&*%/# Starving Artists @%#! A follow up to "Graffiti - Art or Vandalism"

[Anonymous]

Big_Boy_4005 - I think I understand where you have been coming from and what is the dilemma we all face, but probably in varying degrees from awe to disgust.
To say that some graffiti is good, or okay , while other graffiti is bad, and not okay is so subjective. It's like saying some rap is good music and vice versa. How do you define what is offensive on the internet or TV? Should this, and not that, be blocked or deemed in poor taste? Graffiti cannot be judged as either good or bad from a legal sense -it's all illegal, period. Does some graffiti illustrate artistic talent? Absolutely. And it's not unlike music, in that some people shouldn't try to sing anymore than some shouldn't try to paint, no matter what the canvas. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

[Big_Boy_4005]

Now that is bad!!! Of course this is a stationary object, that happens to be a train in a public park. This is just moronic tagging and defacing public property, and has no redeeming qualities what so ever!

Thanks for sharing this Sask. It is a good example of bad graffiti, and helps to illistrate the distinction that I'm trying to make.

[Anonymous]

This is what angers me the most and I consider to be a really big insult-putting graffiti on a steam locomotive!!!!!!! Can you get any worse?!!!!

[trainfan1221]

Thanks for the heads up, roadtrp. I`ll look for that car.
A friend of mine actually put hers and another friends name on a car at a local yard to see of they would run into them anyplace else. They never did, and I think it doubtful they will.
As for the MR boxcar possibly getting graffittied, its definitely possible. Most people who aren`t one of us certainly won`t care what it is. It might even attract these people since it is something different.
Reminds me of how TRAINS all american locomotive had its commemorative plates stolen.

[Anonymous]

well put Big Boy.

[Big_Boy_4005]

I have always said that I like to provoke THOUGHT among my fellow modelers, and these graffiti topics have truly done just that. Nobody has gone ballistic, though some people have gotten a little rattled, but I don't see that as a bad thing.

I'm not really trying to GLORIFY graffiti, just call attention to something that I sort of discovered by accident.

I look at it somewhat philosophicly.

• I didn't put the graffiti on the cars
• I can't remove the graffiti from the cars
• I didn't see the person who DID put the graffiti on the cars
• I don't condone putting graffiti on ANYTHING

It is there, and I can't change that fact, so why not look at it in the most positive light possible. Remember, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade!!!![swg]

[Anonymous]

Agreed. (I know that this entire string 'got to me' and stirred up a lot of emotion that I hadn't vented before -- why else would I be up this late on the Right Coast, esp. on the night one has to turn their clocks ahead!)

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bill mathewson

I'm okay, you're okay. . . Is that okay?

[tup] Fine with me Bill, and congrats on your 500th post and third star.[bow][bday]

I have a feeling that anyone who participated in, or read this discussion, may be forever changed. Prehaps not their opinion, but their awareness of railroad graffiti.

[Anonymous]

I'm okay, you're okay. . . Is that okay?

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by easyaces

With all the fervor of this subject, and without further adue, how many of you would be really outraged if the MR 70th anniversary boxcar showed up with graffitti on it?

Hmmm, Interesting notion. I for one would not be outraged, as a matter of fact, I think I would find it somewhat amusing, and ironic. Isn't the MR 70th anniversary boxcar nothing more than railroad sanctioned graffiti. The Wisconsin Southern has kindly allowed MR to put IT"S TAG on one of their cars.

We as readers of MR feel that the 70th anniversary boxcar is special, but do you think that vandals are so discriminating as to pass over this car for a different one in the event that an opportunity arrises for them to make their mark on it????[:0][;)]

[Anonymous]

i can see that we won't all agree, so i think it's fair that we agree to dissagree, we all agree it's illegal and morally wrong, i think where we dissagree is the degree to which it is wrong, railroad companies for the most part are as stated above, huge faceless corporations, nobody is going to feel deeply hurt or violated if a train car gets painted, at the most people might not like it... i know rail workers who love it, and others who don't, and i know some workers that don't care either way and their only concern is the safety of the kids when they are near trains, and i also know railworkers who tag trains with their monikers, i don't see it as a waste of talent, i see these kids capitalizing on an artistic expression that allows their art to transcend borders, that's what kids do, pu***he limits..... im not saying it's okay to break the law, all i'm saying is that it's happening, and im not gonna get mad about it, im going to embrace it and will look forward to see what else will roll my way....

[Anonymous]

Any painting on any canvas may be construded as "art". To admit that graffiti is an act of expressing an attitude, emotion, anger, defiance, hatred, or simply 'tagging' is reality. To believe that it is the work of a 'talented' individual can be debated. One could use the same argument that a teenage computer hacker is an incredible computer whiz. . .Both the hacker and the graffiti 'artist', however, are not applying their skills and abilities within the context of what is considered socially acceptable or legal. Neither will they ever develop their 'talent' to be ligitimately recognized as long as they continue to commit illegal and intrusive acts on the public and private sector. It is entirely up to the individual viewer to judge whether or not graffiti is 'art', and for that matter, if it should be admired as 'art'. Did you ever consider that some graffiti is meant to stir up anger or to scream out to a more conservative society that the 'artist' can and will do anything they damn well please with little or no regard that they are defacing someone else's property, for they consider that property as only their canvas, and maybe not a malicious act of vandalism, which it is. . .Somehow I doubt that that the graffiti painter even remotely considers what will be the financial impact of their expression, or that they are pigging up our railroads, highways, and towns.simply because they don't care. It is an impossible pill for me to swallow that anyone could admire such a waste of potential talent and to admire their work as 'art'.

[easyaces]

With all the fervor of this subject, and without further adue, how many of you would be really outraged if the MR 70th anniversary boxcar showed up with graffitti on it?

[Big_Boy_4005]

I think we need to stop trying to make the argument that defacing personal property is wrong. We all know that, and I sincerely believe that the people who vandalize railroad cars believe that too!!!!

The difference in their minds is that while homes belong to individuals, railroad cars belong to large IMPERSONAL CORPORATIONS, and there by, they feel that their actions are hurting no one, and the cars are fair game.

This whole topic is not simply a matter of black and white, it has a great deal to do with our ability as human beings to reason. This is one of the things that make humans different from animals. Dogs, monkeys and dolphins, can be trained to do certain tasks, but as far as we know, they cannot communicate in a visual graphical manner, again this is something uniquely human.

We are looking at a subject that may have some redeeming quality here, but to simply dismiss it ALL as junk is just much to simple.

The fact that we are all engaged in an intelligent polite discussion is wonderfully human!!!

[warner brook]

i`am reminded of the time i went to an art gallery opening (my one and only),there was a door that had a sign that said open when i opened it there was an exhibit of a pile of dirt (about a ton) with a sign that said dirt.apparently the artist had major blockage.you can get as intellectual as you want to about it,but it still remains a pile of dirt. my point is don`t try and get intellectual about grafiti because its vandalism pure and simple.the same people that see it as art would be irate if it was done to there homes or property the age of the vandals doesn`t matter i`am sick of society making excuses for these morons.[soapbox][:(!]

[Anonymous]

"for those of you that view it as art would you welcome that so called art on your house or personal property?"

it's getting tiresome repeating myself to people who are too lazy to read previous posts and just jump in the middle of a discussion.. so i'll repost my response to this.

"i never said it was okay to deface private property, i said that graffiti, whether you like it or not is art, look at some of the trains i posted, those are amazing works of art, yes they are done illegally and it is vandalism, but graffiti by defintion is doing art without permission and it won't stop, now here me out.. i don't think that it should be accepted, graffiti artists wouldn't want it to be accepted, that's part of the risk they take, but any which way you approach this argument, graffiti for the most part is art if the graffiti artist had taken time to sketch something out before hand, fabricate a colour scheme and then paint the piece.. if that's not art i don't know what is... i certainly know that art isn't contingent on getting permission... so i don't want to hear this "so if i painted your car or house that would be okay".. it is certainly not okay, but if i woke up and saw a character and lettering on my garage, i wouldn't deny it's artistic merits"

[warner brook]

for those of you that view it as art would you welcome that so called art on your house or personal property? i don`t think so.i had a experience with a son of a minister that defaced my property when the police came the officer didn`t really want to do anything about it he said kids will be kids,only when i told him my kids will be kids with his house he decided to go see the boys father and resolve it.even though it`s a fact of life in some areas, i refuse to give it any dignity by modeling it

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dougal

I think its all junk. No matter how artistic it is its pure junk.

Well Mark, at least you know better than to go out and try it, so that's a start.[swg]

Art appreciatoin is something learned later in life by most people anyway.[;)]

[Anonymous]

I think its all junk. No matter how artistic it is its pure junk.

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by brothaslide

I knew a guy who used to tag, now he works as an animation artist for film. He "grew up" and realized that he was defacing private property.

The bottom line is that it makes are communities look awful. Like Bill M. I lived in Los Angeles and it is out of control in some communities. A lot of tagging is gang related and these guys don't think of walls and trains as property but as territory to be marked and a way to "represent". On the other hand, there are the "artists" who are not affiliated with any gang who see a side of a box car as a canvas.

Some of it is excellent work but it shouldn't be done on private or public property.

Sean

I like this story, and Sean's attitude toward graffiti. I think that there are many people that do bad things when they are young, but go on to be productive members of society later on.

I can see that Antonio was influenced by his exposure to graffiti at an early age, and this may account for his strong dislike for any such images. I respect his opinion, but offer a suggestion.

Just for a moment, set aside everything from your past, and just see the images that have been posted, ignoring what they were painted on, pretend it is just canvas. I don't think that I have the talent to create such images. Of course I have nothing to gain by persuading you to change your view, but feel that you may be missing out on something worth while. Even if you try looking at it this way, and find that you still don't like it, it is easy to go back to your old view.

I never thought about the fact that some of the large ones would require the use of a ladder to reach as high as they are painted. I wonder how long and how many people it takes to create such things, or if there are sketches done first for planning.

Ian, my guess is that graffiti started in the mid 60's. Some was gang related, but much was anti war protest. By the 70's, it was mostly gangs, and with the prevailing attitudes of society, viewing it as intolerable. In the 80's it may have been elevated to the level of "outlaw art", as the practitioners turned more to the rails.

[brothaslide]

I knew a guy who used to tag, now he works as an animation artist for film. He "grew up" and realized that he was defacing private property.

The bottom line is that it makes are communities look awful. Like Bill M. I lived in Los Angeles and it is out of control in some communities. A lot of tagging is gang related and these guys don't think of walls and trains as property but as territory to be marked and a way to "represent". On the other hand, there are the "artists" who are not affiliated with any gang who see a side of a box car as a canvas.

Some of it is excellent work but it shouldn't be done on private or public property.

Sean

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by stokerk

Recently I was watching a train roll on by, Out of 84 cars, 69 of them had graffiti on them, ....

Just wonderin', how many of you run cars on your layout with graffiti on them?

[Anonymous]

The image defines wether it is art or not. What is behind the paint can't be seen and therefore should not be considered when deciding if it is art or not.


My 2 cents worth.

[Anonymous]

i never said it was okay to deface private property, i said that graffiti, whether you like it or not is art, look at some of the trains i posted, those are amazing works of art, yes they are done illegally and it is vandalism, but graffiti by defintion is doing art without permission and it won't stop, now here me out.. i don't think that it should be accepted, graffiti artists wouldn't want it to be accepted, that's part of the risk they take, but any which way you approach this argument, graffiti for the most part is art if the graffiti artist had taken time to sketch something out before hand, fabricate a colour scheme and then paint the piece.. if that's not art i don't know what is... i certainly know that art isn't contingent on getting permission... so i don't want to hear this "so if i painted your car or house that would be okay".. it is certainly not okay, but if i woke up and saw a character and lettering on my garage, i wouldn't deny it's artistic merits... i would be pissed off but i wouldn't deny that it is art... so i'm saying that like it or not, graffiti will continue to be on freight trains, and i choose to embrace it rather than get pissed off whenever i see it... and i have every right to choose to enjoy it... you may not and im not asking anyone to accept it, i just don't think anyone should deny that it is art.

[Anonymous]

You know, some of this stuff really is good. I'm an art teacher, and I wish I'd have some of my kids have the skills to do work like this.

So how can we (whoever "we" are) encourage the creativity without the trespassing and painting on someone else's property? I guess my point is that if they're doing it for the sake of doing good art, find a way to channel it in to some sort of acceptability. Not the content, of course, but a means for more people to see it without considering it destructive. I wonder if those guys realize they could probably make good money getting commissions for large murals or paintings? Diego Rivera the great Mexican muralist worked his whole life in a large scale like this, and people accept it as being some of the best work ever. These guys are just as good, they just need a vehicle for their talent.

It would be interesting to find some of these people and learn what motivates them. If it's art for the sake of doing great art, find something they can paint on. But if they're doing it just to tag or someother subversive reason, then I just don't know...


mike
art teacher extraordinaire

[Anonymous]

Railover -- I suppose a nude painting of the "Madonna" (not the entertainer) paid for by tax payer funds and exhibited in a NYC galley is "art"? Or a rapper w/ his boom box so loud that it is in your face - is that music appreciation? Or if your child was busted for spray painting graffiti or gang signatures on a covered hopper, you'd give them an ataboy and brag on them to your coworkers and scream fowl that society was surpressing your child's artistic expression? There is a basic tenet of human society about respecting what is considered normal and unoffensive behavior, and graffiti is not one of those. Is it okay to disfigure a large freight car since it belongs to a large corporate entity and it doesn't damage you directly? What about rr bridges and highway overpasses-are they acceptable as canvas but the store fronts in your neighborhood are off limit because that may have a detrimental impact on real estate values affecting the worth and sanctity of your home? Don't mean to be judgemental but for you to state "that to not appreciate graffiti as art is a sign of ignorance", is more a reflection of a lack of values and maturity, regardless of how old or well-traveled one may be. You may be a model railroader in the strictest definition-you collect and 'play with' small trains, but how could you be a railfan with not only tolerance for, but admiration for, such a blatant disfiguring of an American institution? If you ever get 'tagged' let us know and we'll come over and admire the 'artwork' with you. I appologize for being so harsh on what should be a fun, meaningful, and thought provoking forum, but this really pixxxxed me off! You may want to re-examine and reconsider The Golden Rule. . .

[Roadtrp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trainfan1221

I can`t paint to save my life, so I would just as soon wait to see if any come out in n scale.

MDC Roundhouse has a graffiti car in 'N' scale.



[:)]

[AntonioFP45]

Railrover,

You make some good points regarding what can be defined as art, but it does depend on the values one grows up with.

I agree with Bill Matthewson 100%. Regarding the "beautiful graffitti murals" on New York City subway trains that my parents and I had to ride. To us was sickening!!! The so called "artists" became bolder and started to graffitti the insides of the trains! Indeed this beautiful art was in my face, the windows, the stations, the stairways, the EL structure support posts,etc.

This was not an art museum where if you saw something offensive you walk away. NO, We were forced to look at it! To deny that this was art is Ignorant?

Guy, I'm artistic myself! With BASF, PPG or DuPont automotive paint products I can paint beautiful murals on car hoods. But graffittied trains? The talented artists that I've had the priviledge of meeting (including teens) don't believe in shoving their artwork down the publics throat as what's being done today to rail cars.

[Anonymous]

arround were i live i see lots of graffiti becuase the RR yard is hidden partilally and we have mainly autoracks and hi cubes

[Anonymous]

illegal or not, vandelism or not, graffiti is art, art is not contingent on whether it is legal or not... graffiti is going to exist in one form or another, it can't be stopped, and i know that i would rather see a nice mural done on a train, with characters and lettering, than not seeing it at all, i guess it comes down to personal values and preferance, i am fan of art and trains and seeing graffiti on trains reminds me of the olden days when new york subway cars were filled with beautiful graffiti murals, but like it or not, it is art, to deny that is to be blatantly ignorant.