Saturday, June 30, 2007

University Place, June 2007










  1. I don't think it's silly, I think it's great. By thinking about it and categorizing, you help legitimize these forms of creative expression. I salute you!

  2. Good morning Steve. I guess I am just against tagging. In my former business, new commercial construction, I rarely saw a new building that wasn't wasn't tagged during construction. This costs the owners money. that doesn't seem fair to me.

  3. well, don't all our minds work that way to some extent? i think i tend to categorise it in the same general ways as you - though i don't know very much about it all (what are burns?)
    (you are my street art consultant, you know)

    i like its transitoriness and subversiveness - but understand how building-owners might be less keen...

  4. Reya: I think it was legitimized long before me, but I'm happy to do my part!

    Merle: I think if I didn't live in New York (or another large, dense city) I'd feel differently. Here, in many areas, people have just sort of "given in" to graffiti. It's as much part of the landscape as the pigeons. So it doesn't really cost money, because no one bothers to remove it!

    Lett: As I understand it, "fills" are the big bubbly lettering. "Burns" are the intricate, highly stylized lettering with lots of angles, often very colorful. (Like your recent Flickr photo that you slugged "Faver.") Honestly, though, I'm not sure where I learned that, so I may not be right!