Re: QR and Photographers

["Brendan" <nadnerb_2000@NOSPAM.com.au>]

I understand what you mean, but what I was referring to was organised
graffiti. If this were elsewhere, this would be art.

And think about it. Some graffiti is considered historic and valuable. Many
places wera with pride 50+ year old graffiti.

Brendan

pdwyer <pdwyerNOpdSPAM@ecn.net.au.invalid> wrote in article
<12ea1f1c.db37a579@usw-ex0102-013.remarq.com>...
> In article <01bf68ae$a3d66c00$ec0e65cb@nadnerb2000>, "Brendan"
> <nadnerb_2000@NOSPAM.com.au> wrote:
> Part of the problem
> > here is
> > the failure to accept Graffiti Art as an art. It doesnt get
> > attention like
> > more classic forms of art, so you dont find many graffiti art
> > museums etc.
> 
> The OTHER part of the problem is that most graffiti isn't art. It's
> little people scribbling their name or 'tag' over every piece of
> scenery they can find. It isn't art. It's graffiti.
> 
> Decent 'burns' however, are an art. If they are properly used (and you
> CAN see it in QLD) they can cover 'unsightly' or blank areas & provide
> free advertising for business's that back onto the permanent way.
> 
> PD
> 
> 
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
> 
>