After reading the Tempo story about the graffiti ”artists” who have opened a vandal supply store, I still can find no reason for graffiti-in spite of the ”isn`t-that-great” tone of the piece.
The saddest elements of the article were the vandals` rationalization that they were doing no harm because they only destroyed public facilities and their boast that they taught graffiti ”art” in schools.
I guess I`m naive, but I didn`t think public spaces needed to be decorated by no-talent illiterates. I thought the schools were making some slight effort to lead their charges away from crime. Maybe I should just realize it`s far easier to pretend the spray-painters` vandalism has some twisted value than it is to point out the criminality, ugliness and artistic irrelevance of graffiti.
