Think All Graffiti Taggers Are Poor and Underprivileged Youths? Think Again!

1. Tweeker
   February 4th, 2009 at 6:51 pm

   “MTA” tag in the concrete Los Angeles River bed that authorities say will cost millions of dollars to remove.

   Feeling the need to spend millions to remove a tag from that concrete scar is part of why California is in a budgetary crisis.

2. T.
   February 4th, 2009 at 7:00 pm

   It's a beautiful thing. These people should be subsidized instead of criminalized.

3. Byrd Brain
   February 4th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

   Drug money. Once you start selling, you are not poor anymore, but still ignorant.

4. slashdotcoma
   February 4th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

   Saying poorer people are responsibile for graf, tagging, etc. is, on the whole, incorrect.

   Does any really think those low income families can afford spray paint?

5. Non
   February 4th, 2009 at 7:52 pm

   I am an artist, and I can appreciate some graffiti art as being very intriguing and skilled. Having said that, I do firmly believe that any form of art placed in an outdoor place should be placed there ONLY after the general populace and/or the owner of that property have agreed to its placement. Tagging and placing Graffiti in a place where nobody has agreed to it, is a criminal act of defacement no matter how "pretty" it makes anything. Just as most of you wouldn't want me to come to your house/appt and paint the outside/inside an ugly gray and brown plaid, polkadot or paisley....so too should we leave others property alone. No matter how "cool" you think it is, its actually kinda asshat.

6. FIG
   February 4th, 2009 at 8:23 pm

   Ya, theres a bunch of rich kids out there who want to rebel by doing this kind of stuff. Here in Montreal, theres theres taggers, the KOPS, and theyre just a bunch of rich brats

7. donna
   February 4th, 2009 at 8:37 pm

   Most grafitti marks drug gang territories...

8. alonzo
   February 4th, 2009 at 9:02 pm

   I highly doubt that, what drug dealer wants to advertise to everyone, especially police, on where they run their illegal business.

   Just like the other urban myth of the dangling shoes on the power lines marking drug territories, myth not fact.

9. matt
   February 4th, 2009 at 9:32 pm

   graffiti does not always mean gang turf. on way you can tell is because majority of gangs write threats and numbers and signs. Writers or taggers have a more stylized way of writing.

   i mean if you were in NY and think that most graffiti tags you see mean your in gang turf, you would have no where to go then.

   and dangling shoes on power lines usually means that the wearers of those shoes has passed away. well thats what it means in my part of the woods.

   plus the reason taggers do what they do is because they get a rush out of it, and it doesn't mean they're homeless and poor and under privileged. its just a rush.

   and there are ALOT of rich taggers(most retired but started out with tagging) out there. some of them are now internationally known, many of them own their own brands and earn honest money. search: Jose Parla, Krink, Kaws, Cope2. theres many more but these guys stand out the most.

10. DylanDoom
    February 4th, 2009 at 9:57 pm

    I've met the majority of the popular well known graff artists and taggers in my humble Canadian city, and none of them would be considered underprivileged.

    Most of them are fine art students.

    Most of their reasoning fits what matt says, aside from the shoes, which is purely done as an art instillation piece.

11. Dan Smith
    February 4th, 2009 at 9:57 pm

    i used to be a graffiti artist

    i went to jail

    and i am always the guy on neatorama explaining this stuff

    tags don't indicate drug turf, unless they're super ugly, in which case they might. prolly 95% of tags are done by writers who are 20-30 middle class white kids who are bored and irreverent.

    not news to me

    spray paint costs money, poor ppl are busy trying to live. drug dealers have better things to do. graffiti started in the urbs but now it comes from the burbs

    werd yo

12. DOJ
    February 4th, 2009 at 10:18 pm

    I bet they could just paint the black part white for a lot less than "millions of dollars"

    Or just leave it there and try to fix you're economy?

13. dan.
    February 4th, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    are you serious? ahaha this sounds like a load of crap. spending money on cleaning the riverbed? c'mon now, i don't know of anyone that would willingly go down there for a walk, so then why are your tax dollars going to clean it up. it is stupid and redundant, it is just a big game that the cops want to play, how about catching rapist? Because as far as i'm concerned mr. artist up there I rather have a tagger/writer out on the streets then a rapist.

    oh and yes the poor write too, if you really want to do something you'll find a way.

14. dan.
    February 4th, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    **rapists

15. Lawrence
    February 5th, 2009 at 12:31 am

    "Just as most of you wouldn’t want me to come to your house/appt and paint the outside/inside an ugly gray and brown plaid, polkadot or paisley….so too should we leave others property alone."

    I've done my share of tagging, and all the taggers that have any sense at all don't tag on houses, people's fences, small businesses, people's cars, etc. That is messed up, and as you would say, "asshat."

    However, when people tag on concrete walls behind buildings, or under freeways, or in canals, like in the picture, it is not on anyone's property. And that shit is ugly, anyway. I don't see why the government wants to pay millions to paint over a tag drawn on something uglier than the graffiti. Plus, does it really cost millions of dollars to go out there with a bunch of paint and go over it? And once they do go over it, it'll be even uglier than before!

    What California (and everywhere else with a graffiti problem) really needs to do is find areas that are out of the view of society and designate them as legal tagging areas. That way, it will keep most of the graffiti away from areas where people may not like it. Where I live, most the graffiti that I see is drawn in only areas that other taggers will see. There is no point doing it on a main street; it will get covered up too fast.

16. Johnny Cat
    February 5th, 2009 at 12:55 am

    I love the SMEAR campaign, and seriously...the L.A. river can have any art that might grace its prescence, and choke on it. I hate the L.A. river, and as Dan Smith urges, so do I. Tag that shite, tag it until it sings.

17. SenorMysterioso
    February 5th, 2009 at 3:47 am

    Millions? It would be ridiculous to spend even thousands to clean it up.

18. Alan
    February 5th, 2009 at 9:00 am

    I love how all the artists i hear of are trust fund kids.
    I don't think the good graffiti out there is what chaffs people, it the other terrible graffiti that comes with it that's the problem.

19. Byrd Brain
    February 5th, 2009 at 11:37 am

    Rich white kids from the 'burbs wouldn't tag "Norte" (they would write "North") all over the place (mail boxes, signs, neighborhood walls, etc) and that is what is plastered all over my neighborhood by the hispanic kids whose parent's houses are about to be forclosed on. They buy/steal the paint from the walmart near by and spray stuff all over the place until they get home or to wherever they're going.

20. Jen Diggity
    February 5th, 2009 at 2:03 pm

    Leaving graffiti there would encourage more. I say make the fines when they catch these criminals heavier to help offset the cost of cleaning up the mess these little kids (in intelligence if not age) leave around our state. It's unfortunate that people can't just be left alone and be trusted to be respectful of property, but since they can't, make them scared to do it. I would happily do a California stop when turning right at traffic lights if there weren't a fat fine attached to that kind of violation (and we have a lot of cameras at lights here), but there is. So I don't.

21. PK
    February 5th, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    I am sure most people will reverse sides, if the graffiti artists draw glorifying images of Jesus or a race car, a big fish or something, instead of crazy loopy text, threatening images, happy images that aren't related to any famous brand, or arts that most people don't have time to understand.

22. Byrd Brain
    February 5th, 2009 at 4:15 pm

    And I'm sure, PK, that your are incorrect in your assumption.

23. josie
    April 22nd, 2009 at 3:56 am

    i love GraFiti!!!

24. ahole
    May 26th, 2009 at 6:24 pm

    in reality, the only ones who appreciate the supposed art of tagging are those who does them. There are only few legitimate graffiti artists out there but there are no intelligent human beings out there could consider a neon-color yellow tag that says "T-bone rulez!" an art.

25. sumpa
    May 26th, 2009 at 6:31 pm

    About 98% of graffiti makers and taggers have no talent, whatsoever - just a bunch of fucking morons with IQs below 75

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT