« LICH Liquidation Underway System Failure at The Novo »

January 27, 2009

Brooklyn Got 'Tagged' More in '08

With tighter city budgets, quality of life issues are bound to get worse. Case in point: Graffiti complaints in North Brooklyn were up 20 percent last year; arrests were up 24 percent. "It’s bringing property values down," complained one Bushwick resident whose building is frequently tagged. In parts of South Brooklyn like Sunset Park and Coney Island, complaints were up but arrests were down.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8136

Comments

hmmm i just read this article this morning. yeah it's definitely on the rise but you only notice it a lot more now because there's not as big of a push to clean it up ASAP anymore. total double edged sword i guess. gonna be brutally honest with you tho, i kinda sorta like the city aesthetic of graffitti. not scratchitti or etchitti tho, that's so lame and ugly.

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 10:19 AM

Lets see what the What believes this indicates!!!!!! Please, amuse us with your thoughtful insightfulness.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 10:23 AM

You need to get tagged by the right "artist" - then your place may go up in value.

Posted by: dittoburg at January 27, 2009 10:23 AM

also tagging is a victimless crime (for the most part. i know some will argue that point).

ha. you know it just occurred to me.. you know who really might be to blame for this uptick again? suburban white kids who live in bushwick. if youve noticed there's been tons of articles about how they love doing grafitti murals all around bushwick and stuff. the first article recently i read about i totally laughed my @ss off when i saw the pics and it was all skinny dorky white post adolescents-yet-not-quite-ready-to-be-adults guys pretending to be all street. of course they had their requisite face masks, protective coveralls so they dont get paint on their clothes, and vacant looks in their eyes as 10 chubby white girls with librarian glasses snapped pictures of them to put on their myspace. so that might be the new face of graffitti. funny when they do it, it's not a crime :-/

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 10:28 AM

It is a crime when graffiti is sprayed on your property by someone else, without permission, and you then have to pay to clean it off. It's no different than some jerk breaking your windows because they think the broken glass looks cool.

Posted by: FenFen at January 27, 2009 10:45 AM

Rob:
Walk over the Manhattan Bridge, when you get closer to Chinatown there are some buildings that have graffitti covering their entire roof tops, it's a sight to see....it's impressive in a dysfunctial artsy way.
Yes, I regard 'some' graffitti as art.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33969369@N03/3162727911/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33969369@N03/3163559138/

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 10:47 AM

"also tagging is a victimless crime"

Unless, like, you know... you own or live in the property defaced by spray paint.

Or you own property nearby, cause your property values will be going down as the people who think tagging is cool generally aren't bidding to buy property.

Posted by: northsloperenter at January 27, 2009 10:47 AM

sorry i dont think i meant victimless crime.. i think i meant.. what's the name of the type of crime where someone isn't physically hurt or something? i think forgot everything i learned from criminology class hahaha

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 10:52 AM

rob - you're wrong. I have an acquaintance who has a "fascination" with graffitti artists, especially white ones from central Europe. One of them was arrested when on his visit to her for doing some work, and another was cautioned and seemed to wriggle out of it only because the cops thought it was too much paperwork (vacationer etc).

Posted by: dittoburg at January 27, 2009 10:54 AM

Much to the chagrin of Japan, graffitti has exploded over there too. I can remember seeing the first signs of it along the railway from Narita to Tokyo about 8 years ago. In tru Japanese fashion, it is never done to private property. That would be unacceptable.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 10:57 AM

lol ditto.. i guess.

one of the skanks on Rock of Love Bus was a graffitti artist til she got implants. then she quit it because "it became too hard to scale up and down buildings" lol

sadly she got eliminated on the first episode :(

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 10:59 AM

New York's coming back to its senses again. Why is/are graffiti equated with "worse"? Only the up(their a--)tight class see it this way. Graffiti reflects the realities, the zeitgeist, and at times the hypocrisy of a culture; made NY world famous and even brought in business after the white flight.

Posted by: cb6 at January 27, 2009 11:05 AM

OK cb6...are we all invited over to tag your building???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 11:10 AM

Haha! You know DIBS would make a pretty good tag too.

Posted by: YngRntr at January 27, 2009 11:13 AM

that'll be loads of fun, dibs.

Posted by: cb6 at January 27, 2009 11:15 AM

Always good if a tenant checks with a landlord first before proceeding with exterior modifications.

I'm working on the style of the DIBS tag though. It'll open up a whole new medium of graffiti art by a fifty-something Pompous White Asshat. I'll sell caps with the DIBS logo and a "53 Fifty" label on the brim.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 11:20 AM

this is how it jumped the shark.

Posted by: cb6 at January 27, 2009 11:28 AM

BRG;

How noble of you to regard grafitti put up on someone else's property as "art". I'll second DIB's thoughts and ask that you provide us with your address, so that some of this "art" can be delivered to you.

I'll take photos to put up on flicker.

You are being just plain ridiculous in your post.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 11:32 AM

'How noble of you to regard grafitti put up on someone else's property as "art".'

Benson, I NEVER said that I regard graffiti PUT ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY as art.

I said:
'Yes, I regard 'some' graffitti as art.'
Believe it or not some graffiti 'art' is paid for.

So, our argument should be about verbiage in this case. Be careful what you accuse me of, my toys have not come out in a long time.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 11:41 AM

It worked well on the subway cars to clean things up there...NOT.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 11:44 AM

BRG;

Do you realize how frivolous you come off in your posts?

First you write about graffitti on rooftops in Chinatown that you admore and even link to photos of them. Do you expect anyone with a brain to believe that this was graffitti that was "paid for"? I'll tell you what it is: it was the work of idiot vandals who broke into a building and went to the rooftop and marred someone's property. You then reward them with a photo so that all can admire their act of vandalism.

Then, when I call you on your ridiculous post, you try to tell me that you were not trying to glorify graffitti put up on someone else's property? Oh really? What exactly were you doing by linking to these photos?

Frivolous and ridiculous. Time for you to run along and start posting on the open thread.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 11:51 AM

The most notorious graffiti 'art'

'Crack is Whack'

It's now called a 'mural'

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 11:52 AM

'Crack is Wack'

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 11:53 AM

let's play a little game people... guess the kind of person who did this graffitti...

http://gothamist.com/2009/01/27/graffiti_on_the_rise_in_brooklyn.php

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 11:59 AM

Rob;

Put a cork in it too.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 12:04 PM

benson,

I think your most recent achievement of the much coveted SOTD has gone to your head! ; )

[No, I'm not jealous...much!]

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 12:06 PM

I used to write graffiti when I was a teenager, it truly affected the way my art is today, by the time I was 18, I was through, too many fights over walls that belonged to none of us, my art and thoughts of vandalism were maturing, and when you arent a minor anymore, the punishments are greater. Unfortunately its so trendy now, most writers are post or current art school students, havent been in Brooklyn that long, and have expendable time and income to emulate teenagers from the 70's and 80's. Sure there are exceptions, but Graffiti has definitely jumped the shark.

Posted by: lifer at January 27, 2009 12:10 PM

agreeance about graffitti jumping the shark. it's all about frozen blood balloons these days!

*rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 12:13 PM

SOTD was for a witty quip, not sheer nastiness. That time of the month for you benson? I's suggest midol but wine is more fun.

And for the record- I don't think defacing private property is right but there has been graffiti that really does elevate it to an art form. And what I wonder about is that some of these kids have so much talent- we should be trying to do more to get them real venues and support. Art = communication. Some of the subway trains in the 80s and 90s were just amazing- like it or not.

I can't get that upset over graffiti on public buildings- some of the crap that goes up just because it was paid for is a visual and social insult to most of us. Billboards screaming at us, ads everywhere- kids pick up the message. No empty space, assault all the senses. You won't teach them to respect an empty wall because we're so busy selling it to advertisers and we don't care who as long as they have the bucks.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 12:18 PM

Pitbull, Since "Stewart" is spelt wrong, I wouldnt say they are in their 30's, I would say a fake retro art student in their mid 20's, who couldnt really "get" how to paint in true Hip Hop style, but wanted to be naughty like their classmates , but with a political bend trying to make a comment about Class. Native teenagers wouldnt know who Mr Stewart or the Hamptons are..an adult definately did that..

Posted by: lifer at January 27, 2009 12:19 PM

exactly lifer. a poseur adult who refuses to grow up.

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 12:22 PM

"SOTD was for a witty quip, not sheer nastiness."

The was my point bxgrl, he's gone too far....

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 12:23 PM

Just wait until it hits the sides of corner Brownstones, then let's see who's on the side of the "artists." At least the ugly signs pay the building owner for the "insult."

Posted by: Iknow at January 27, 2009 12:30 PM

i keep seeing it everyone like a cheesy tag.. but what does SOTD stand for? is that like quote of the day?

*R*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 12:31 PM

Geez, Benson, why do you find joy in attacking me?

Yes, I wrote about graffiti on the rooftops of Chinatown buildings. I NEVER SAID/WROTE I admired them. I linked to them as a reference. I NEVER EXPECTED anyone to think this is paid for. And I didn’t REWARD them, I linked the photo.

Benson, STOP PUTTING WORDS in other people’s mouths, it’s quite annoying. Don’t do it with me. I choose my words carefully most times, you should also!!

There is a difference between vandalism and graffiti ‘art’. Graffiti is intertwined with pop culture and is used as a form self expression. It evolves as an ‘art form’ as a reaction to social issues. It has shaped an entire generation of artists. Haring and Basquiat (sp?) (I forget what his tag was) being the most famous. There’s many that do regard it as art. I don’t want to get into a whole discussion about art and graffiti, I don’t have that kind of time.

So, yes, I do regard some graffiti as art!!!!

I suggest you go look at the 'crack is wack' graffiti (just because it's the most famous and if you want to call it a mural go right ahead) and then think about what was happening in this city at the time. It's quite moving.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 12:32 PM

Bxgrl and Cobblehiller;

Oh really?? I'm nasty and gone too far in calling down someone who glorifies graffitti vandals, complete with photo links? Then I'll extend the same invitation to you: let us know your address, so that we can glorify the place in which you live in with some of this art.

Please, this argument is so trite and done with. NY had this discussion back 20 years ago, and people have spoken: they don't want their propery defaced by someone they did not invite to do so, "artist" or not. Those who believe it is some type of art are perfectly free to invite these "artists" into their apartment to do their work. If they want a public exposition of this "art", then invite these folks to do so on your building.

Furthermore, one more point to be made: how would you like to be one of the persons living in these Chinatown buildings decorated with this "art"? Do you think you'd feel secure, knowing that you live in a building in which idiot vandals would be willing to break in so that they can get to your rooftop? How noble of you to glorify vandals (oh, excuse me, "artists") who break into the homes of poor immigrants who are probabably half-terrified to be living in such a targetted building.

As for your snide remarks: I'm not feeling entitled because of some award, or having any type of problem today. I just don't like folks glorifying criminals.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 12:35 PM

I guess you didn't read the parts where we said not on private property? But if you want to get really silly about it- who gives the building owner the right to make the neighborhood ugly? So everyone has to pass a "Paid" advertisement with a scantily-clad woman pushing beer or cigarettes? Because I've seen ads like that on privately owned brownstones. But in your book it's ok as long as the owner got paid? Great priorities there.

c'hiller- give the guy one lousy award and he forgets the losers lounge and all his plans. Maybe SOTD wasn't enough for him and he's suffering PTST over not getting QOTD?

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 12:37 PM

i think basquiat's tag name was SAMO and benson needs a chill pill this morning

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 12:41 PM

boy benson- what is your problem? First of all don't go putting words in anyone's mouth. Second- who died and made you the Oracle of Everything? We weren't being snide- we were trying to kid you out of your snit. BRG wasn't glorifying criminals. Neither am I. So get off it. (And don't write scenarios for neighborhoods and buildings you've never lived in. There's graffiti on my block too- on some of the private buildings. Guess what- it wasn't done by Crips, Bloods or Terrorists. Just kids wanting to think they gained soe semblance of importance).

It still doesn't give you leave to insult BRG because you disagree with her. and if you don't want to get feedback on your comments, don't post them.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 12:44 PM

"Rob:
Walk over the Manhattan Bridge, when you get closer to Chinatown there are some buildings that have graffitti covering their entire roof tops, it's a sight to see....it's impressive in a dysfunctial artsy way.
Yes, I regard 'some' graffitti as art"

"Yes, I wrote about graffiti on the rooftops of Chinatown buildings. I NEVER SAID/WROTE I admired them. I linked to them as a reference. I NEVER EXPECTED anyone to think this is paid for. And I didn’t REWARD them, I linked the photo."

Cue up the music from "Twilight Zone".....

Bxgrl: This issue was settled around 1995. If you want to keep at it, be my guest. Hey, while you're at it, why don't you revive that argument that the squeegie men were just merely exercising their "right" to make a living.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 12:44 PM

benson, Please take one deep breath. and I will too, before I type this.

You read too fast and are missing key points.

1. No one said that graffiti on a private home/property is acceptable. In fact, it is agreed that it's unacceptable and pretty much everyone here agrees with you on this point! [Hoo-ray!]

2. The point is that SOME not all graffiti is art. It's really not a point of discussion it was decided without you. [Sorry, it's just a fact, books have been written on it, museums and galleries and experts have weighed in.]

3. You're welcome to your opinion, but you have no right to trash a person. Please play nice.

Thank you for listening, and I really hope you have a nicer rest of your day. [Totally unsnarky comment.]

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 12:46 PM

'How noble of you to glorify vandals'
'I just don't like folks glorifying criminals'

Who the fuck is doing this...and don't say me!! Get a grip.
Benson...you're over analyzing my words and making too many assumptions!!!!
Benson, when you can read a sentence for what it is and not extrude more out of it, than address me.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 12:47 PM

"c'hiller- give the guy one lousy award and he forgets the losers lounge and all his plans. Maybe SOTD wasn't enough for him and he's suffering PTST over not getting QOTD?"

He's gone all 'Hollywood' on us.

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 12:49 PM

Obviously the issue hasn't been settled- except in your mind. If it were we wouldn't be posting on this thread, would we? And- FYI- I never made that argument about squeegie men- that's just another example of the "put words in people's mouths " attack method you employ because you can't deal with differing viewpoints.

what do you have rabies this morning because you're seriously foaming at the mouth.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 12:49 PM

No, c'hiller. benson just likes to go off on people out of the blue. He's done it more than once to me in the past, many times to MM, and plenty of others. You can say the simplest, most reasonable thing and if he doesn't like it, he can't just disagree, he has to trash you. I have no patience for it- that's what always got me in trouble before. Some people love to snipe for the sake of sniping. benson is one of them. I'm really disappointed in him- I thought we got past it.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 12:54 PM

It was a joke. I was trying to lighten the mood. Oh well. I guess I'll never get the SOTD!

"Some people love to snipe for the sake of sniping."

See sniping/being snide/snarky is fun, trashing people is not. It's a fine line, but there is a clear difference - in intent.

Humor is a grey area, granted, and clearly we need more of it around here.

Yikes, I think I'll just go wash some dishes now.

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 1:02 PM

Benson, you now want to cut and paste my posts and want to analyze my words. Let’s do it!!! Word for fucking word!

‘Walk over the Manhattan Bridge, when you get closer to Chinatown there are some buildings that have graffitti covering their entire roof tops, it's a sight to see....’

Yes, I said walk over the bridge and there are with graffiti. NO GLORIFYING ANYTHING THERE. I also said ‘it’s a sight to see’, I didn’t say it was good or bad, just a sight to see. That’s where you went wrong, Benson, over thinking this!

I also said, ‘it's impressive in a dysfunctial artsy way.’ Think about my use of the words ‘impressive’ and ‘dysfunctional’, Benson. Those are the ones you should have paid attention to. The ones you should have analyzed. Also, ‘impressive’ can mean in a negative way.

‘Yes, I regard 'some' graffitti as art"’
I didn’t say I regard ‘this’ graffiti as art, meaning the buildings in photos.

Like I said earlier Beson, I do choose my words carefully most times.

Please don't put words in my mouth. If you want to anaylyze my words, I'll help you with that.
We can play this game all day!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 1:04 PM

Thanks Cobble and bxgrl and *rob* for getting what I was saying.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 1:06 PM

okay im going to ask a THIRD time. what does SOTD stand for!?!?!?!?!?!?

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 1:07 PM

Snark of the Day.

It was given out a few times by the Snarkmaster himself 'Snarkslope'

My head is spinning, I need some lunch.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 1:10 PM

Rob: It's the highly coveted Snark Of The Day award, which is only granted by the Grand High Master of Snark himself, our own SnarkSlope. [All Hail SnarkSlope!]

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 1:12 PM

Cobble, you stoop so low with your accolades.
At this point you should go 'tag' his house.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 1:15 PM

i grew up on ave z next to the Coney Island Train Yard in the 80s.writers from all over the city would sneak in to put up pieces.what a great time it was to live in NYC.

Posted by: buckfast at January 27, 2009 1:17 PM

These "artists" have been marking up my mom's corner brownstone for yrs. I can not stand it and I am never there to catch them, it's annoying and totally disrespectful to the homeowner.

Posted by: 1123844 at January 27, 2009 1:17 PM

"Cobble, you stoop so low with your accolades."

And you find this unbecoming? ; )

I've offered to send Skittles, I've offered a nice French red wine, and Sprite. I'm running out of things to offer...all I have left is my undying appreciation and admiration and copious amounts of fawning!

[Too much?]

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 1:19 PM

I'll take one more shot at putting some reason into this issue.

BRG: I was not born yesterday. I know, as well as all of you know, that what a graffitti vandal wants is exposure, be it with photos on MySpace, glances from passing motorists on the Manhattan Bridge or folks on the train. By linking to photos of their work, you are giving them what they want, you are rewarding them. Don't be disingenuous with me and say that you are not rewarding them, when you know perfectly well that you are.

Furthermore,if you want to know why I got so angry with you, it's because these are not merely some jerks who put their tag on the side of a building they were passing by. They broke into a building to get to a rooftop. In terms of the law, they were "breaking and entering" a private property, so don't give me this nonsense that they were just some mis-guided youths. Recently someone broke into the building where I live to steal a lobby mirror, and I know the feeling of insecurity it brought to my wife, and - I'll say it again - I can only imagine the feeling that this graffitti brings to these residents of the Chinatown building, as their building has alot less security measures than mine.

You do not seem to realize that posting on a public site does bring some responsibility with it, like not rewarding people who broke into and entered someone else's building.

I like a joke as much as the next guy, but not at any price. That is what you seem to forget sometimes, BRG.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 1:28 PM

The 80's WAS a great time to be a writer, most of the work was done on handball courts and trains. Once the MTA introduced the new Kawasaki cars, which when painted on, the paint would just bead up, writing was pushed above ground to private homes, roofs, and scratchiti evolved..Not to say people werent writing in these places already, it just multiplied the effort to write there.

Posted by: lifer at January 27, 2009 1:30 PM

Well, as the FIRST RECIPIENT of the coveted award I have to say you must lighten up, c'hiller. Go with your more airy, ethereal, lifted on the wings of whimsical humor self and fly! SLAP!! What?! Oh....sorry. Got a little carried away there.

Er....try to earn meows, not barks (ala benson). Meows have more finesse, a rapier edge. Skittles? Sprite? You underestimate His Royal Snarkship. His tastes are refined. his interests of the highest level. Try offering a gift certificate to KFC. Or a case of Thunderbird wine- vintage only.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 1:31 PM

1123844- that's really awful. I really don't condone that- nor does anyone else. I thought there was some sort of sealer or finish you could apply to a building to make it easier to get the paint off. Anyone heard of that?

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 1:35 PM

you people and your bickering today totally make me want to huff a can of spray paint right now

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 1:38 PM

> "Try offering a gift certificate to KFC."

I've been to the KFC on 4th Avenue, but never again.

I'm more of a Popeye's fan myself. I used to go to the one on Fulton Street when I worked in Metrotech. I remember a very nice cashier there who had the rather unfortunate name of Shatwanda.

Anyhoo...

Posted by: SnarkSlope at January 27, 2009 1:48 PM

and we welcome your insightful input rob :-)

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 1:48 PM

bxgel, I'm losing hope. I'm depressed...[and me thinks you need to stop sipping whatever that is in your glass!]

[Oh crap, she's bringing THAT up again." First recipient", feh, she just can't shut up about it!]

bxgrl, That you deigned to award me 4 meows last night sparked the smallest glimmer of hope...and I was mightily crushed when...WHO won the award? benson. A great sadness has came over me.

Clearly, I have to e x p a n d my understanding of snark. I have to delve deeper into it's true meaning. [Perhaps there is a study group?] I have tried to "be the snark". I have tried to "wear the snark" [as one might wear a hairshirt, I might add...] I am trying... in the words of my fearless leader ....to 'taste the rainbow, be the rainbow'. Truer words were never spoken.

I will not rest, I will persevere.

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 1:49 PM

but c'hiller,you didn't jump the snark.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 1:52 PM

Benson,
I don't know why I'm addressing you, but I'll take one more shot at putting some reason into you.

You must have been born yesterday. Because you're talking about graffiti vandals and I'm talking about graffiti artists. Are they the same?? I won't answer that for fear of you misconstruing what I say.
I don't know why a graffiti 'vandal' does what they do, but I would think that a Graffiti 'artist' is not only doing it for the exposure but as a reaction to society. I'm not going to say anymore on this, it's a whole discussion on social issues.
Wow, if you think linking to photos is a reward what do you think about photo galleries?!?!?
Ansel Adams is rewarding trees?!?!

Benson, you sure have an imagination. How do you know they broke into these buildings to get to the rooftop? You're accusing them of something you have no evidence of. They should sue you for smearing their names?

How do you know they don't live in the buildings? or a neighboring building and hoped rooftops? How do you know they're not mis-guided youths? How do you know these buildings have less security measures than yours? (You don't want me to say what I'm thinking here by you saying that statement about less security in these graffiti laden buildings.

Benson, yes I do realize that this is a public forum and with it does come responsibility, so please don't accuse me of rewarding someone for breaking and entering into someone else's building. I NEVER EVER referenced such a thing.

Yes, I still think that some graffiti is 'art'

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 1:53 PM

"but c'hiller,you didn't jump the snark."

bxgrl, Perhaps I'm mistaken, but my understanding is that one doesn't "jump the snark", the "snark jumps you".

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 1:56 PM

Now where did I put that soundtrack from "Twilight Zone"???

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 2:01 PM

'Now where did I put that soundtrack from "Twilight Zone"???'

Ironic that you would own the soundtrack. You must have the beat in your head when posting.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 2:04 PM

Since I am stuck in meetings for the rest of the afternoon, I thought I would go ahead and announce SOTD.

The winner is:

----------

oh yeah.i thought that 11217 zip code sounded familiar. that's Heaven's zip code! i totally remember learning that in sunday school as a kid.

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 1:49 PM in response to Rumor: Biergarten Coming to Seven Corners Space

----------

The Snark has spoken. Your mileage may vary.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at January 27, 2009 2:10 PM

Arrrrrggghhhh!

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 2:13 PM

c'hiller- only in the passive phase :-)

BRG- it's a lost cause. He's projecting hysteria and has no further agenda other than insulting you. Don't worry about it- it's obvious to everyone except him. Could have been an interesting discussion- I'm fascinated with graffiti on a lot of levels, especially artistic and urban ones. On the one hand I hate to see beautiful old buildings defaced, on the other- I get much more upset if the trains aren't running or cost too much more than the graffiti on them. On some of the older subway cars the graffiti was the best thing about them- when they ran.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 2:17 PM

I am NOT giving my tiara and gown to rob. Nothing personal, rob, but they're MINE

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 2:19 PM

huh. B'stoner exiles my post cuz I swore in it, yet I see other F words in other posts? Well then F you too B' Stoney! :)

Anyway. I live by the school mentioned in this article and I gotta say, they must clean that up asap because I've never really noticed the building covered in tags. Although, my g'dammed garage door got tagged all to hell a few weeks ago. Thanks, teenaged chumptards.

I may need to go back to my theory of preemtion and have a burner 'commisioned' on my garage door. Graffiti/murals = awesome. Tagging = blow me, a'hole.

Posted by: MAT at January 27, 2009 2:23 PM

"c'hiller- only in the passive phase :-)"

I see nothing escapes your eagle eyes bxgrl...perhaps you should turn your attention back to keeping your precious gown and tiara!

[Once again, she fails to notice the subtly of my approach.]

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 2:35 PM

I think it says a great deal about your continuing journey toward self-knowledge that you can put the word "fails" in the same sentence as "subtlety of approach." Now you just need a little tiny nudge to be able to catch my drift :-)
C'mon, c'hiller- you can do it. Just make that........connection.....

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 2:39 PM

bxgrl, Where has the love gone? And why do you continue to goad me toward this unattainable goal? Have you no pity?

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 3:21 PM

I would have gotten SOTD if I hadn't been out at a Chinese New year lunch for 2 hours. Gung Hei Fat Choy.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 3:25 PM

yay!

*r*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at January 27, 2009 3:28 PM

What-EVER DIBS!

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 3:29 PM

cobblehiller, your 14 year old daughter is on your computer.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 27, 2009 3:35 PM

My point is - lunch or no lunch, you did not win the much coveted SOTD.

Posted by: cobblehiller at January 27, 2009 3:46 PM

benson, I spose you're long gone, like everyone else, but nevertheless you should see those buildings. THere are a lot of interesting features about them that call for some sociological thinking. You can't see it all in those pix, maybe I'll post some of my own in a coupla days.

And I don't want to get into the graffiti debate either.

But those buildings are fascinating because they are a prime example of tenement slums, the kind you used to see in East Harlem in the 1970s. Almost like a museum, yet the first time I walked next to them it was quite a shock. There are also active clotheslines on the roof. Yet in spite of being straight outta the hood, the owner has seen fit to install cell antennas all over the building, which you can see in the photos. The clash here is pretty interesting. Obviously these are stabilized or controlled buildings, and I know how you feel about that (I'm not in that much disagreement).

In a way, looking at it from a tagger's POV, this is a piece of property that shows a lack of respect by the owner, therefore no respect is given in return.

But check them out one day, besides, everyone should take that walk over the bridge. Glorious!

Posted by: denton at January 27, 2009 6:39 PM

Thank you Denton for that great post. When I saw those rooftops I was in awe. You're right, those photos I referenced do not do justice, it's a sea of graffiti, it's not just one building it's many, it's very fascinating on so many levels.

I couldn't help but just stand in amazement because you really don't see that anymore. I felt I truly was in NYC at that moment. This is another side to NYC that still exists that we've covered up with our pretty Condos and tree lined streets. There's still a grittiness to NY that's rarely displayed and here it is on top of the 'world'.

Yes, the walk across that bridge is wonderful. I love the metal and rivets and the connections of gables. Also when you're above Manhattan and Brooklyn, there are great vistiges of streets that you will never see from any other angle.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 27, 2009 6:56 PM

The images from the roofs relate to a term in art history... 'palimpsest' like the prehistoric cave paintings at Lascaux, France, images drawn over old images, relating to the importance of the new, and the oldness and less importance old. I'm starting to sound older than I am, a common malady on this site..thanks, Stella (the beer, not a woman)

Posted by: lifer at January 27, 2009 7:10 PM

Denton;

I am well familiar with those buildings and that area. I ride my bike over the bridge often during the summer. I was born in a cold-water flat in Red Hook. I know tenements well.

I maintain my points, both about the graffitti, and BRG. If you check out the open thread, you can see that she is back to her usual intellectual pursuits.

By the way, BRG: Denton's comments were about the buildings, not the graffitti. Please re-read his post.

Posted by: benson at January 27, 2009 8:01 PM

In the early eighties I had a temp job somewhere on west 57th street. I think it was a Board of Ed. Office. I got to input information on some sort of ancient computer with green letters against a black screen. Think Omega Race.
Anyway, I used to get off at the 50th Street station on the A line, or perhaps the C local.
I started noticing these cool drawings done in white chalk on the black construction paper they put up prior to plastering over an advertisement.
I particularly liked the drawings that featured a large television box with legs and a square shaped barking dog.
These would show up routinely along the stations I'd pass by
that whole summer.
At one point I decided to try and peel one off for my bedroom, I got to about a quarter of the panel before the black construction paper started to thin out and shred. I figured at the time, it was well enough, the artist probably had it in their mind to keep these works as an ephemeral notion to be looked at for a short while until they were plastered over by an ad for pepto bismol.

The rest is history as they say,
Keith Haring will always be part of New York in that way that the city has of producing ground breaking cultural contributions out of thin air or sometimes a piece of chalk.

At least his "crack is wack" mural is still up there in East Harlem.

Posted by: Legion at January 27, 2009 8:52 PM

I saw them in the Soho train station. Loved them- they were so serendipitous. boy, Legion. had you been able to peel off that picture you would be rich. Don't they periodically restore that mural?

I was always amazed at how quickly those drawings captured the imagination of everyone. They were so mysterious and humorous and iconic at the same time.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 27, 2009 9:11 PM

I have a glowing baby on an old spiral notebook cover he did with a marker when he spoke at my high school, its gotta be worth something, but i'm not sure i could part with it..

Posted by: lifer at January 27, 2009 9:21 PM

Late to the game, but ....

I have to agree with Benson. You want to tag a building? Buy it and do what ever you want to it. Go to town. Otherwise, hands off. Same for public property.

Bored teenager/20-something? Get a job, go to school or volunteer. Being bored is a lame excuse for illegal behavior.

As for Haring, I remember his chalk drawings on the 51st Street station on the 6 back in the early 80's. Just don't lean on them!

Although there were SOME pieces that might be considered worthy of praise, the overwhelming majority is simply crap. Trying to act as if a few nice pieces should excuse the majority of garbage doesn't work.

Posted by: Miss Chiff at January 27, 2009 11:08 PM

well, just to start off the morning right- BRG was neither condoning illegal graffiti, nor excusing. But like any artistic person, she draws things out of the visual experience you might not. Graffiti is an intense visual and artistic experience- I find much of it fascinating, some of it brilliant. It's an urban and politco-social phenomenon with a long, even venerable history. Even the Romans dealt with it. I've got my theories on why young urban kids risk their lives to tag a building but that said,the real question is why benson couldn't just disagree with BRG's opinion, but instead had to make a full blown, uncalled for attack. Which he continued on the open thread and still continues here.

He very obviously has issues with differing opinions, but the insults and innuendos (done maliciously, not in fun) are over the top, uncalled for and puts him on the same level of maturity as the young graffiti painters he so despises.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 28, 2009 9:20 AM

This house in London tried to sell an original Banksy tag, as well as the wall it was attached to, on ebay for one million pounds:

http://www.switchedonset.com/2008/01/own-an-original.html

don't know how that worked out in the end.

Posted by: Frederick Law Homestead at January 28, 2009 4:07 PM

Here's a news story on that same Baksy piece: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7188387.stm

Posted by: Frederick Law Homestead at January 28, 2009 4:09 PM

« LICH Liquidation Underway System Failure at The Novo »

January 27, 2009

Brooklyn Got 'Tagged' More in '08

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions