|
stellauk -> RE: graffiti (12/5/2011 4:30:22 PM)
|
I'm going to be honest.. I'm divided.
I recognize tagging and graffiti as part of culture, on the fringe, but my views are almost the same as for advertising.
It depends on the morality. It can be art, it can be vandalism, just as much as it can be activism. You can say the exact same thing about advertising.
There is a dilemma however which is particular to tagging. I'm all for the provision of more community spaces devoted to tagging. But I doubt that those who engage in tagging would find this acceptable.
I'm also all for anger to be expressed creatively and for statements to be made. But here again morality plays a crucial role.
I'm all for alternative, angry, creative and controversial where it makes a point, attracts an audience and makes them think. This is the whole point behind alternative.
But when it's an angry individual just coming out with a stock design on public or private property without agreement that's not being alternative, creative, or artistic - it's basically attention-seeking behaviour, vandalism, and not so much controversial as stupid.
My advice to anyone in the latter is to actually take themselves off and go to art school, learn music, study acting or theatre and actually learn what it really means to be alternative.
|
|
|
|
