London Banter - View Single Post

Richard J. · January 30th 04, 08:38 PM posted to uk.transport.london

Robin May wrote:
(Chippy) wrote the following in:
m

Robin May wrote in message
. 1.4...
(trainspotter) wrote the following in:
om

what do you all think of graffiti?

It's generally ****. The graffiti you get on the tube is not the
artistic sort of graffiti, it's just rubbish looking tags and
meaningless things scratched in windows.

The 'tagging' variety is indicative of a mentality like that of a
dog urinating against a lamppost.

I agree.

The 'artistic' variety indicates that the perpetrator labours
under the delusion that he has some degree of talent.

I believe I've mentioned it before, but there is a foot bridge over
the District line near me that seems to be a designated location for
people to do graffiti, and the people who've done things there really
do have talent (I should probably take some photos of it actually).
Unfortunately I can't really think of anywhere else that I've seen
stuff of the same quality, so I suppose the vast majority of graffiti
probably is just rubbish.

Even if the graffiti perpetrators think they have some talent, what makes
them think it's legitimate to impose their designs on someone else's
property, which the owner has decided will be painted in a particular
colour? What really annoys me are graffiti vandals who destroy the quiet
dignity of a brick wall that has stood for perhaps 130 years serving the
people of London. I don't care whether it's a mere tag or something more
elaborate and colourful. It's still criminal damage. Please don't be
tempted, Robin, to give the criminals the recognition they crave by
photographing their mutilation of our environment.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)