also, on this same stretch of sidewalk, is a stencil bit that says “you have less time than ever” with a cute little foreboding clock.
i see them both every single day when i walk the dog.
while i cannot say i am in favor of this type of “art” -
forcing folks to look at one’s shit whether they like it or not and deciding for people whether your shit adds value or is vandalism (my vote is vandalism) -
hey, i dont think anyone’s saying there’s never any value whatsoever in street art.
well, maybe someone is.
but it seems to me, there’s a difference between this and the meat-head neanderthals that got pinched bombing store windows on valencia with their own “names” (like the lingo, eh?…bombing)…
there’s a difference between girafa and pussy juice.
but i am conflicted about it. i think the sea monster finger puppets are cute….but what a costly pain in the ass to paint over all those garage doors.
and one tag breeds a dozen. i started painting over tags on a commercial wall on my block, and guess what? after 2 or 3 times…it never gets tagged anymore. not the norm, i know.
i’m going to have a big mural piece put on the wall in front of my house. bad? good? not sure yet.
we live in a world of greys, not black & white.
that said, if i had to choose between finding the gems in an ocean of crap (which imho is the current state of “street art”, particularly in sf)…and having all of it gone, well, it would be a hard choice for me.
as an appreciator of “art” and a liver of life, i say what the fuck. let em bomb, and i will find and enjoy the gems…and paint over the crap on my block.
as a property owner, and a generally respectful person, i say if i catch you tagging my house, i will beat your self entitled juvenile ass till you cry like the big baby you are.
dear renters – imagine if someone tagged your car (or your fixie!)
But for fuck’s sake, if you’re going to tag, be clever. And use some more color. I’d welcome space invader tiles on my house. (errr, you’d better ask my wife first.)
I am ok with sidewalk stencils though – if the above apply. Otherwise I’ll Giuliani you. that’s how I roll.
I’d love a public grafitti art wall with some sort of playoff/voting system though. Paint an 8×4 grid, 32 squares on the side of the Dolores park bathroom. Taggers do their square. Vote online, pick top half, paint 16 larger squares, those guys get to go again. Pick half, 8 even larger squares, etc.
Speaking of respectful – how about johnny0 bragging about owning in SF.
Why you gotta dis “renters.” How do you know they’re not teenage kids living in their family home here in the mish? The tags that aren’t worth leaving where they are are probably done by n00bs trying to figure out how to make a mark that actually looks good – and typically those n00bs are still living in their parent’s home because they’re barely out of training pants.
I hope you’re not dissing on their parents because that can get really messy.
what if someone wrote “fuck you asshole” on the sidewalk in front of your house?
or “pussy juice”?
or “kill whitey”?
or “i hate brown people”?
or “gentrification: better than crack”?
or “let’s light all the homeless people on fire”?
or “please stand here and sell crack, or your crack addicted ass”?
then you might care. point is, tags are permanent, and odds are, regardess of content or wittiness, odds are they’re an affront to someone.
on the one hand, that’s life in the city. on the other hand, so is prostitution and hard drug peddling. not the same, but who’s to say what bothers whom?
in a close, dense community like the mission, better to be respectful, and careful.
There was a quadratic equation graffito around 23rd and Valencia that used to annoy the fuck out of me. Tried to solve it one evening. It’s still there, barely painted over.
I’m not quite sure where I should be commenting, since this whole discussion of graffiti, decades, and pop-culture has now been fragmented across several threads. The last post that popped up in my RSS feed “In a Close, Dense Community…” referenced this thread, and I’d like to chime in on graff and tagging in the Mission, rather than debate the merits of particular decades (“I Love The 00′s”).
Looks like you have a classic argument here, one that has been raging for quite a few decades. Even longer when you take into consideration the entire history of public art. It’s very difficult to reach a consensus on what constitutes art, public or otherwise, as well as where the line can be drawn between “tags,” “tagging,” and “throw-ups,” “burners,” etc.. Much of it has to do with regional slang, as well as a subjective tastes and personal perspective. You can go back and forth forever and never reach a definite conclusion. Is Duchamp’s “Fountain” truly art?
Currently, I live and work around Lilac Alley, between 23rd and 26th Streets. Lilac Alley is it’s own world, and sports some pretty amazing pieces, names you may or may not recognize, depending on your familiarity with the graff world. Regardless, I’ve often bumped into tourists, people out for a stroll, and neighborhood locals, all of whom instinctively know and appreciate quality work, beautiful expression wrought out with spray cans and sweat. Often times I’ve bumped into the artists mid-piece, talked to them, gotten a feel for who they are, why they’re there, where they’re coming from. Some of these guys are truly sincere, experienced artists, some are still youngsters, but equally passionate.
It’s true, occasionally you get those who are doing it strictly for quick props, gang communication, or are still just kiddies working it out. The interesting thing is that they all nearly always understand, almost innately, to respect the pieces other writers have truly labored over. Often, much to my dismay, I’ve seen spectacular and ornate works from well known writers, flatly destroyed by building owners who can’t distinguish the difference between art and tagging. They put up a flat roll of sickly color, much more disagreeable to look at than a richly detailed tableau from the mind of a budding artist. So be it. They are the owner and that is the price for putting up your work on somebody else’s “canvas.”
Before living in the Mission, I spent nearly a decade living in Dumbo, Brooklyn. When I first moved there, I knew I was “home,” finding a wealth of street-art decorating the streets and alleys of that broken down neighborhood. REVS, Neckface, Reese, all had incredible works of art, that were painted, welded, even bolted into the ground, all of it for public consumption. It was like making your home inside of a living, breathing museum.
These days when you go into that neighborhood, it is all but stripped of this work. Instead you find stuffy galleries, spic-n-span high rises, condos, and impotent works paid for and sanctioned by the city. Certainly those fantastic kaleidoscopic compositions of metal, wood, and krylon were the first things to go when the gentrification got into full swing. Those who wanted all the chic of living like the hip bohemian artists that gave that neighborhood it’s flair, pulled out one of the major components of it’s character, simply because they couldn’t be bothered by such visual distraction. It didn’t fit into the clean lines of their modern glass lifestyles. Such a shame.
I accept, more than that, I appreciate GOOD graffiti and public art, as part of living in “the big city.” It’s why I’m here. It’s part of why I live in the Mission. If you want a sanitized, hygienic experience, may I suggest you live in the suburbs. There is going to be good work, there’s going to be bad… But there are only two things that will almost always keep a wall free from gang tags and poor scribbles:
1) Solid pieces. A well executed mural.
2) Fresh paint. Just keep going over wack tags every day, and eventually they give up.
The public walls are a good idea, but there are plenty of problems that go along with those as well. Researching a well known spot that used to be here in SF, that I recall from growing up, “Psycho City,” I came across a page where you can see a very similar argument to what’s going on here.
Psycho City was, for all intents and purposes, a public wall. Anyone could go through, throw-up, and not be hassled. I remember coming to the city with my friends and watching them take their tags, put up their pieces, and become part of the visual history of graffiti in San Francisco. However, like many of the commenters on nograffiti.com point out, public walls often lead to non-discretional writing. It moves out beyond what is sanctioned as public and open.
My stance here is obvious. I welcome art, and find San Francisco in particular, to be a colorful city, which is reflected in the art that graces her many back alleys, and walls tucked away just around corners. Part of the price we pay for living among inspiring, colorful art, that decorates the public view, whether legal or not, is having to deal with those who would use these spaces for mediocre, or outright thoughtless errata. Consider it a conversation that society is having with itself. The majority of it is uniform, here and there is the vulgar, unsavory discourse most of us find unwelcome, but if you are open, you find wild, fresh shouts from a few innovative souls.
I would much rather live in a place that encourages color and experimentation, whatever it’s form, and is willing to deal with some of the chaos that might arise from that, rather than live their lives in uniform boxes.
@JB: Nice job attacking a straw man, but no one thinks billboards are cool. So your “argument” fails.
@Chyllo: Why is it that you insist that people who dislike graffiti vandals must leave the City? Maybe you should actually address people’s concerns about graffiti vandalism rather than dismissing them. There are many great things about the City, graffiti vandalism is not one of them.
I generally like street murals and think that they add to the City. And, if property owners or the City want to open up certain walls to taggers, then that there option. Interestingly, no one appears to want to do that. It is really all a matter of respect and taggers have no respect for the concerns of property owners or the general community.
zin zin,
Was I disrespectful? Interesting comment, I was teasing you, ala “now get off my lawn!” you and I being a little longer in the tooth then others posting here. But I was hardly disrespectful. In fact teasing is more a sign of respect then the opposite. I submit that my comment could be unfunny or un-clever but it was hardly disrespectful. I mis-read you once before, and now I think you’ve mis-read me, so by my reckoning, that makes us even.
Allan Hough (7858)
Brittany Janis & Katie Cruz (104)
also, on this same stretch of sidewalk, is a stencil bit that says “you have less time than ever” with a cute little foreboding clock.
i see them both every single day when i walk the dog.
while i cannot say i am in favor of this type of “art” -
forcing folks to look at one’s shit whether they like it or not and deciding for people whether your shit adds value or is vandalism (my vote is vandalism) -
both of these do have messages i can get behind.
and i’m kind of conflicted about that.
i believe there’s also a “dr. zokia” right there too.
this one, i dont think has such a thoughtful message.
Bingo! See, I have much more fun thinking about things I’m conflicted about than things I’m sure of.
hey, i dont think anyone’s saying there’s never any value whatsoever in street art.
well, maybe someone is.
but it seems to me, there’s a difference between this and the meat-head neanderthals that got pinched bombing store windows on valencia with their own “names” (like the lingo, eh?…bombing)…
there’s a difference between girafa and pussy juice.
but i am conflicted about it. i think the sea monster finger puppets are cute….but what a costly pain in the ass to paint over all those garage doors.
and one tag breeds a dozen. i started painting over tags on a commercial wall on my block, and guess what? after 2 or 3 times…it never gets tagged anymore. not the norm, i know.
i’m going to have a big mural piece put on the wall in front of my house. bad? good? not sure yet.
we live in a world of greys, not black & white.
that said, if i had to choose between finding the gems in an ocean of crap (which imho is the current state of “street art”, particularly in sf)…and having all of it gone, well, it would be a hard choice for me.
as an appreciator of “art” and a liver of life, i say what the fuck. let em bomb, and i will find and enjoy the gems…and paint over the crap on my block.
as a property owner, and a generally respectful person, i say if i catch you tagging my house, i will beat your self entitled juvenile ass till you cry like the big baby you are.
see? i’m conflicted.
And I love it. I worry about anyone that’s not conflicted. Embrace the greys.
Zin zin we are running from your lawn now, please don’t shoot are asses full of rock salt! Sorry our ball fell there.
dear renters – imagine if someone tagged your car (or your fixie!)
But for fuck’s sake, if you’re going to tag, be clever. And use some more color. I’d welcome space invader tiles on my house. (errr, you’d better ask my wife first.)
I am ok with sidewalk stencils though – if the above apply. Otherwise I’ll Giuliani you. that’s how I roll.
I’d love a public grafitti art wall with some sort of playoff/voting system though. Paint an 8×4 grid, 32 squares on the side of the Dolores park bathroom. Taggers do their square. Vote online, pick top half, paint 16 larger squares, those guys get to go again. Pick half, 8 even larger squares, etc.
My new commenting technique is unstoppable!
@neo…
good. run. works for me. works for you too…avoid a beating.
and it’s my ball now.
that said, you want to play nice? be respectful? i’m game.
Speaking of respectful – how about johnny0 bragging about owning in SF.
Why you gotta dis “renters.” How do you know they’re not teenage kids living in their family home here in the mish? The tags that aren’t worth leaving where they are are probably done by n00bs trying to figure out how to make a mark that actually looks good – and typically those n00bs are still living in their parent’s home because they’re barely out of training pants.
I hope you’re not dissing on their parents because that can get really messy.
Oh, and, I LOVE these little notes – as long as it’s not something that gets on my shoes if I step on it, who cares what’s on the sidewalk.
Bragging? WTF? Trust me, it’s easier renting here. And the city makes me responsible if my property gets tagged.
All the more reason to have public art walls for n00bs and 733t alike.
Respect me, I respect you, pretty simple, don’t care if you’re 13 or what.
what if someone wrote “fuck you asshole” on the sidewalk in front of your house?
or “pussy juice”?
or “kill whitey”?
or “i hate brown people”?
or “gentrification: better than crack”?
or “let’s light all the homeless people on fire”?
or “please stand here and sell crack, or your crack addicted ass”?
then you might care. point is, tags are permanent, and odds are, regardess of content or wittiness, odds are they’re an affront to someone.
on the one hand, that’s life in the city. on the other hand, so is prostitution and hard drug peddling. not the same, but who’s to say what bothers whom?
in a close, dense community like the mission, better to be respectful, and careful.
There was a quadratic equation graffito around 23rd and Valencia that used to annoy the fuck out of me. Tried to solve it one evening. It’s still there, barely painted over.
I’m not quite sure where I should be commenting, since this whole discussion of graffiti, decades, and pop-culture has now been fragmented across several threads. The last post that popped up in my RSS feed “In a Close, Dense Community…” referenced this thread, and I’d like to chime in on graff and tagging in the Mission, rather than debate the merits of particular decades (“I Love The 00′s”).
Looks like you have a classic argument here, one that has been raging for quite a few decades. Even longer when you take into consideration the entire history of public art. It’s very difficult to reach a consensus on what constitutes art, public or otherwise, as well as where the line can be drawn between “tags,” “tagging,” and “throw-ups,” “burners,” etc.. Much of it has to do with regional slang, as well as a subjective tastes and personal perspective. You can go back and forth forever and never reach a definite conclusion. Is Duchamp’s “Fountain” truly art?
Currently, I live and work around Lilac Alley, between 23rd and 26th Streets. Lilac Alley is it’s own world, and sports some pretty amazing pieces, names you may or may not recognize, depending on your familiarity with the graff world. Regardless, I’ve often bumped into tourists, people out for a stroll, and neighborhood locals, all of whom instinctively know and appreciate quality work, beautiful expression wrought out with spray cans and sweat. Often times I’ve bumped into the artists mid-piece, talked to them, gotten a feel for who they are, why they’re there, where they’re coming from. Some of these guys are truly sincere, experienced artists, some are still youngsters, but equally passionate.
It’s true, occasionally you get those who are doing it strictly for quick props, gang communication, or are still just kiddies working it out. The interesting thing is that they all nearly always understand, almost innately, to respect the pieces other writers have truly labored over. Often, much to my dismay, I’ve seen spectacular and ornate works from well known writers, flatly destroyed by building owners who can’t distinguish the difference between art and tagging. They put up a flat roll of sickly color, much more disagreeable to look at than a richly detailed tableau from the mind of a budding artist. So be it. They are the owner and that is the price for putting up your work on somebody else’s “canvas.”
Before living in the Mission, I spent nearly a decade living in Dumbo, Brooklyn. When I first moved there, I knew I was “home,” finding a wealth of street-art decorating the streets and alleys of that broken down neighborhood. REVS, Neckface, Reese, all had incredible works of art, that were painted, welded, even bolted into the ground, all of it for public consumption. It was like making your home inside of a living, breathing museum.
These days when you go into that neighborhood, it is all but stripped of this work. Instead you find stuffy galleries, spic-n-span high rises, condos, and impotent works paid for and sanctioned by the city. Certainly those fantastic kaleidoscopic compositions of metal, wood, and krylon were the first things to go when the gentrification got into full swing. Those who wanted all the chic of living like the hip bohemian artists that gave that neighborhood it’s flair, pulled out one of the major components of it’s character, simply because they couldn’t be bothered by such visual distraction. It didn’t fit into the clean lines of their modern glass lifestyles. Such a shame.
I accept, more than that, I appreciate GOOD graffiti and public art, as part of living in “the big city.” It’s why I’m here. It’s part of why I live in the Mission. If you want a sanitized, hygienic experience, may I suggest you live in the suburbs. There is going to be good work, there’s going to be bad… But there are only two things that will almost always keep a wall free from gang tags and poor scribbles:
1) Solid pieces. A well executed mural.
2) Fresh paint. Just keep going over wack tags every day, and eventually they give up.
The public walls are a good idea, but there are plenty of problems that go along with those as well. Researching a well known spot that used to be here in SF, that I recall from growing up, “Psycho City,” I came across a page where you can see a very similar argument to what’s going on here.
http://www.nograffiti.com/files/freewalls.htm
more pics of Psycho City, as I remember it, can be seen on Flickr here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kewlio/sets/72157600049838471/
Psycho City was, for all intents and purposes, a public wall. Anyone could go through, throw-up, and not be hassled. I remember coming to the city with my friends and watching them take their tags, put up their pieces, and become part of the visual history of graffiti in San Francisco. However, like many of the commenters on nograffiti.com point out, public walls often lead to non-discretional writing. It moves out beyond what is sanctioned as public and open.
My stance here is obvious. I welcome art, and find San Francisco in particular, to be a colorful city, which is reflected in the art that graces her many back alleys, and walls tucked away just around corners. Part of the price we pay for living among inspiring, colorful art, that decorates the public view, whether legal or not, is having to deal with those who would use these spaces for mediocre, or outright thoughtless errata. Consider it a conversation that society is having with itself. The majority of it is uniform, here and there is the vulgar, unsavory discourse most of us find unwelcome, but if you are open, you find wild, fresh shouts from a few innovative souls.
I would much rather live in a place that encourages color and experimentation, whatever it’s form, and is willing to deal with some of the chaos that might arise from that, rather than live their lives in uniform boxes.
Why is it cool to have giant billboards advertising pointless shit in our neighborhood and not tagging on the sidewalk (some of it good, some bad)?
@JB: Nice job attacking a straw man, but no one thinks billboards are cool. So your “argument” fails.
@Chyllo: Why is it that you insist that people who dislike graffiti vandals must leave the City? Maybe you should actually address people’s concerns about graffiti vandalism rather than dismissing them. There are many great things about the City, graffiti vandalism is not one of them.
I generally like street murals and think that they add to the City. And, if property owners or the City want to open up certain walls to taggers, then that there option. Interestingly, no one appears to want to do that. It is really all a matter of respect and taggers have no respect for the concerns of property owners or the general community.
Some billboards are cool.
zin zin,
Was I disrespectful? Interesting comment, I was teasing you, ala “now get off my lawn!” you and I being a little longer in the tooth then others posting here. But I was hardly disrespectful. In fact teasing is more a sign of respect then the opposite. I submit that my comment could be unfunny or un-clever but it was hardly disrespectful. I mis-read you once before, and now I think you’ve mis-read me, so by my reckoning, that makes us even.