I mean, if you actually own the fucking wall you paint that at or buy a canvas.. Then you good. I hate modern art with a passion, though.
44Reply
deleted
· 10 years ago
Art is a wide-ranging and nigh on all-encompassing subject - for some the top is art, for others not; the same can be said for the bottom image (depending on how you view street art/graffiti/vandalism). It's all a matter of personal taste and understanding - so hey, if people are allowed to like a flavour of ice cream and dislike another, why isn't it acceptable for people to do like/dislike different types of art?
I can't stop admiring the vandal one. So beautiful
2Reply
deleted
· 10 years ago
All art is a matter of perspective. No two people have the same concept of whats considered real art and what isn't. But, the question of vandalism vs art is that unless you own what you're painting on then thats against the law. You must have permission or own the property for it to be legal.
it's all in the opinion of the artist. its up to them if its art or not. why if you're a boy then someone tells you you're a girl would you accept that you're a girl? same applies no matter what you say to the artist if he claim its art then its art it the artist claim its vandalism it's vandalism.
The "vandalism picture", which I personally consider to be extremely kitschy, may have never existed without Mark Rothko (Picture on top) or Lucio Fontana (canvas with a slit), who attempted to question terms like art, canvas, color, and so on. You might consider the mentioned "vandalism picture" both art and vandalism or neither. I might add that works by "Banksy" are IMHO far superior to this one. Sorry for my bad English, I am both German and drunk ;)
Really, it doesn't matter how beautiful the painting is or how talented the person was, if it's not their property then it is vandalism if they didn't get permission from the person or who owns the wall or wherever it is
Comments