Taggers have sprayed graffiti on 27 stories of a downtown Los Angeles skyscraper
latimes.com
latimes.com
The real blemish on the cityscape is a half-finished luxury condo building, not the colorful paint job.
Your HOA might disagree.
Disregard for property is not the motivating factor for these artists.
Doesn't matter what the motivating factor is. Maybe they are artists but when others see lawlessness is accepted and even applauded, theyll seize the opportunity.
My point is that lawlessness breeds more lawlessness. I see it myself, when im in a neighborhood that's pristine, I act accordingly. I remember in Tokyo waiting for a walk to cross when there were no cars nearby or queuing to get on the subway, something unthinkable in NYC.
Laws should be reasonable (e.g. littering, vandalism, can't tag other people's property) and widely enforced. We should condeme lawlessness without consideration of the victim and offending party
Buildings and billboards get tagged because no one really cares about faceless conglomerates of real estate developers. It’s only natural that they don’t derive the same level of sympathy an individual would get if their car got spray painted.
I don't care about faceless conglomerates but neither do I care about hooligans covering buildings in graffiti. It is possible to dislike both and a lot of people do.
Probably true, but isn't that true for nearly all property crime?
Very few bicycle thieves for example are motivated by disregard for the cyclist's property. They are motivated because they want the money that they can get for the bike. Same with car thieves, bank robbers, pickpockets, and purse snatchers.
You don't get to spew air pollution from your property. Or constantly play loud music.
You shouldn't be allowed to force your eyesore on people either.
You talking about the example set by the owner's who have disregarded this unfinished property for years?
There may be a discussion about whether painting on someone else's things is justified or not, and in which cases. But another thing is that tagging is really the lowest form of graffiti, barely any "art" in it, certainly no creativity. It's usually the same low effort, low complexity "stamp" repeated over and over again by the same group. Where's the art in that? Because there's certainly vandalism.
Does anyone consider the words "SOUP" written in blue letters and pink contour (top left title picture), or "AKDE" in all black bold letters (top right), or plain white lettered "LOSTKA" (second picture middle), or the absolute jumble of plain green text right next to it as anything other than low effort spraying of paint on a wall?
Nobody presumes some guy shouting in the park is a talented singer and the shouting is quality art. And someone kicking in your door wasn't actually a ballet dancer performing their art. Tagging your name or your crew on a wall is nothing different. People want their name on a wall because it makes them feel important or memorable. They are neither, and this "tag" art is in the same vein as someone drawing dicks on the side of library books. Low effort, low skill, just making the real artists look bad in the name of some short lived boost of ego and self-importance.
Some decades ago I organized in my adoptive home town several yearly "celebrations" that were a combination of book-fest, food-fest, and street-art-fest. As a thank you for organizing this I was always invited to put my own "art" on the walls. Due to my distinct lack of talent in this area it was limited to a tag-style signature in a corner of some real art. So I managed to do the same level (albeit slightly smaller scale) of street art as these taggers with no preparation and two left hands. It was a punchline against the incredible art the others put on there. Random internet examples [0].
[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=graffiti+art&iax=images&ia=images
Exactly. In my old neighborhood the local college organizes a matching service - building owners and artists. The building owner (and random people that make donations) pays artists to make public art on their buildings. It provides housing (if they are from out of town), lifts and safety gear (if needed), paint, etc.
Some of them are huge [1] [2] [3] [4] but most are pretty small, that you would miss unless you are walking through the area [5] [6] [7]
[1] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/big-walls-ella-...
[2] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/diosa-jasmina-c...
[3] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/big-walls-kobra...
[4] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/mad-c/
[5] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/wabash-arts-cor...
[6] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/tima-fatima-ezz...
[7] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/wabash-arts-cor...
Technically anything that is illegal is prohibited and yet we all find justifications for doing some of those things anyway. Sometimes because you believe the law is unjust, or because you believe some exceptions should be granted, etc.
I do not find those graffiti attractive. It is not art, like a huge beautiful wall mural, it is rather the human equivalent of dogs peeing on trees to mark their territory.
...is what billboards do as well. And certainly they have more nefarious purposes than just "marking territory" or getting cred or just showing off your skill at writing stylized letters.
Now lets apply the same standard to graffiti.
Those people have rights to vote for politicians, or run for local offices, who control such billboards. They should exercise those rights.
Personally, I like some grafitti, but I'm absolutely against tagging. It is immoral, unethical, and thuggish behavior. When property owners put up graffiti of their own (or commission an artist to do it), I think it can be a nice splash of color in an urban environ.
not really. in theory there is some kind of process where we could collectively decide about the existence / frequency / size of billboards, as can be seen in many towns that have advertising banned, or as can be seen when you contrast New York with any European city.
with wanna be gangster teenagers and adults with Peter Pan syndrome ? not really.
p.s. I hate billboards as well, if you ask me both should not exist
Times square is a disaster the magnitude of which cannot be found in Europe.
Who is Times Square for but Europeans and other tourists? Do you think New Yorkers go there to see the latest billboards? I feel bad for anyone I know who has to work in the few big towers in times square.
Europe has destinations that are way more touristic than Times Square, and you cannot find this atrocity.
>Europe has destinations that are way more touristic than Times Square, and you cannot find this atrocity.
Okay? It's not New Yorkers going there to gawk.
It is the exact opposite of this. It's extraordinarily difficult. That some cities have done it shows that it's possible, not that it's easy.
Why this is such a difficult position for people to take, I don't understand. I guess everyone has to either be for or against something, without any sort of nuance possible.
You normally see stuff like this in developing countries... not in the middle of one of the largest cities in America.
Only, if it were a Banksy, it'd be throught-provoking, good looking art, instead of these gaudy, multi colored balloon letters
The only character this kind of crap adds is the kind of shady character that makes me not want to walk around Downtown at night.
LA has been getting worse and worse. The Westside has been pretty much given over to drug addicts and the criminally insane. The Valley is rapidly suffering the same fate.
The only reason this sort of thing even exists is pure neglect, plain and simple. If your property doesn't mean enough to you to either finish it or sell it to someone who will, then maybe you have no business owning it in the first place. Wanna bet that this property is owned by Chinese interests that don't give two shits about this city?
Oh wait, that's literally in the article. What a shock.
Like OP, I enjoy the artwork just outside my window.
If so, please let me know exactly what street you live on, because speaking as a USC graduate who has lived in the LA area for the better part of four decades, I sure as hell wouldn’t.
I once came within seconds of having to pull a knife to protect myself in that area at 2:00 AM. I can tell you, it is NOT safe.
Being an institution with thousands of students, I'd trust their take more than your random anecdote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
It is 'just' a criminology theory, with many people who disagree with it.
And your assertion about the LA crime rate shrinking for years is incorrect: https://www.laalmanac.com/crime/cr01.php
In fact, violent crimes reached their lowest level around 2013, and have been steadily on the rise since then.
I have been to a bunch of college campuses to visit my friends over the years. None came close to USC in terms of how scared the local student population was to walk alone outside at night.
If not, climb out of your comfortable ivory tower armchair and recognize that there are bad people in this society, and you are doing nothing but enabling them for the simple reason that you, like your average teenager, have never been anyone’s victim and therefore think you’re invulnerable.
Denial isn't just a river in Africa after all!
It is conceptual yes but it's not exactly deep in it's thinking.
Good looking yes but isn't exactly provocative or beautiful in its aesthetics.
Banksy is friendly and harmless and non threatening. Easy to digest and understand and appreciate. Its very understandable why his works are so valued - they are good products to be consumed.
Graffiti is threatening, and is less easy to digest and understand. It's also less valued by the world. Arguably graffiti doesn't aim to be consumed as art or to be approved of by cities.
Personally I would rather not see either! But as the above outlines this would be for different reasons.
No, they are good pieces of art to be enjoyed.
These markings are tribal and represent violence to people that violate these peoples turf.
I hate tagging done in places where people obviously care about the building the walls are part of, but in this case it's hard not to see this as a public service:
“Look at this hubris. Hard to ignore now isn't it? A huge newly built tower abandoned for all intents and purposes. It's a waste of space, money, and it raises questions about sustainability and fairness.”
The connection between supporting broken windows, and those who break them is a lot more direct.
>The real blemish on the cityscape is a half-finished luxury condo building, not the colorful paint job.
That's a lovely way to try to frame the narrative, take that all the way through and every vacation home or place for sale/ready is "abandoned" and therefore morally acceptable for someone to take. Double plus good.
Don't let the fact the Oceanwide lot alone being worth $100m plus stop though, though. Definitely abandoned, no one likes money.
All fun and games till they come for your stuff, with the same argument. As someone with a first hand experience in that, I find it extremely peculiar these arguments are almost elusively made by 30 something year old white kids that grew up in upper middle class US suburbs.
Most modern disestablishmentarian movements simply exploit minorities and claim to speak for them, but dont actually represent their views.
Well, apart from that homelessness is not just a housing problem[0], and that homeless people in Western countries are substantially more likely to have alcohol and drug dependence than the age-matched general population in those countries, and the prevalences of psychotic illnesses and personality disorders are higher.[1]
Of course there is the idea of "housing first"[2], 'the idea [to] help people find permanent housing right away, without conditioning this housing on sobriety, mental health treatment, employment, or anything else'.
...aaand then it ends up being political.
[0] Homelessness Is Not Just a Housing Problem https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2605901/
[1] The Prevalence of Mental Disorders among the Homeless in Western Countries: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2592351/
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/oct/20/housing-first...
Waste of money: Whose money? The developers? Sure. But it isn't like random tax paying citizens of LA had any kind of stake in it.
It would be a major liability.
None of what you wrote makes sense - it's functionally owned by new york hedge fund 2) that specializes in real estate financing, and there's some local muni nonsense 3) that's slowing down the process.
1) https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/09/29/bermuda-court-orders-l...
3) https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/08/23/california-court-block...
I only know of 22 Bishopsgate [1] — and that’s with the big caveat that they gutted the structural core of the building and replaced it.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love for someone to have been maintaining it, and for construction to complete rather than going entirely to waste. But given the levels of fraud that have been alleged around the project, I’m not holding my breath.
As matter of fact developers build these things in parallel, lower levels are getting interiors while upper floors are still open to elements concrete and middle is getting framed out for interior. Kinda interesting to see a tower that's getting washers/dryers and exterior windows installed at the same time...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704226004575262...
We’ll just have to wait and see I guess!
Actual gang tags [1] have arguably no artistic value and serve a very different purpose.
Anyways, just wanted to point out the distinction -- discussions about the morality of it are a separate topic.
>[...]
>More to Read
>LAPD investigating gunfire at graffitied skyscraper in downtown L.A.[0]
[0] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...
I would purchase this and would love to have something like this.
Right, Banksy's work usually has a message or some intellectual content embedded in it. These are just inscrutable letters that have no meaning.
The building does have a pretty Cyberpunk look to it now though I guess.
I don’t know de León, but I see he’s got the conservatives’ gift for describing his opponent’s desired world in the coolest possible way. “Taco truck on every corner” vibes here.
Someone drives past, that has no overlap all at with any of those factors.. they're gonna have an internal reaction too.
I guess if someones a fan of burning society down you can make a pitch that there's some progress being made by someone spraying their tag handle on some symbol of capitalistic structures.. but I have a hard time seeing depth of meaning from an act that's usually ego-driven(tagging).
What if you like your job, your area, and a developer shows up one day and installs 2/3rds of a dumpster in the parking lot. There is a partially completed trash enclosure there, clearly unfinished, blighting the view from your office.
If someone drives past, they're not going to get a positive impression whether it's painted or not.
If someone paints the wreckage of the incomplete dumpster, how do you feel about it? It seems to me the disrespect here is really from the people who built a pile of garbage in your parking lot.
That's the community in action, not some development firm who would mostly act as an extraction tool to siphon money out of the community once it was complete.
Seriously who cares? It is paint. Wash it off or paint over it if it bothers you.
Am I glad I don't live in a city. Around me the only "tags" are left by territory-marking animals of the non-human kind.
Apparently this building is also a target pratice range: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...