American Parkour Forum

Parkour and Freerunning => Parkour And Freerunning => Topic started by: mickeynotmouse on November 29, 2010, 03:15:17 PM

Title: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on November 29, 2010, 03:15:17 PM
Well... What can I say?  Some people think the law just doesn't apply to them. And usually, it doesn't matter to me. BUT, in this case, us traceurs are being given a bad image with all this graffiti crap. Just take a look at this comment:
(http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q271/mickeynotmouse/grrrrrrrrrrr.jpg)
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Fecteau on November 29, 2010, 03:20:35 PM
Some graffiti is insane bro. I think it's an art. I also think you should ask the owner of a building to do it first.

Also, how the hell do you carry paint cans without it interfering in a roll?
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ashley McCauley on November 29, 2010, 03:23:32 PM
I do believe that gives the parkour community a bad image if those who do graffiti use parkour to do it. It's different if they are using parkour to say take a picture of a piece but not creating one. I agree with that comment to a certain point, yes I believe graffiti is art, but it is also a crime and vandalism. Being a traceuse (or traceur), at least to me, is to not do this kind of thing, because it goes against the purpose of leaving no trace that you were there. And if we are disrespectful to the buildings we train on, whether we break something or vandalize it, it will no longer be a training spot.

I feel like I'm not making any sense.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Stevie Leifheit on November 29, 2010, 03:26:35 PM
I do believe that gives the parkour community a bad image if those who do graffiti use parkour to do it. It's different if they are using parkour to say take a picture of a piece but not creating one. I agree with that comment to a certain point, yes I believe graffiti is art, but it is also a crime and vandalism. Being a traceuse (or traceur), at least to me, is to not do this kind of thing, because it goes against the purpose of leaving no trace that you were there. And if we are disrespectful to the buildings we train on, whether we break something or vandalize it, it will no longer be a training spot.

I feel like I'm not making any sense.

No it made perfect sense Ashy. I completely agree with you.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on November 29, 2010, 03:31:36 PM
To the people who say "Graffiti is an art":


I say vandalism is vandalism no matter what, and it's okay if you want to spraypaint a wall, but only if you own it. If not... Again, it's just vandalism and you have no right to tag something that belongs to someone else.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ashley McCauley on November 29, 2010, 03:35:14 PM
Some graffiti is insane bro. I think it's an art. I also think you should ask the owner of a building to do it first.

Also, how the hell do you carry paint cans without it interfering in a roll?

Does that matter Fect? It's still crime.

No it made perfect sense Ashy. I completely agree with you.

Thanks.

To the people who say "Graffiti is an art":


I say vandalism is vandalism no matter what, and it's okay if you want to spraypaint a wall, but only if you own it. If not... Again, it's just vandalism and you have no right to tag something that belongs to someone else.

I agree with you. I say do graffiti on something you own, a wall, a notebook, your garage, or a city ordained legal wall. But if you do it illegally it makes it a crime, and as you say vandalism is vandalism and that is also correct.

But I still believe it's art. Because the writers who do create the pieces are artistically gifted. It takes a lot of practice and failures to get to where they are.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Scott Berson on November 29, 2010, 05:52:27 PM
I dislike graffiti if it's tagging or if its on private property. If it's on an advertisement that is in a public area, that you are not given a choice to see or not...then I completely condone modifications to that advertisement.

That's my stance on graffiti.

I also wouldn't completely relate climbing/"buildering" to parkour...
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: S Leger on November 29, 2010, 05:56:10 PM
I agree with Fecteau that Graffiti looks awesome and that it is art.  However, I also agree with Ashley that it's still vandalism.  However, the rebel in me favors graffiti over the fact that it's vandalism.  I don't do graffiti or other things that break the law, but if I was going to break the law and I wanted to do it stylishly, then I'd go with graffiti.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ashley McCauley on November 29, 2010, 06:10:14 PM
I agree with Fecteau that Graffiti looks awesome and that it is art.  However, I also agree with Ashley that it's still vandalism.  However, the rebel in me favors graffiti over the fact that it's vandalism.  I don't do graffiti or other things that break the law, but if I was going to break the law and I wanted to do it stylishly, then I'd go with graffiti.


Some of my thoughts in that post.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Josh Boggs on November 29, 2010, 06:26:17 PM
Didn't read any other posts besides OP, but even though graffiti is wrong, some seem to think of it the same way we think about parkour. Its a hobby, an art. You know? And non-traceurs might think WE'RE wrong for doing what we do.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Stevie Leifheit on November 29, 2010, 06:35:51 PM
Didn't read any other posts besides OP, but even though graffiti is wrong, some seem to think of it the same way we think about parkour. Its a hobby, an art. You know? And non-traceurs might think WE'RE wrong for doing what we do.

Well I have to say that we have a 1-up on the non-traceurs because what we do isn't illegal.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Dan Elric on November 29, 2010, 08:30:07 PM
Parkour helps graffiti artists in the same way art classes help graffiti artists.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on November 29, 2010, 09:00:30 PM
Well I have to say that we have a 1-up on the non-traceurs because what we do isn't illegal.


EXACTLY.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Dan Elric on November 29, 2010, 09:38:37 PM
Well I have to say that we have a 1-up on the non-traceurs because what we do isn't illegal.

It's not illegal to move, but it is illegal to trespass.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: dotCA on November 30, 2010, 06:09:19 AM
Well I have to say that we have a 1-up on the non-traceurs because what we do isn't illegal.

Do you only train on your own property ?

I know I don't..
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Stevie Leifheit on November 30, 2010, 06:13:52 AM
Do you only train on your own property ?

I know I don't..

I train on my property and public property. If I want to go on someones private property I ASK PERMISSION. As long as the tag artist ask permission (and get it) I am 100% ok with what they do. But for some reason I have a feeling that they dont. And that sometimes might be part of the thrill.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on November 30, 2010, 08:01:33 AM
Do you only train on your own property ?

I know I don't..

But do you trespass?  If so, what you've been doing is wrong and you should stop right away so you don't soil the image of parkour any further.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: David Jones on November 30, 2010, 09:57:05 AM
Well if they don't associate their Parkour training with their tagging, then whats the problem. Parkour is just the training mathod. If they are running away from the police, they are running away from the police. Not doing Parkour. And as far as I'm concerned, if someone who is tagging is running away from a cop, the last thing the cop will think is "Oh yeah, he's doing Parkour!"

To anyone who does Parkour and tags: When your tagging, never bring up the word PARKOUR*. If you ever try to run away and get caught by the police, DON'T MENTION ONE SINGLE WORD OF PARKOUR*.

If you apply to those two rules, then your fine in my book.

-David

*Same goes for any variation of the discipline, Freerunning/ADD/Freestyle Parkour lol/etc.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Josh Boggs on November 30, 2010, 01:54:03 PM
Well I have to say that we have a 1-up on the non-traceurs because what we do isn't illegal.
Never said it was illegal  ;)
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: hfksla on November 30, 2010, 06:56:57 PM
If you think graffiti is so great, why don't I tag your house up and see if your opinion changes.
Vandalism is vandalism, if a lot of people do this, more bad looks for parkour.
Instead of "hey, look at those traceurs doing parkour and training"
it'll be
"shit, look at those guys... they must be about to go steal/tag something.
unfortunately, we cant do anything about what people decide to do
David I agree with you, but if parkour continues to grow in popularity (which it looks like it will) and people start recognizing parkour. it could have a negative outlook
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: hfksla on November 30, 2010, 06:59:27 PM
Well if they don't associate their Parkour training with their tagging, then whats the problem. Parkour is just the training mathod. If they are running away from the police, they are running away from the police. Not doing Parkour. And as far as I'm concerned, if someone who is tagging is running away from a cop, the last thing the cop will think is "Oh yeah, he's doing Parkour!"
Agree here, but it stills gives off a bad image, especially if parkour continues to grow in popularity.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Anias Zig Zag Reed on November 30, 2010, 06:59:53 PM
I will admit graffiti can be a form of art BUT it isn't in our best interest for a rogue traceur to tag other buildings and what not. Other individuals will sew it as a reflection of us.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Sparklefish on November 30, 2010, 08:57:15 PM
I'd rather see a beautiful mural than a big grey wall on a freeway underpass.  My city tends to hire lame artists for murals.  Good graffiti on that beautifies public property is awesome.  The only graffiti I've ever seen on anyone's house is gang tags, which isn't art, but intimidation.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Kim Martin on November 30, 2010, 09:20:49 PM
I agree with Brett more often than not what we see is someones tag saying I was here which mars the property. Good beautiful graffiti is rare. Most people don't wantto see any graffiti becace of I'll mannered taggars
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Hunter on November 30, 2010, 11:42:34 PM
Whats really wierd is i saw that comment the other day on a parkour vid and i went apeshit and commented back telling him off and how it damages our image to the community but i also agree that to an extent it's an art but its also vandalism,tresspasing,and a few other things.anywayy.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Josh Boggs on December 01, 2010, 07:05:17 PM
I'd rather see a beautiful mural than a big grey wall on a freeway underpass.  My city tends to hire lame artists for murals.  Good graffiti on that beautifies public property is awesome.  The only graffiti I've ever seen on anyone's house is gang tags, which isn't art, but intimidation.
Exactly. Most taggers wont go out and do this to peoples houses and what not. Big walls, bridges, etc. Its beautiful to look at sometimes.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: John George 'JG' on December 01, 2010, 08:04:49 PM
I believe a good term here would be "Destruction of Property"
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on December 01, 2010, 08:38:51 PM
If you think graffiti is so great, why don't I tag your house up and see if your opinion changes.
Vandalism is vandalism, if a lot of people do this, more bad looks for parkour.
Instead of "hey, look at those traceurs doing parkour and training"
it'll be
"shit, look at those guys... they must be about to go steal/tag something.
unfortunately, we cant do anything about what people decide to do
David I agree with you, but if parkour continues to grow in popularity (which it looks like it will) and people start recognizing parkour. it could have a negative outlook


Thank you!

Common sense FTW!
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on December 01, 2010, 08:47:15 PM
Exactly. Most taggers wont go out and do this to peoples houses and what not. Big walls, bridges, etc. Its beautiful to look at sometimes.

Yes, but remember: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

And in public property, the beholders are EVERYBODY. Public property is exactly that: What belongs to everyone.

And not everyone likes murals.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ethan Nicholson on December 01, 2010, 09:51:10 PM
I know some guys who got busted doing it on a wall and got arrested; it was 10 at night and they thought it was a sanctioned graffiti wall because of how much it had already been tagged. They got forced to clean it off, lol.

In any case, here are my thoughts; It is similar to graffiti in that it is usually a form of self expression, and an art in itself. People complain about private property tagging, but who hasn't gone into private property once in a while? Mind you, you might not've known, and they usually do, but still. *Please don't take that word for word to cut me down, having trouble wording it D:*

I think most of the time it tends to be negative, but I've seen some amazing works of art in my area, and I think the majority of people would want Banksy to stop doing his work. I'm am, for the main part, in support of it.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ashley McCauley on December 01, 2010, 10:07:25 PM
Let me explain myself even more on my opinion on this.

I support Banksy. I love the message he puts in his works. I support graffiti that has a message as well. If it's a poster or a mural or a sticker or anything that screams what the artist/writers believes in. If it's not useless tagging and gang graffiti and it makes the building, object, etc., more inviting or better looking then I say go ahead. I'm against the vandalism & gang side of it.

Blah it feels like I'm contradicting myself...
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ethan Nicholson on December 01, 2010, 10:19:36 PM
Let me explain myself even more on my opinion on this.

I support Banksy. I love the message he puts in his works. I support graffiti that has a message as well. If it's a poster or a mural or a sticker or anything that screams what the artist/writers believes in. If it's not useless tagging and gang graffiti and it makes the building, object, etc., more inviting or better looking then I say go ahead. I'm against the vandalism & gang side of it.

Blah it feels like I'm contradicting myself...

I understood that completely, and that is what I totally agree with. Writing a bunch of cuss-words and "this gang sucks dick" isn't art, but freeflowing expression and well thought out, deliberately designed pieces of time-consuming work are.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ashley McCauley on December 01, 2010, 10:26:35 PM
Exactly my point.

I believe if traceurs/traceuses do the vandalism part of it, then it gives us, as a community, a bad image. But if it's a masterful, beautiful, amazing piece than I believe it shows that we are adding to the beauty of the billboard, wall, electrical box, etc.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Sparklefish on December 01, 2010, 11:52:41 PM
Yes, but remember: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

And in public property, the beholders are EVERYBODY. Public property is exactly that: What belongs to everyone.

And not everyone likes murals.

Why is public property okay for traceurs to use, but not graffiti artists?  Are shoe marks on a wall really more beautiful than a nice graffiti piece? 

Art should push limits and boundaries.  There is no such thing as art everyone likes.  My town tries to put inoffensive art all over the place and guess what: no one likes it.  Plenty of people don't like parkour either, does their distaste override your right to train? 

No one here is arguing that all graffiti is awesome or that it should be allowed everywhere.  Several people keep saying "well why don't I tag your house then," but I already pointed out that it's extremely uncommon for that happen, barring gang tags, which we're all against. 
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: John George 'JG' on December 02, 2010, 07:07:36 AM
Why is public property okay for traceurs to use, but not graffiti artists?  Are shoe marks on a wall really more beautiful than a nice graffiti piece? 

Art should push limits and boundaries.  There is no such thing as art everyone likes.  My town tries to put inoffensive art all over the place and guess what: no one likes it.  Plenty of people don't like parkour either, does their distaste override your right to train? 

No one here is arguing that all graffiti is awesome or that it should be allowed everywhere.  Several people keep saying "well why don't I tag your house then," but I already pointed out that it's extremely uncommon for that happen, barring gang tags, which we're all against. 

I don't ever remember my shoe leaving a mark on a wall. But now I'm gonna go back and check haha!

Even if our shoes do leave marks, graffiti is MUCH more difficult to remove if people find it offensive or inappropriate.

So what if people don't like parkour. The beauty about it is that it leaves no trace. Graffiti - not so much.

If someone would say that they want to permanently alter/deface public property, I'd suggest that they get permission from the city.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Astrauk on December 02, 2010, 08:30:33 AM
Unless you have permission or it's on your own property, graffiti is vandalism pure and simple, no argument against it.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Josh Boggs on December 02, 2010, 12:43:40 PM
Unless you have permission or it's on your own property, graffiti is vandalism pure and simple, no argument against it.
Then why do traceurs trespass?
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on December 02, 2010, 02:34:54 PM
Then why do traceurs trespass?

DUDE


THEY DON'T!

I know I, for one train only where I'm allowed to, as it should be. And I'm VERY sure many people of our community do the same.

Parkour or no parkour, trespassing is wrong and against the law, and so is graffiti. (Unless of course you have permission or it's your own property).
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Astrauk on December 02, 2010, 02:38:31 PM
Then why do traceurs trespass?

Any traceur/traceuress that trespasses is commiting a crime, same as graffiti, we can't make them stop it's there descision.  Now trespassing without knowing it is different as a traceur might not know if it's private property, and if there told to leave I'm sure most would apologize and leave, people that do graffiti know it's wrong if you do it anywhere not on your own property unless you have permission.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Josh Boggs on December 02, 2010, 06:19:49 PM
DUDE


THEY DON'T!

I know I, for one train only where I'm allowed to, as it should be. And I'm VERY sure many people of our community do the same.

Parkour or no parkour, trespassing is wrong and against the law, and so is graffiti. (Unless of course you have permission or it's your own property).
Lol. Ok. Is La Dam Du Lac familiar to any of you guys, as well as the guys over in England? They trespass all the time...admit it. We're guilty of it.

Any traceur/traceuress that trespasses is commiting a crime, same as graffiti, we can't make them stop it's there descision.  Now trespassing without knowing it is different as a traceur might not know if it's private property, and if there told to leave I'm sure most would apologize and leave, people that do graffiti know it's wrong if you do it anywhere not on your own property unless you have permission.

Trespassing without knowledge is STILL trespassing.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Astrauk on December 02, 2010, 07:34:15 PM
Never said traceurs weren't guilty of trespassing sometimes, and just cause they do it doesn't make it right.  And as I said they are still trespassing but if someone brought it up to them and asked them to leave I'm sure most of them would apologize and leave.  Where as there's no confusion when your doing graffiti without permission on property you don't own.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: hfksla on December 02, 2010, 07:41:23 PM
public property isnt trespassing
who owns where you train?
Who owns dam du lac?
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on December 02, 2010, 09:30:27 PM
Point that hasn't been addressed enough:

If you practice some parkour in a spot, and then you leave. What happens to that spot afterward? Is there any damage done? Is there any trace left?

Now,

If you tag a wall (Be it beautiful or not: This is irrelevant). Is there a lasting consequence?


Yes.

Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ethan Nicholson on December 02, 2010, 11:51:29 PM
Most of the time, the rubber from the bottom of your shoes will be left as big, ugly black marks on walls every time you slip up.
And, if you aren't careful (even if you make a few mistakes, coming down too hard etc), you can damage parts of your surroundings, leaving them as a potential risk factor for any traceur, or even any kid that likes to walk across bars in public.

I'd point out, no matter how good you are, you will probably ever leave some rubber burns or some damage done to concrete, bricks, rails and stuff like that, no matter how minor. In that respect, parkour does indeed leave a trace. Some spots just don't have great structural integrity, leaving them vulnerable to much damage of multiple types by traceurs.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Josh Boggs on December 03, 2010, 12:33:17 PM
public property isnt trespassing
who owns where you train?
Who owns dam du lac?
In Pilgrimage, for example, they said something about Dam Du Lac. They said if they keep putting fences up, they'll jump over them, if there is security, they will go out night, etc. So from that, I'm guessing its private property. Therefor trespassing if you are over on it.
Point that hasn't been addressed enough:

If you practice some parkour in a spot, and then you leave. What happens to that spot afterward? Is there any damage done? Is there any trace left?

Now,

If you tag a wall (Be it beautiful or not: This is irrelevant). Is there a lasting consequence?


Yes.


Pilgrimage pointed this out too.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: John George 'JG' on December 03, 2010, 03:03:43 PM
I'm starting to feel that ground is not being gained in this conversation.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on December 04, 2010, 02:43:10 PM
In Pilgrimage, for example, they said something about Dam Du Lac. They said if they keep putting fences up, they'll jump over them, if there is security, they will go out night, etc. So from that, I'm guessing its private property. Therefor trespassing if you are over on it.Pilgrimage pointed this out too.





I believe different people have different beliefs, and that if one traceur behaves a certain way, it doesn't mean all others do the same.

I train with a (I guess you could say large) group. And I can assure you we all have respect for any and all spots we mess about in. This includes any rubber marks left or damage to any structure. (And litter, of course ;))

So while I'm not saying traceurs are perfect, I AM saying that parkour doesn't necessarily mean destruction or damage to any kind of property.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: EpicMovement on December 04, 2010, 04:38:58 PM
"Graffiti is one of the few tools you have if you have almost nothing.
And even if you don't come up with a picture to cure world poverty you can
make someone smile while they're having a piss." -Banksy

"the people who run our cities dont understand graffiti because they think nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit...
the people who truly deface our neighborhoods are the companies that scrawl giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff....
any advertisement in public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours, it belongs to you ,, its yours to take, rearrange and re use.Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head...." -Banksy

"You owe the companies nothing. You especially don't owe them any courtesy. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs."  -Banksy

As a traceur and an artist, I have to make due with the combination of the two biggest loves of my life. I'm not trying to persuade people here that graffiti is something that should be lawful. We all have our opinions.

However, I will say that because of what I've learned through the discipline, I'm not going to disregard parkour if I find myself needing to use it. As a traceur I would never use the name of parkour to any authorities in the case of me getting caught, but I sure as hell would use everything I've learned to get myself away from the situation.

Thats part of what parkour is to me, to use my training in real life practice. You can call me a horrible person for using parkour this way, I don't care. The philosophy of parkour, the leave no trace, the commercialization of the art, all things that people have stuck with a very basic human ability... Moving. I feel as if parkour is gaining a following of very like minded people who shun anything out of the ordinary. Once again, I know full and well graffiti is illegal, but I'm not going to stop training because of it.

I have to ask. If parkour was illegal, would you stop doing it? Maybe you wouldn't go to your favorite spot and train for hours on end in front of cops, maybe you would. Because... as stated, that would be illegal, and I understand not wanting to break the law. However, would you never lazy vault a rail that was in your way just because the law said so?


Also, the question was given about how I would feel if someone tagged my house. It has happened, I smiled and painted a new piece I had been working on right next to it.

Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ethan Nicholson on December 04, 2010, 04:49:19 PM
I have to ask. If parkour was illegal, would you stop doing it? Maybe you wouldn't go to your favorite spot and train for hours on end in front of cops, maybe you would. Because... as stated, that would be illegal, and I understand not wanting to break the law. However, would you never lazy vault a rail that was in your way just because the law said so?

This is a very good counter point. I'm going to have to say, I would definitely keep on training, regardless of whether it was legal or not.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: EpicMovement on December 04, 2010, 04:57:13 PM
This is a very good counter point. I'm going to have to say, I would definitely keep on training, regardless of whether it was legal or not.

As would I. Before people start pulling out, "Parkour is legal, graffiti is not." People have been writing on walls just as long as people have been moving. Thats why I posted that quote about graffiti not making money, because I find it to be very true.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on December 05, 2010, 09:05:55 AM
"Graffiti is one of the few tools you have if you have almost nothing.
And even if you don't come up with a picture to cure world poverty you can
make someone smile while they're having a piss." -Banksy

"the people who run our cities dont understand graffiti because they think nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit...
the people who truly deface our neighborhoods are the companies that scrawl giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff....
any advertisement in public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours, it belongs to you ,, its yours to take, rearrange and re use.Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head...." -Banksy

"You owe the companies nothing. You especially don't owe them any courtesy. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs."  -Banksy




This "Banksy" character is quite paranoid and needs to grow up.


We don't live in a terrible, ill society filled with "evil" companies who  "Re-arrange the world to put themselves in front of you" and make us "feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff"


Does this really seem "evil" or make you "feel inadequate"?


(http://www.gasstationadvertising.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/455367444_bf88518cec.jpg)

lol, if it does, then you're VERY sensitive.

Besides, those "evil companies" feed thousands of families by creating jobs for them that usually pay very well, and those "giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate" are the way they GET that money. Not to mention the product or service that they offer.

So you see, those ads and slogans have a necessary and actually good and productive impact on society.

Doodling on top of them, does not.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Sparklefish on December 05, 2010, 09:39:21 AM
This thread is becoming overtly political.  The whole discussion seems like one of those things where people's opinions won't be swayed at all, by any evidence.  I'm sure there are some neutral people out there... but I'm not sure continuing to argue is going to reach them.

So you see, those ads and slogans have a necessary and actually good and productive impact on society.

Doodling on top of them, does not.

I and many others would say you have this backwards.  It's not so simple as you make it seem.  You're reducing large socio-political problems to single-sentence answers.  I think most people would agree that not all companies are evil and that not all are companies good, and that the answers to questions like the impact of advertising on society are nuanced.

"This 'Banksy' character" has had art displayed in galleries around the world, books of his/her/their work published and influenced millions.  Without taking credit for it.  No one knows who Banksy is, or if there even is a Banksy.  There could be a collective of Banksies.  For Banksy it isn't about glory or money, or whatever, it's about getting out a message.  His/her/their message is political, so obviously not everyone agrees.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: S Leger on December 05, 2010, 09:54:57 AM
Great post Epicmovement.  Never thought of it that way.

Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 03, 2011, 08:19:33 AM



This "Banksy" character is quite paranoid and needs to grow up.


We don't live in a terrible, ill society filled with "evil" companies who  "Re-arrange the world to put themselves in front of you" and make us "feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff"

We do. This is not to say that all companies are evil, or even that the idea of a corporation is wrong. Just that they are way under regulated and have far too much power. The billboard you posted is not really and example of what someone like Banksy is against. Also, making us "feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff" is the main idea behind marketing. That's how we end up buying useless stuff like bottled water.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 03, 2011, 09:21:34 AM
We do. This is not to say that all companies are evil, or even that the idea of a corporation is wrong. Just that they are way under regulated and have far too much power. The billboard you posted is not really and example of what someone like Banksy is against. Also, making us "feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff" is the main idea behind marketing. That's how we end up buying useless stuff like bottled water.


I think banksy just needs to HTFU

A bottled water company sells plastic bottles and says it sells water. Is that a lie? Yes. They sell a piece of plastic and a logo and they throw in the water. However, is it wrong? Of course not!
People spend MONEY on the bottles. It doesn't matter if they're getting their money's worth or not, it was THEIR DECISION to buy it. Nobody held a gun to their heads.

Now, people spending money on anything legit is always good. It makes money leave the hands of one person and go into the hands of another person. And that second person will not, of course, hold on to that money: They will spend it on something else, and so on and so on. If you work (And probably, for one of those evil companies), then the money will come back to you, so you can keep spending it on water bottles.  It's a cycle, and it's a cycle that works and is not evil at all. In fact, it's beneficial.

And if those taggers were to adapt to it rather than rebelling against it like teenagers who never grew up, maybe they could afford their own property and be able to doodle on their own walls.

In the end, I paid for my billboard or my wall: That wall is mine and only I can modify it. She paid for her billboard or wall: It is hers and only she can modify it.  He paid for his.... You get it.

And also, nobody makes you buy anything, it's your own choice. And if banksy (I know it's a group of people now :P) feels bad for seeing a commercial on TV (A tv that, btw was made possible by the very system he is against), then he needs to HTFU.

peace
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 04, 2011, 10:31:43 AM

A bottled water company sells plastic bottles and says it sells water. Is that a lie? Yes. They sell a piece of plastic and a logo and they throw in the water. However, is it wrong? Of course not!
People spend MONEY on the bottles. It doesn't matter if they're getting their money's worth or not, it was THEIR DECISION to buy it. Nobody held a gun to their heads.


It is not "wrong" on an individual level. They are not doing anything illegal, and yes, it is up to the individual to make the choice. Is it wrong on a larger level though? Is it bad for humanity as a whole and the future of our planet?
Of course!
But how do you regulate that?

I don't really care if people waste their money. The only thing I truly care about is the survival and growth of our species, but with that comes a lot of other hazards to worry about that most people just don't really care about.

Now, people spending money on anything legit is always good. It makes money leave the hands of one person and go into the hands of another person. And that second person will not, of course, hold on to that money: They will spend it on something else, and so on and so on. If you work (And probably, for one of those evil companies), then the money will come back to you, so you can keep spending it on water bottles.  It's a cycle, and it's a cycle that works and is not evil at all. In fact, it's beneficial.

Again, not all companies are evil. I understand the sarcastic dismissal of all this "hippy bullshit" as I used to feel the exact same way. I understand how the exchange of currency and the economy in general works. The problem is when companies start doing things like manipulating the political system for profit. If you think we are really living in free market capitalism, you have been duped. I'm not sure when exactly my view of American economics changed, but I know this article (http://mises.org/daily/2678) was a big eye opener (in case you are actually interested).

And if those taggers were to adapt to it rather than rebelling against it like teenagers who never grew up, maybe they could afford their own property and be able to doodle on their own walls.

In the end, I paid for my billboard or my wall: That wall is mine and only I can modify it. She paid for her billboard or wall: It is hers and only she can modify it.  He paid for his.... You get it.

I think we both definitely agree on random tags. I don't care who these people are and no one else does either. To me, it's like a dog pissing on a tree.

I think where we disagree is the idea that graffiti can be used constructively. An example would be something like propaganda in Nazi Germany. Would it be wrong for someone to graffiti over a Nazi billboard in order to expose atrocities commited by the German military? If so, why? They paid for the billboard fair and square.

I understand that this is an extreme example, but hopefully you can see that the lines are not cut and dry. There is at the very least, some grey area. There are also a lot more forms of corruption in the world than just the blatant gassing of millions of people.

And also, nobody makes you buy anything, it's your own choice. And if banksy (I know it's a group of people now :P) feels bad for seeing a commercial on TV (A tv that, btw was made possible by the very system he is against), then he needs to HTFU.

One thing I have always respected about Banksy is that he doesn't make things for profit. I think the irony you are trying to point out would better be suited to the capitalistic sale of Che Guevara t-shirts.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ryan Nicolai on January 04, 2011, 11:00:07 AM
Ugh... This thread makes my head hurt on both sides of the spectrum...

What is the intent of the law? I was in Germany a few years back, riding the train to Munich. On the way we passed a building with a giant, amazing, detailed... Penis. Two things came to my mind; That's a penis... And, that is an incredible work. It blew my mind with how much time the artist(s) had to spend creating it. I only wish I had a picture of it. The problem is, most people, myself included, don't want to have penises scrawled all over our cities.

The point of that little story is this; While some graffiti is art and a beautiful expression, some of it is not acceptable... No matter how funny I thought it was. It basically comes down to the 80/20 rule. Which means that most people won't cause a problem, but the minority will screw it up for everyone.

At the end of the day though, it's illegal without permission. So knock it off.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 04, 2011, 11:31:41 AM
It is not "wrong" on an individual level. They are not doing anything illegal, and yes, it is up to the individual to make the choice. Is it wrong on a larger level though? Is it bad for humanity as a whole and the future of our planet?
Of course!
But how do you regulate that?

I don't really care if people waste their money. The only thing I truly care about is the survival and growth of our species, but with that comes a lot of other hazards to worry about that most people just don't really care about.


Future of our planet? Survival and growth of our species??  What are we talking about here? what exactly and why is selling water bottles bad for humanity as a whole?
I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you mean there.

I think where we disagree is the idea that graffiti can be used constructively. An example would be something like propaganda in Nazi Germany. Would it be wrong for someone to graffiti over a Nazi billboard in order to expose atrocities commited by the German military? If so, why? They paid for the billboard fair and square.

I understand that this is an extreme example, but hopefully you can see that the lines are not cut and dry. There is at the very least, some grey area. There are also a lot more forms of corruption in the world than just the blatant gassing of millions of people.

Seriously? If an organization is wrong-doing in any way, there are a lot of better and more effective, LEGAL ways to deal with it. Besides, it's not like a big doodle on a billboard is going to do anything. And now that I think of it, whenever I see graffiti (And I mean the "good" kind, not the scribbles), it's never on a billboard. It's always on the wall of a house, of a factory, of a small store, under a bridge... Stuff like that.

The problem is when companies start doing things like manipulating the political system for profit. If you think we are really living in free market capitalism, you have been duped. I'm not sure when exactly my view of American economics changed, but I know this article was a big eye opener (in case you are actually interested).

I think companies like pepsi and coke are also a bit of an extreme example. However, I don't think that it is in any way unhealthy what they do. Why not? Because coke and pepsi are made up of a LOT of people. And all those people have families, and all those people have needs. So: All those people need to get paid. SO: The less it costs to make the product, the more money they make, the better.
And as for the comparing with jones soda with how it's healthier and has more variety.... I don't drink soda, so it really doesn't matter to me. But hey, once again, people choose what to buy.



I understand that this is an extreme example, but hopefully you can see that the lines are not cut and dry. There is at the very least, some grey area. There are also a lot more forms of corruption in the world than just the blatant gassing of millions of people.

If there is a gray area, I've never heard of any cases.





Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 04, 2011, 11:58:53 AM
Future of our planet? Survival and growth of our species??  What are we talking about here? what exactly and why is selling water bottles bad for humanity as a whole?
I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you mean there.

Now in video form! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se12y9hSOM0)

Seriously? If an organization is wrong-doing in any way, there are a lot of better and more effective, LEGAL ways to deal with it. Besides, it's not like a big doodle on a billboard is going to do anything. And now that I think of it, whenever I see graffiti (And I mean the "good" kind, not the scribbles), it's never on a billboard. It's always on the wall of a house, of a factory, of a small store, under a bridge... Stuff like that.

Doing things within the confines of the legal system doesn't exactly work when the thing you are fighting controls the legal system. If something written on a billboard had no effect, why would someone pay for it in the first place?

I think companies like pepsi and coke are also a bit of an extreme example. However, I don't think that it is in any way unhealthy what they do. Why not? Because coke and pepsi are made up of a LOT of people. And all those people have families, and all those people have needs. So: All those people need to get paid. SO: The less it costs to make the product, the more money they make, the better.
And as for the comparing with jones soda with how it's healthier and has more variety.... I don't drink soda, so it really doesn't matter to me. But hey, once again, people choose what to buy.

Please don't respond to an article that you didn't read, or at most skimmed through the first couple of paragraphs. Just say you didn't feel like reading it.

If there is a gray area, I've never heard of any cases.

*facepalm*
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 04, 2011, 12:03:58 PM
Ugh... This thread makes my head hurt on both sides of the spectrum...

What is the intent of the law? I was in Germany a few years back, riding the train to Munich. On the way we passed a building with a giant, amazing, detailed... Penis. Two things came to my mind; That's a penis... And, that is an incredible work. It blew my mind with how much time the artist(s) had to spend creating it. I only wish I had a picture of it. The problem is, most people, myself included, don't want to have penises scrawled all over our cities.

The point of that little story is this; While some graffiti is art and a beautiful expression, some of it is not acceptable... No matter how funny I thought it was. It basically comes down to the 80/20 rule. Which means that most people won't cause a problem, but the minority will screw it up for everyone.

At the end of the day though, it's illegal without permission. So knock it off.

This is very true, sir.

So knock it off!





Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 04, 2011, 12:20:59 PM
This is very true, sir.

So knock it off!

I really hope this isn't just another way of ignoring anything that I have said. If so, I am done trying. Maybe someday you will actually take a deeper look at the beliefs you hold.



EDIT: Edited for douche-ness.

Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ryan Nicolai on January 04, 2011, 12:26:18 PM
Was that really necessary? That one post just destroyed the respect you had been building in my eyes. While I don't agree with everything you've been saying, you were handling yourself in a calm and controlled manner, which I respected.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 04, 2011, 12:35:01 PM
Was that really necessary? That one post just destroyed the respect you had been building in my eyes. While I don't agree with everything you've been saying, you were handling yourself in a calm and controlled manner, which I respected.

Everyone has a threshold. When I take people's point of view into consideration and really try to think of things from their perspective, and then they blow off everything that I say as inconsequential BS, I get a little bothered.

Post has been edited accordingly.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 04, 2011, 12:38:02 PM
I didn't mean to send that message.

I just got tired of arguing is all.

Perhaps if we were speaking to each other I could've continued on, but I never learned to type the right way and my fingers were getting sore.



In the video about water bottles, and I say this in risk of you telling me I didn't watch it, I didn't see any problem pointed out. AND I saw a lot of figures pulled out of their hats...

Anyway, I think videos like that just use guilt to brainwash you. Guilt, and jealousy of the high class...

I don't particularly love rich people, but in videos like this it always seems like they hate them.





EDIT:  Anyway, I'm having company in a few hours, so I'd like to get some training in before I shower.

Keep your city clean, bros!
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Ryan Nicolai on January 04, 2011, 12:44:46 PM
Klaymen, I completely understand your frustration. I've been around the internet long enough, that I've had my share of experiences like that, I'm sure we all have. I hope I didn't come off as angry or aggressive with you.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 04, 2011, 12:49:52 PM
In the video about water bottles, and I say this in risk of you telling me I didn't watch it, I didn't see any problem pointed out. AND I saw a lot of figures pulled out of their hats...

Anyway, I think videos like that just use guilt to brainwash you. Guilt, and jealousy of the high class...

I don't particularly love rich people, but in videos like this it always seems like they hate them.

You're right that there is a bit of an "neo-environmentalist" (read:anti-corporate) tinge to the video. That doesn't, however, discredit their message.

I'll make it easier for you. Bottled water uses massive amounts of energy, lowers air quality, and creates useless garbage. This is all done for a product that is completely unnecessary. A truly self-aware society would not let something like this happen, but we're not there yet.

The reason I said you didn't read that article is because I could tell you didn't. I still think you should, but hey, that's your choice.

Alas, this is getting very off topic. I'll just respond to the original topic in a similar way that you have been responding:


I don't see anything pointing out why graffiti is bad.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 05, 2011, 08:58:07 AM
I don't see anything pointing out why graffiti is bad.

-It makes the streets look dirty
-It's illegal
-not everyone likes what people draw. (See ryan's penis story)
-If what you say is true, it gets in the way of good, healthy business.



Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 05, 2011, 01:00:31 PM
I read through your post, but I still don't see any reasons why it's bad. The streets are already dirty.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 05, 2011, 01:07:26 PM
I read through your post, but I still don't see any reasons why it's bad. The streets are already dirty.


It's wrong. It's rebellious, it's dirty, it's immature, it's a waste of time, it's a bother to clean up, it makes a neighborhood look like it's full of criminals, it shows a lack of respect for other people's property, AND IT'S AGAINST THE LAW.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: A on January 05, 2011, 04:01:21 PM
I highly doubt that Graffitti Artists are going to damage the image of Parkour in any significant way, It's just not going to happen. You can't control the people who use Parkour related techniques or the other Hobbies/Arts that they associate themselves with, theres nothing you can do about that. It's a generally harmless and non-violent crime in any case. The point is there are things far more important to focus your energy towards, and there is no reason to be heated or worried over something so trivial. I'm sure Parkour can somehow manage to survive this horrible ordeal  ::)
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: Dillon Johnson on January 05, 2011, 05:17:07 PM

It's wrong. It's rebellious, it's dirty, it's immature, it's a waste of time, it's a bother to clean up, it makes a neighborhood look like it's full of criminals, it shows a lack of respect for other people's property, AND IT'S AGAINST THE LAW.

Society should be aiming for rebellion, not trashing it. Rebellion is how we fight back against bland times, and bland places.

As klaymen said, the streets are already dirty. There's trash everywhere, and only a few groups are helping to clean it up.

As to the immaturity part, how is art immature? There's an old, abandoned KFC down the street from where I live, and it is becoming quite the graffiti hotspot. It makes an old, useless building look a bit nicer.

The criminal comment. Oy Vey... Art is not criminal, nor does it make people look criminal. Ghandi was sent to prison. By your reasoning, Andy Warhol should have been as well.

Respect: Almost a valid argument, but is graffiti (disregarding gang signs) really all that common on private property? Unless someone's been hired to do it, no.

The law: A valid argument, but if laws constrict our creativity, what do we have left?
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: klaymen on January 06, 2011, 12:21:12 PM

It's wrong. It's rebellious, it's dirty, it's immature, it's a waste of time, it's a bother to clean up, it makes a neighborhood look like it's full of criminals, it shows a lack of respect for other people's property, AND IT'S AGAINST THE LAW.

I was being purposely dismissive of everything you said in an attempt to show you how annoying it can be. I stand by what I said in our political discussion, and I still think you should read that article. The world is not as black and white as you seem to think it is. Companies do own lawmakers, and sometimes the best way to get a message out is through graffiti. As long as people are not messing with an active business, I don't see a problem with it.
Title: Re: Graffiti
Post by: mickeynotmouse on January 06, 2011, 01:21:00 PM
I highly doubt that Graffitti Artists are going to damage the image of Parkour in any significant way, It's just not going to happen. You can't control the people who use Parkour related techniques or the other Hobbies/Arts that they associate themselves with, theres nothing you can do about that. It's a generally harmless and non-violent crime in any case. The point is there are things far more important to focus your energy towards, and there is no reason to be heated or worried over something so trivial. I'm sure Parkour can somehow manage to survive this horrible ordeal  ::)




Now THAT's an eye-opener.

I got all caught up in those direct personal attacks I forgot what I was talking about in the first place!

You're right, bro. You're right.