In message , Richard J.
writes

"Kat" wrote in message
...
In message , Ishmael
Sayle III writes
A lot of the people comitting this crime, are in their 20s, you think
they'd
know better, a lot are in work some highly paid and in responsible
positions, apparantly they deface the world for the thrill.

I lothe graffiti, it make the world an ugly threatning place, it's not
art
thats for certain.

I could *possibly* agree with you about some graffiti but I don't think
Picasso would have agreed with you when he painted Guernica.
Art isn't *only* pictures suitable for chocolate boxes.

You're missing the point, Kat. It's not a question of whether it's nice to
look at. The difference is that Picasso used his own canvas to paint on,
not someone else's property without their permission. It's the total lack
of respect for our, yes *our*, property that people find threatening.

I don't think I missed the point at all... the previous poster was
implying that because it made the world a threatening place, it was not
art. It may well be art in spite of the effect it has on you, the
viewer, and in spite of the fact that it's not on the perpetrator's own
property.

Whether you and I enjoy it or not, Graffiti is a valid form of visual
expression.

http://www.graffiti.org/faq/graf.def.html
--
Kat Me, Ambivalent? Well, yes and no.