Dequindre Cut...Open When?

**Johnlodge** · May-18-09, 01:24 PM

You graffiti apologists just reinforce the general disrespect for other people's property that is already rampant. It's vandalism, plain and simple If it's not yours, don't fuck it up, how difficult is that? And why should there be a "legal" wall? You really think the people spraying this shit are going to say "oh, a legal wall, now I don't have to disrespect things that aren't mine!" How about the graffiti "artists" put a wall up in one of the vacant lots and spray on that? They can spend a fun day laying brick together, and when they're done they can spray their "art" all over it without destroying public property.

**GREENTROIT** · May-18-09, 02:56 PM

Well because somebody owns that vacant lot and we wouldn't want to harm other peoples property by building a wall on it now would we????

And most graffiti artists don't touch private property. It's sort of an unspoken rule that only public property should be touched. And as far as public property goes, the art should fit with its surroundings...

**Johnlodge** · May-18-09, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by GREENTROIT

Well because somebody owns that vacant lot and we wouldn't want to harm other peoples property by building a wall on it now would we????

And most graffiti artists don't touch private property. It's sort of an unspoken rule that only public property should be touched. And as far as public property goes, the art should fit with its surroundings...

Hey, you're starting to get the idea of respecting things that don't belong to you. Public property doesn't belong to you either, though, so unless you have the permission of the public, IE the local municipality, then your "art" doesn't belong on that either, because our tax dollars pay for it.

detmich · May-18-09, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by Johnlodge

Hey, you're starting to get the idea of respecting things that don't belong to you. Public property doesn't belong to you either, though, so unless you have the permission of the public, IE the local municipality, then your "art" doesn't belong on that either, because our tax dollars pay for it.

How about taggers get together and buy some thing of their own to tag on? Or is that too middle class for their sensibilities? Greentroit and Django you are simply acting as apologists for vandals. No rationalization, no clarification required. Whether you think it looks nice is irrelevant. Vandalising other's property is aggresive, illegal, antisocial behavior. You may enjoy it, much as a john enjoys his time with a prostitute, but it doesn't make it right.

**vintagesoul** · May-18-09, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by detmich

How about taggers get together and buy some thing of their own to tag on? Or is that too middle class for their sensibilities? Greentroit and Django you are simply acting as apologists for vandals. No rationalization, no clarification required. Whether you think it looks nice is irrelevant. Vandalising other's property is aggresive, illegal, antisocial behavior. You may enjoy it, much as a john enjoys his time with a prostitute, but it doesn't make it right.

wow. your ignorance is impressive.

count me in as an apologist. and show me the research that points to the type of graffiti that we are referring to as being "antisocial" or "agressive". there's neither of those qualities involved. the people who do that sort of art only search for a place to do it. end of story.

detmich · May-18-09, 05:17 PM

You're right, I take it back.

detmich · May-18-09, 05:19 PM

I see your point, I want to invite these guys over for dinner, they're just looking for a place to create their art.

Vsoul- you avoided the reality of the matter. Answer the question I asked instead of trying to attack me. WHy don't taggers get together, buy their own place, and tag away on it?

**Johnlodge** · May-18-09, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by vintagesoul

wow. your ignorance is impressive.

count me in as an apologist. and show me the research that points to the type of graffiti that we are referring to as being "antisocial" or "agressive". there's neither of those qualities involved. the people who do that sort of art only search for a place to do it. end of story.

Bullshit, it doesn't matter if it's art or not. Art is subjective. And unless everybody who owns public property, IE the public, agrees to allowing you to spraypaint all over it, then it is vandalism. I like certain kinds of art too, I graduated from art school. I'm not going to come over to your house and do whatever I want on it, or on your city's municipal buildings as though I have some kind of right to do so. It is vandalism, end of story.

**vintagesoul** · May-18-09, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by Johnlodge

Bullshit, it doesn't matter if it's art or not. Art is subjective. And unless everybody who owns public property, IE the public, agrees to allowing you to spraypaint all over it, then it is vandalism. I like certain kinds of art too, I graduated from art school. I'm not going to come over to your house and do whatever I want on it, or on your city's municipal buildings as though I have some kind of right to do so. It is vandalism, end of story.

You're right, it is subjective.

I don't see any of the artists I'm referring to putting pieces on:

a. Municipal Buildings
b. People's houses

So, where did you come up with that argument?

Here's my stance - graffiti should remain illegal as it is. There should be legal walls. A lot of them. The more the merrier. The cut should be a legal place to paint. That's how I feel about it.

The people who create that other garbage the detmich posted should be arrested for gang-related activity. Period. It has nothing to do with art, clearly, and he was only posting it in a lame attempt to make an argument that graff is not art. Everyone else can see that is clearly not what I am supporting.

Now, I'm done bickering with you two. If you have VALID arguments about the cut not being legal and against legal walls or anything else I am supporting here, please let me know.

gravitymachine · May-18-09, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by GREENTROIT

And most graffiti artists don't touch private property. It's sort of an unspoken rule that only public property should be touched....

on that first point, you must be living in a different city than i am [[detroit), and on the second, what makes public property so deserving of the honor?

**vintagesoul** · May-18-09, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by Johnlodge

You graffiti apologists just reinforce the general disrespect for other people's property that is already rampant. It's vandalism, plain and simple If it's not yours, don't fuck it up, how difficult is that? And why should there be a "legal" wall? You really think the people spraying this shit are going to say "oh, a legal wall, now I don't have to disrespect things that aren't mine!" How about the graffiti "artists" put a wall up in one of the vacant lots and spray on that? They can spend a fun day laying brick together, and when they're done they can spray their "art" all over it without destroying public property.

Thank you for the chuckle. Great suggestion, I'd love to hear your solution for our homeless population. Perhaps we could build a wall...say near 8 mile...

lol sorry, I couldn't resist. C'mon, I'm willing to listen to real ideas and solutions to problems, but the people on here who seem to have a personal vendetta against people who do graff is just incredible. I can't possibly take you seriously.

as a detroit resident, I personally hope the walls in the cut become fully legal and that there are more legal walls allowed in the city. i love graff, i look for it everywhere i go.