44
« on: January 29, 2010, 02:53:30 PM »
i think that your argument is based on the "broken windows" theory... which is if there is broken window left unattended , it gives off the idea that the place is neglected and therefore attracts criminal elements.which is bullshit in my humble opnion, the authorities feel that by stopping graffiti the criminal elements will be gone, if i am going to commit a crime i dont look for broken windows i will commit the crime regardless.
there are certain rules that most writers try to live by some of them are; dont paint on private property unless you have permission from the owner, no churches or government buildings or schools, the rest i feel is fair game... what is the use of painting somewhere you know that whatever you did is going to be painted over before anyone sees it? ( fame being one of the motivating factors in graffiti)...
i probably used the wrong word by saying hypocritical, but you cannot divorce the two, like i said it is part and parcel of graffiti... what i meant to say was let us not look at the beautiful pictures or murals and then the part which does not fit what is aestheticaly acceptable be deemed ugly.