← Back to context

Comment by voidUpdate

12 hours ago

The thing that really gets me about graffiti is that you don't own the canvas. It's just vandalism. If you're commissioned to do it one someone else's wall, I'd call that a mural instead, and I see quite a few aesthetically pleasing ones around. Why can't you paint on stuff you actually own, instead of making it someone else's problem? You might as well just shit on someone else's lawn and say it's fine because it's art

If a graffiti artist believed shitting on a lawn was art, they would, but they don't.

The problem and solution are similar to OSS:

The problem: the artists have something to say, they want as many people as possible to see it and use it.

The solution: make it free, and put it where as many people as possible can access it.

Yes, I just compared graffiti to github.

> You might as well just shit on someone else's lawn and say it's fine because it's art.

Are you referring to 'tagging' (putting your, or your gang name on something)?

I agree.

Referring to well-crafted, or political (think banksy), images, i agree less. Unless i don't like the image/style then it's only lawn-worthy.

  • I don't agree with the political graffiti either. See imgur as where this leads. imgur used to be interesting images. Now it's 90% images of text as political statements. The site is effectively ruined.