Ok, I am pulling the plug now.
Whatever could have been said, has been said.
Discussing graffiti is a no-no in the Trains forums, and as long as it stayed civil, we have let it roll. We have left that state.
vsmith
Yikes! Hope nobody got hurt!
Let me make a couple of points, and let me tie this subject back to our model railroading as best I can.
1. There's a lot of things that are real in the prototype world we model which, for one reason or another, do or don't make it into our modelling. Lynn Wescott, for instance, was uncommonly fond of outhouses....I think he thought it was funny or humorous or something, but I personally find this infantile at best. To each his own; to each his own model.
2. No one sensible will deny the high-quality decorative aspects of some spray paint work, nor the amount of thought and effort that goes into it. Decorative does not mean art, though. AND what I've seen on boxcars is hasty, not-too-thoughtful, and could definitely stand improvement on the decorative side, perhaps because the trespassers are afraid of the appearance of the BNSF and UP police??
3. Whether or not graffiti is art is not the issue. Let's say all this graffiti IS true art. We have a boundary issue here. When I want to see art as in landscapes and portraits and sculpture from traditional artists I go to the museum, a gallery, or some such place as a public area where the community has agreed art is a good thing to display. On the other hand, I don't want to see, for instance, Michelangelo's David, which maybe one of the greatest sculptures of all time, IN MY FRONT YARD! No thank YOU!
4. Boxcar graffiti is not territorial, gang-challenge, territory infringement provoking writing that is going to require retaliation and even active violence to protect one gang's turf. Boxcars move from place to place, the purpose of boxcar graffiti now is to get your work out there in front of as many people as possible. It's a fascinating idea and way of getting your work around....but it's vandalism and punishable.
5. But advertising on boxcars is NOT illegal. You should see some of the light-rail trains here in Denver where the ENTIRE train is one big ad. Why? Because there's money and permission involved. And advertising on the sides of buildings (somebody needs to take a good look at George Sellios's layout) is acceptable (and attractive to some modellers) because we've agreed as a community it's an acceptable means of commerce.....however, as OBNOXIOUS as some advertising these days is, there are fixed boundary issues here. You are unlikely to find some huge billboard of a fat ugly car salesman leering over you in the midst of a quiet residential area. The problem with graffiti is that there is no boundary as to where it might show up.
I think the anger and desire for revenge and punishment we are hearing in some of this discussion comes from a sense of having our visual and property boundaries severely violated by graffiti and the people who make it.
6. Let's not get down or all moral-sounding on manufacturers for creating models with graffiti as a reflection of the real world when there's a guy in every model rr club who has a long, long consist made up of nothing but (pre-manufactured) beer reefers, okay?
7. Here's the bottom modelling line for me: (a) people shouldn't be trespassing on rr property and defacing equipment with art or spray paint or anything else, not on real railroads and NOT on my model railroad...it's dangerous, uncivilized, and unattractive, not to mention illegal!!; (b) graffiti on trains just doesn't look right to me....it looks out of place; and (c) you go ahead and model whatever you want on your model railroad.
The St. Francis Consolidated Railroad of the Colorado Rockies
Denver, Colorado
Have fun with your trains
ztribob white's only signs and maybe even a lynching of a black man?
white's only signs and maybe even a lynching of a black man?
Is that what we're comparing some paint to? I'm not denying that graffiti is a crime and may be offensive, but jeez....
And so, the fact that it's just the way it is and we're just modeling the real world as it is, would justify someone who was modeling a souther railroad in the 50's with white's only signs and maybe even a lynching of a black man? It's my garden railroad and I produce something that gives me enjoyment, not something that reminds me of all that's wrong in the world.
Bob
... The fact that a few vandals from 30 years ago became famous and are now making a living from this rubbish is the very problem. The current crop of vandals might have thought twice if their forebears were in prison for their crimes. Now they can see a path to fame through crime.
Two points...
First, the chances of facing any kind of jail time for vandalism is pretty slim. In Colorado, you've got to really cause a ton of damage to warrant anything more than just a few months (as a maximum sentence). Fines and losing your driver's license are far more likely a penalty, maybe restitution to the owner. So jail as a deterrent simply doesn't exist. I don't think it ever has, nor do I see that changing in today's times. It's just not effective (in terms of cost or "corrections") to put people behind bars for tagging.
As for the success stories, would you rather they find a legitimate outlet for their creativity or continue their life of crime? You can't keep an artist from creating. The point I'm making is that these success stories have forged a path for success with their skills that now doesn't involve crime. It's about showing today's kids that they can be successful with this kind of art without needing to resort to crime.
The problem of graffiti will always exist, but it's been demonstrated time and time again that if you give young kids something productive to do, they don't do destructive things. That's how you break the cycle. But these alternatives can only be successful when they mesh with the kids' natural proclivities. A kid who's more artistic than athletic isn't going to enjoy playing basketball. That's where these reformed miscreants from 30 years ago can be a positive influence, despite their "storied" past. They've been where these kids are today, and can help them find alternatives that better match their natural abilities. Give them a productive, legitimate venue through which to hone their skills, and they won't be as inclined to tag everything that moves. Give them an audience that's appreciative of their talents, and they won't have any reason to stray elsewhere.
Later,
K
My : I have seen some pieces of graffiti that are quite artistic, but I don't condone defacing other's property (or gang activity). It is a crime, but it is becoming a part of railroading. Therefore, for modelers it is also becoming a part of detailing modern railroad equipment (whether that be a good thing or not).
Walt, The used car dealer paid for the space on that sign. It is legal. It is called advertising. No-one is trying to call it art, except maybe Andy Warhol.
Kevin, the fact that a few vandals from 30 years ago became famous and are now making a living from this rubbish is the very problem. The current crop of vandals might have thought twice if their forebears were in prison for their crimes. Now they can see a path to fame through crime. And again we pay to clean up the mess.
Mick
Chief Operating Officer
Northern Timber Company - Mt Beenak
You misunderstand. I'm not condoning the act in any respect. As I see it, I think moving graffiti off the streets and into galleries and museums could be a step towards curbing graffiti by showing those who might be inclined that there are avenues for self-expression that don't involve property crimes. That's the whole premise behind rec centers and other programs--to give kids the opportunity to use their talents in a productive manner as opposed to wasting them on the streets. What's the harm in recognizing artistic talent when we see it, then encouraging that talent to be used positively?
The fact that manufacturers produce models of this abomination, and supposedly reputable magazines advertise their damage as 'art' shows how american society has lost its moral compass.
It's not the job of the manufacturers or magazines to sanitize reality. History happened. It's strange that we push the manufacturers and magazines for more and more realism--except when it upsets our sensibilities? Graffiti on a model railroad box car no more glorifies vandalism than a "Whites Only" sign on a station waiting room promotes racism. Railroading has always had its ugly underbelly. It's our call as individuals how sanitized we want our version of history as we reflect it on our own railroads, but it's important that we understand that history, warts and all.
When they start buying the spray cans and painting their own car or home I might take a different view.
One thing to keep in mind... We're only seeing a very small part of the exhibit in this article. Here's a link to the museum's blog about the exhibit:
http://www.moca.org/audio/blog/?cat=84
Reading that, you get a much broader perspective about the aim of the exhibit; that it's about showcasing exactly what you're saying--that these artists are buying their own spray cans and painting their own cars (or canvases). And as I read it, the exhibit does talk at length about the destructive nature of graffiti over the past 40 years--not to glorify it, but just give perspective as to how it's evolved since the beginning to where--yes--it's still very much a destructive element in society, but it's also evolved into a force for benefiting the community as well, and how many artists have "turned legit" and made quite a name for themselves.
O.K. let's throw a little more wood on this fire - Can there be anything more annoying, gaudy, and pervasive than roadside advertising ? How annoying is a 20 foot tall billboard shaped like a mouse extolling the virtues of a certain brand of cheese or a group of half dressed young people swilling beer and inviting you to join them, etc, etc. We're inundated with this crappola everyday and everywhere we look but that's O.K. - it's corporate and it's legal. We legitimize this stuff because it is the work of and for the middle class, it's our folk art.
I don't find the graffiti on a subway coach or boxcar any more annoying or distasteful than a huge picture of an overweight car dealer leering down at me from a billboard. The main difference is that the graffiti is the work of some disadvantaged kid seeking attention, a member of a subclass somehow less worthy than ourselves, but the fat car dealer, he's O.K., because ..... ?
Walt
Kevin,
'I might not know art, but I know what I like' is so old that it has fallen into mainstream art appreciation folklore.
BUT, this is not what we are talking about. The 'artist' has to trespass in order to perform his 'art'. Secondly, he does not own the medium onto which he applies his 'art', so a second crime of criminal damage occurs. (I also know from years in law enforcement that most graffitists shoplift the spray cans, another level of crime.) As Andrew points out, one was recently hit and killed by a passing train as he trespassed and vandalised property. That collision becomes a crime scene and trains are halted in that section for many hours, inconveniencing the public further.
In this country, most railway property and rolling stock is government owned. So my taxes and fares are increased to pay for the removal of this rubbish. And most of it is removed as soon as it is detected, to remove the joy of seeing their work in motion, so suburban electric trains are withdrawn from service for cleaning, making one less set available for the next day or so.
'Poor Moral Choice'? Are you kidding? This is the sort of nanny state gibberish that has led us to this discussion. They are vandals with too much time on their hands and no effective parental control. If I broke into your home and did hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage, you would expect me to go to gaol, (jail in your land). Yet you think these vandals should be lauded and their work displayed as modern masterpiece?
Although from the perspective of the art only, I cannot disagree with your comments. However one must consider the source, the hand that generated the 'art'. Please keep in mind that most of the 'art' we are viewing on the sides of freight cars is in reality 'gang signs'. This is their way of proclaiming their existence. From my point of view, ANY showing of legitimacy to the tagging bolsters their 'right' to exist. Tagging is vandalism, plain and simple, is illegal, and should not be promoted by any worthwhile publication.
Bob C.
I'll readily agree with the sentiment that graffiti is vandalism. However, I think to discount the affect that "street art"--regardless of the "canvas" upon which it's painted--has on modern culture based solely on the premise that it's morally corrupt is a bit short-sighted. I think it's that aspect of "street art" which this museum showing looks to showcase, not the morals (or lack thereof) of the artists. It's a very easy task to argue that the stylings of street art have made their way into many aspects of modern design. I frequently see murals that reflect that style painted at the request of the building owner or community. Whether one views these murals as "art" is highly subjective. There's hardly a modern art museum I've been in where I'd bestow that honor on even half of what's hanging on the walls, so clearly tastes vary. (@St. Francis, next time I'm at your studio, you'll have to explain the appeal of Clifford Still. I just don't get it--at least not to the tune of the $30 million they're claiming for that one painting that got damaged.)
The objection, as I see it, seems to stem from the notion that the art and the canvas are inextricably combined; that you cannot celebrate the art without promoting the immorality of the artist. The way I see it, I can listen to 60s and 70s rock, and appreciate it for the music and its influence on modern rock without feeling like I'm glorifying the rampant drug use that created most of it. Graffiti such as that depicted on the cars in the article is much the same. I can appreciate the vision and talent that allows those visions to be created with cans of spray paint without feeling like my appreciation of those talents is encouraging property damage. Those talents exist no matter where the paint lands. It's simply a poor moral choice by the artist that he chooses freight cars instead of canvas.
I too was disturbed by the article. If it had been presented simply as a "weathering" type of article, for those who merely wish to make their rolling stock depict an reality of modern life, that would have been one thing. But this article seemed to glamorize the individuals who commit the destruction of property not their own.
It doesn't matter how "good" the graffiti may be. It could be the next Mona Lisa, but if you're doing on someone else's property without their permission, it's a crime and a despicable act.
To me its all about just how "accurately" do you want to depict your modeling world. I can't imaging a modern Class 1 RR without graffiti strewn cars, its a fact of modern life and as such IF your truely a rivet counter for accuracy, you would by definition have to include tagged cars otherwise that air of beleivablity falters. It would be like modeling Southern Pacific in the 90's and using all shiny perfect locomotives and not the grimy oily horrid rust traps they were actually using. It's a credability issue to me.
As for transition era or earlier, the fact is that graffiti has been around since at least the earliest part of the 20th century, hobos and other tramps left their chalk marks all over rail yards, cars and equipment, particularly Depression era layout, theres actually quite alot of interesting railroad history tied up in those chalk marks. and as such I wouldnt see any reason why they shouldnt be a part of any true model railroad layout, regardless of scale or era.
But thats a question of choice by the individual modeler of course. its their RR so they have final say over what they want to depict.
Railroad rolling stock and facilities "decorated" with more or less elaborate spray paintings (just to avoid the word) are an issue all over the so called civilized world. It has become a common practice, mainly in urban areas, that "clean" surfaces invite ill-led persons to use them for their purposes.
Whether this is regarded as "Art", lies in the eyes of the beholder, in my eyes, it is not, therefore it does not find a place on my layout. There is one little exception, as you can see in the following picture. Take a close look at the right side of the tunnel portal:
Rene S However, please play nice and keep the thread clean.
However, please play nice and keep the thread clean.
Thanks Rene...I for one think this discussion has been interesting and productive. I think it also supports the notion that we large-scale modellers may be opinionated at times but are usually civil.
Can you imagine this discussion on the main MRR forum? OMG it likely would have crashed and burned in a ball of fire within an hour!!
Although I have not yet receive my copy, this subject has come up on other fora I read and the best definition I have see is:
When the canvas you are painting on is yours, it is art work.
When the canvas you are painting on is some one elses, it is vandalism.
Rene, and the editors,
I truly hope that the inclusion of an article of this sort was not viewed as a neutral issue. I for one am very opinionated on this issue, as are many others. To have run this charged subject and to not have expected a dialog on this form would have been naive at best. Thank you for allowing the continuance, as I believe GR could garner some insight for future issues.
Having read this forum, I most likely will skip the article.
vsmith Strictly Modelling speaking... Like it or not, train graffiti is a VERY REAL part of modern railroad operations, and like it or not, modern railroads just simply DONT LOOK REAL unless the cars ALSO reflect there real world counterparts, to neglect such an obvious reality is to the detriment of the modern model RRer, lets face it folks, like it or not, graffited cars are going to a BIG part of future model railroading for those modelling the modern world. Its already got a big following in the HO realm, with prepainted cars being offered RTR from major makers. Get used to it...
Strictly Modelling speaking... Like it or not, train graffiti is a VERY REAL part of modern railroad operations, and like it or not, modern railroads just simply DONT LOOK REAL unless the cars ALSO reflect there real world counterparts, to neglect such an obvious reality is to the detriment of the modern model RRer, lets face it folks, like it or not, graffited cars are going to a BIG part of future model railroading for those modelling the modern world. Its already got a big following in the HO realm, with prepainted cars being offered RTR from major makers. Get used to it...
One more REALLY GOOD reason for modeling the transition era, or before. N&W dropped their last fire before the paint can Picassos got a start.
I model 1964 - in a country where a spray-can `artiste' would shortly find himself in the grip of a no-nonsense O-Marisan and nose to nose with an equally unsympathetic magistrate. The railroad was a national monopoly, and you DID NOT apply unauthorized markings to the Emperor's property.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Last week a young fellow was killed while trying to spray a tag. His "friends" said that he did not hear the train coming until it was a metre away from him.
It was not a one off incident or first time as his tag was shown as being around various parts of the rail system. In New South Wales the trains are government owned. So cleaning graffitti comes from the tax payer.
In my opinion it is an eyesore.
Andrew
Sandbar & Mudcrab
BTW This sums up my opinion of taggers....
For Christmas my wife and I took Amtrak from Kalamazoo, MI to San Francisco and back. I saw a lot of fright cars along the way. Many of them were taged. I can't say as any of it improved the appearance of the original paint work by the railroad. Anytime I've seen an article about the art of taging, The example photos have always been a few of them more impressive displays that I will have to admit do display some talent. But 99% of anything I've even seen in real life has been just plain vandalism. And even if the best of it was applied to the side of my house or car, I would be just a little upset.
Before the advent of kids having money in their pockets and the freely available spray can, the method of 'artwork' was usually done with chalks. Chalk was easily removed or rain washed it off.
An individual, a few years ago, in the London area cost the London Underground (now part of TfL) system millions of pounds in removing the initials that he spayed in many parts and on many cars of their system. Some places very not that easily accessed, but he managed it. After something like four years - lots of manpower hours removing his daubs and searching for him - he was eventually caught and convicted this year.
The attached link makes interesting reading: particularly his 'sales' of his 'so called artwork'.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/jun/07/tox-graffiti-artist-criminal-damage
Alan, Oliver & North Fork Railroad
https://www.buckfast.org.uk/
If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there. Lewis Carroll English author & recreational mathematician (1832 - 1898)
FYI, just wanted to let you know that, ordinarily, our forums don't allow the discussions of graffiti or hobos, etc., because the topic usually turns nasty.
That being said, since our magazine ran an article about this subject, I will allow this thread to discuss the topic. However, please play nice and keep the thread clean.
Rene Schweitzer
Classic Toy Trains/Garden Railways/Model Railroader
I suspect the reason coal cars are not taged is the vandals don't want to get their hands dirty first cleaning the surface so their paint will stick. If it's not cleaned I doubt if the paint would stick with all the coal dust.
Mark
M. Gilger - President and Chief Engineer MM&G web
Web Site: http://mmg-garden-rr.webs.com/
grandpopswalt Instead, how about this - in NYC there was / is a program whereby apprehended graffiti artists are required to spend about 30 hours, over several weekends cleaning up graffiti. They're given cans of solvent and bags of rags and are taken out under police supervision to remove graffiti from buildings, subways, etc. I understand the program is very successful.
Instead, how about this - in NYC there was / is a program whereby apprehended graffiti artists are required to spend about 30 hours, over several weekends cleaning up graffiti. They're given cans of solvent and bags of rags and are taken out under police supervision to remove graffiti from buildings, subways, etc. I understand the program is very successful.
Not that I live in New York so it's none of my darn business, but I'm glad to hear this......it is funny you should mention this because it was in the New York City art world where it became a high fashion (until they moved on to the next fashion) to promote graffiti as a form of art; in fact, the subway cars and locomotives became the prime urban "canvas" and, under the banner of art and social "acceptance and understanding," the city encouraged the practice to the point where you would have thought their next step was going to be handing out spray cans to "artists" who couldn't afford paint. (It might be noted that the buildings where the high art critics and movers/shakers lived were pristine of course; they weren't volunteering their residences as canvases.)
Just about every doggone boxcar I see all up and down the front range is tagged .... but not the Burlington Northern coal cars. Oh, no, no, no. They don't put up with that kind of thing for one second!
Mt Beenak I fully agree with all of the above.. We recently had a Government website preserve outlines of our suburban electric train fleet so that these vandals could plan and practice their murals before leaving their homes. What sort of message does that send??? Cutting off their hands seems a little lenient.....
I fully agree with all of the above.. We recently had a Government website preserve outlines of our suburban electric train fleet so that these vandals could plan and practice their murals before leaving their homes. What sort of message does that send???
Cutting off their hands seems a little lenient.....
Ouch !!!! - amputation for spraying some paint on a boxcar ? Seems a little medieval, no ? What kind of punishment would you guys prescribe for burglary or embezzlement ? Instead, how about this - in NYC there was / is a program whereby apprehended graffiti artists are required to spend about 30 hours, over several weekends cleaning up graffiti. They're given cans of solvent and bags of rags and are taken out under police supervision to remove graffiti from buildings, subways, etc. I understand the program is very successful.
As a man who respects other people's property, I agree it's plain and simple criminal vandalism and the magazine editors should be ashamed of themselves.
But allow me to share an artist's perspective. I've been a full-time professional artist my whole life, and I remember back in the Sixties when it briefly became "cool" to bestow the term artist on a bunch of screwed-up kids with paint cans.
And here we have this article still mindlessly glorifying vandalism as if it were something new and beautiful and creative in the art world. It was insulting to real artists fifty years ago, and it still is.
In all these years, I have yet to see even one instance of graffiti that rises to the level of serious art. Frankly, I would rather own a painting of dogs playing poker.
Get the Garden Railways newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month