A picture of the vandalized Hogswart Express

[Arvon]

Try this site...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk...00/3080060.stm

[Larry_OHF]

Bunch of punk freaks. On the bright side, at least somebody will be paid a little extra to repaint it the right way. It's always good to have an income.

[Xen]

Wow! Vandalizem is not nice altough I have ntohin` agianst Graffiti`s but if they are somewhere where people don`t pass by every day.

[Stormymystic]

that truly sucks, they need to give those creeps tooth brushes, paint remover, and fresh paint, and chain them to it, until it is restored to its original form

[AzRaeL StoRmBlaDe]

wow they didn't just spray a little paint either, they covered that thing, that is nuts. They weren't done?

[Mack_Attack]

It is very sad when this happens but larry is right some one now gets a bigger pay check to fix it back up.

What is it suppose to mean anyways.

[wellard]

Originally posted by Xen: Wow! Vandalizem is not nice altough I have ntohin` agianst Graffiti`s but if they are somewhere where people don`t pass by every day.

I have to disagree Xen, all unwanted graffiti is vandalism. and vandalism is not art.

[Zero Alpha]

Originally posted by wellard: all unwanted graffiti is vandalism. and vandalism is not art.

IMHO, just because something is vandalism, doesnt mean it cannot be art. if you've ever seen some of the 'mural' type graffiti on some of the blank grey walls while your on a train (im in london, there is alot of it), some of them are nicer than an emtpy wall. though that is not saying much for it, i still think of it as an art. it may even be possible to have the destruction of something itself as art? i suppose it depends on your view of art.

[ 09-12-2003, 08:02 PM: Message edited by: Zero Alpha ]

[SpiritWarrior]

Pity it was done on that particular train. On any other I'd see it as art. Any train I have ever seen in this area has been...'touched up' [img]smile.gif[/img] .

[wellard]

Originally posted by Zero Alpha: quote: Originally posted by wellard: all unwanted graffiti is vandalism. and vandalism is not art.

IMHO, just because something is vandalism, doesnt mean it cannot be art. if you've ever seen some of the 'mural' type graffiti on some of the blank grey walls while your on a train (im in london, there is alot of it), some of them are nicer than an emtpy wall. though that is not saying much for it, i still think of it as an art. it may even be possible to have the destruction of something itself as art? i suppose it depends on your view of art. [/QUOTE]Is graffiti art? our view points will differ [img]tongue.gif[/img] But as I carefully stated Vandalism is not art. The question of graffiti itself being art does lead to some interesting philosophical questions regarding art and how to define it. But vandalism is vandalism, the wilful destruction or desecration of another’s property.