what others see, and yet we may all be correct, like the blind men examining the elephant. In this case, I would consider the form of graffiti you were speaking of, Sir ReGiN, as "art", as it was a conscious form of emotional expression. The city of Stockholm was misguided, IMO, in shutting down the exhibit, as those who participated felt that their expression was being prohibited, and took retaliatory action in a less pleasant manner. It is a classic case of taking a general rule and applying it mindlessly to a situation that was an exception. Cheers, -Sazerac [ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: Sazerac ] __________________ "And all my days are trances, and all my nightly dreams, Are where thy grey eye glances, and where thy footstep gleams, In what ethereal dances, by what eternal streams..."

01-11-2002, 10:29 AM	#16
Cloudbringer Ironworks Moderator Join Date: March 1, 2001 Location: Upstate NY USA Posts: 19,737	quote: Originally posted by Sir ReGiN: You don't need to comment on the specific example, it was only meant to describe some of the consequences of graffiti.. Oh and not everybody are blonde, just the virgins And the chef on the muppets isn't swedish, man..you live in a dream [img]tongue.gif[/img] ROTFL! HE isn't? OH NO! You two have shattered my illusions! I love the Muppets! [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img] As for grafiti, I guess I'm not fond of it if isn't actually art. Who wants to see phone numbers or obscenity scrawled on a building? And I think alot of it is also gang markings in places like LA, that Milamber mentioned. But I have seen some very nice artwork done occasionally. Cloudy __________________ "Don't take life for granted." Animal (may he rest in peace)

01-11-2002, 10:30 AM	#17
Cloudbringer Ironworks Moderator Join Date: March 1, 2001 Location: Upstate NY USA Posts: 19,737	quote: Originally posted by catzenpewters: I think it's both, sometimes. Just spray painting your name would be hard to consider art, but you never know. But it is darn annoying. If you want to create art, create it on something you own, not someone else's property. Good point! It isn't their property, even it it's an unused warehouse etc. __________________ "Don't take life for granted." Animal (may he rest in peace)

01-10-2002, 03:48 PM	#11
catzenpewters Manshoon Join Date: March 11, 2001 Location: Victoria, BC, Canada Age: 52 Posts: 204	I think it's both, sometimes. Just spray painting your name would be hard to consider art, but you never know. But it is darn annoying. If you want to create art, create it on something you own, not someone else's property.

01-10-2002, 03:52 PM	#12
Djinn Raffo Ra Join Date: March 11, 2001 Location: Ant Hill Age: 49 Posts: 2,397	People throwing up tags i dont like at all. But i do love big pieces thrown up, especially on frieght trains. Its an underground thing that sucks if its done on the front door of a business...but on the walls of an abandoned warehouse or side of a frieght...i think thats awesome.

01-11-2002, 11:44 AM	#18
Sir ReGiN Gold Dragon Join Date: August 11, 2001 Location: The land of blonde virgins Age: 42 Posts: 2,563	Very interesting post there, Sazerac.. I think I share most my opinions with Tolstoy..except that about everybody gets the same "artistic impression".. But there is also another side of the whole "graffiti-living", and I use Stockholm as a reference... The swedish railways have considered putting up some sort of walls on the back of subways, because many young people "graffers" tend to ride the subways by clinging on to the back of them, and then they get respect from their pals.. Some even jump on subways from roads over the tracks, and sit on the roof..some have died doing this, but still some continue.. And then there's the racking part.. Considering every store as compressed capitalism, gives them a good excuse for stealing everything they want.. And even the true graffiti artists has to write their 'tags' everywhere, and cleaning up all the scribble around Stockholm costs the state many million kronor (ten kronor is about 1 dollar) every year.. So there is of course more to this than the art..

01-11-2002, 12:09 PM	#19
Sazerac Ironworks Moderator Join Date: January 7, 2001 Location: Monroe, LA Age: 60 Posts: 7,387	quote: Originally posted by Sir ReGiN: Very interesting post there, Sazerac.. I think I share most my opinions with Tolstoy..except that about everybody gets the same "artistic impression".. But there is also another side of the whole "graffiti-living", and I use Stockholm as a reference... The swedish railways have considered putting up some sort of walls on the back of subways, because many young people "graffers" tend to ride the subways by clinging on to the back of them, and then they get respect from their pals.. Some even jump on subways from roads over the tracks, and sit on the roof..some have died doing this, but still some continue.. And then there's the racking part.. Considering every store as compressed capitalism, gives them a good excuse for stealing everything they want.. And even the true graffiti artists has to write their 'tags' everywhere, and cleaning up all the scribble around Stockholm costs the state many million kronor (ten kronor is about 1 dollar) every year.. So there is of course more to this than the art.. Of course there is more to it than the art. I, too, do not appreciate the "ugly graffiti" or the ones that consist mainly of swear words or vulgar sexual ephithet, especially applied towards denigrating females sexually...that is NOT ok in my book. However, I feel that the city of Stockholm may have tossed the baby out with the bathwater on this one. I really can't tell unless I knew a little more about the situation. Do you have an article or reference that can show more about it? And, like you, I totally agree about Tolstoy being a bit off the mark in saying that everyone gets the same artistic impression. Art is fluid and has a myriad of meaning; as varied and differentiated as the artists and the members of their viewing audience. Cheers, -Sazerac __________________ "And all my days are trances, and all my nightly dreams, Are where thy grey eye glances, and where thy footstep gleams, In what ethereal dances, by what eternal streams..."

01-11-2002, 12:32 PM	#20
MagiK Guest Posts: n/a	Ok, The Chef on the Muppets was the "Swedish Chef" and he liked Meatballs and popcorn [img]smile.gif[/img] not on the same show but ...well you get the idea, as for Grafitti...Soap Box time: While some grafitti may be artistic, if it is placed on property not your own and you don't have permission to put it there the best definition for it is VANDALISM!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Graffiti..Your Opinion?	Cristian	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	22	05-18-2003 11:04 AM