Really?
The article says…
“this art is shaped by the dynamic New York graffiti scene of the 1970s and 1980s, Keith Haring surfaced as a champion of urban subculture and pop Art.”
Maybe some think graffiti is cool. Maybe some call it art. Some might say it’s a statement of the time.
I’m sorry, I think graffiti is just criminal activity and destruction of both private and public property. I know, I lived in New Your during the 70s. It was filthy. To make a watch glorifying such activity is shameful.
No matter what, graffiti is illegal, destructive and selfish on the part of who ever does it. Shame on timex!
15 comments
Sort by
God, Family and Country. Also a custom watch builder.
Kentucky, USA
Member since
Last active: 3 days ago
18.42 cm
Does art have to be legal?
Tell us how you really feel.
And you art kids stay off my lawn!
You know some graffiti is actually commissioned, right?
Even some that wasn't is left up because the owner of what was tagged felt it is art and improved their property.
You know some graffiti is actually commissioned, right?
Even some that wasn't is left up because the owner of what was tagged felt it is art and improved their property.
Yeah, not back in the 70s. Oh well!
Does art have to be legal?
It does on my property!
To state the obvious, Swatch did his stuff a loong time ago. My objection, besides that it's ugly, is that you were right about the filth. Dude was a pervert and all those crude sausage figures weren't just dancing.
Look up his "art"entitled Once Upon a Time should you think I'm joking. Total degenerate. Guess how he died at age 31?
Art has no physical value or function, instead it's assigned a value is based on the reaction provoked in the viewer(s).
I think his work passed the test, whether drawn illegally on a wall, put on a wall by request, or painted on canvas; and whether it was just for pleasure in the form or if it was one of his sociopolitical images.
Graffiti has a legitimate if not complex legal standing in the art world.
https://news.artnet.com/news/5pointz-ruling-upheld-1782396/amp-page
Graffiti has a legitimate if not complex legal standing in the art world.
https://news.artnet.com/news/5pointz-ruling-upheld-1782396/amp-page
Not in my book or on my property!
Art has no physical value or function, instead it's assigned a value is based on the reaction provoked in the viewer(s).
I think his work passed the test, whether drawn illegally on a wall, put on a wall by request, or painted on canvas; and whether it was just for pleasure in the form or if it was one of his sociopolitical images.
This is why this is the greatest country on earth. We both have the right to voice our opinions and disagree with one another if we wish!