20 replies to this topic

[Fran]

I don't condone graffiti (though it sometimes raises a smile), but this is a new angle on an example near Beaconsfield M40 that is probably familiar to most of us. A recent Community Safety newsletter, produced jointly with Thames Valley Police, says:

"A self declared intellectual has constantly been sharing unwanted armchair philosophy by way of graffiti sprayed onto a long fence which is on the top of a hill overlooking the London bound carriageway of the M40. Although these political, cryptic and cynical views have sometimes been the source of amusement, graffiti is unsightly and unattractive and contributes to a fear of crime that is detrimental to communities and individuals...."

If the fence owner wants to take action against this "intellectual", they are quite within their rights to do so, and I daresay a council might have some powers to order its removal, but the language of the newsletter strikes me as bizarre (is it bad to be intellectual?) and exaggerated (are you more afraid of crime?). What do you think?

See: http://www.bucksfree..._intellectual_/.

[PeterC]

(is it bad to be intellectual?)

To the police "canteen culture" very likely.

[PaulEden]

In what way has this person declared themselves an intellectual? Given that the only communication we have from this individual is their graffiti, have we seen written "I'm an intellectual" or is some one in "community safety" made that assumption.

"Community Safety"? Ugh. What a horrible phrase. I bet they are 'working with partners and moving forward' etc etc. First up against the wall when the revolution comes.

[K&P]

_{Rather Orwellian, I'd say. I'd be keen to see the message that inspired this missive.}

[PaulEden]

[HP6]

Dear Board User,

With reference to the post above, research conducted within focus groups has repeatedly demonstrated that it is precisely the sort of graffiti above that disadvantaged members of the public find intimidating and upsetting.

It is therefore most disappointing to see it reproduced here.

The Local Authority is committed to delivering proper regulation of individuals misleading the public as to their intellect, by means of a revenue-neutral licensing regime. Protecting the integrity of walls, fences and other media surfaces within the county continues to be one of the key drivers of the cohesion and safety agenda.

Yours sincerely,


Piers Lamont
Interim Director of Communications

Commuity@Cohesion

Buckinghamshire County Council

[PaulEden]

focus groups ~ committed to delivering proper regulation ~ revenue-neutral licensing regime ~ key drivers of the cohesion and safety agenda. ~ Interim Director of Communications ~Commuity@Cohesion

Where did Piers learn to talk like this? It's English, but meaningless. With this ability to use dozens of rubbish words where a couple of good ones would do, it's just a matter of time before they remove the 'Interim' from his job title.

Oh and while I remember, the online graffiti generator I used to make the image above only allowed a certain number of characters, otherwise I'd have said more!

[David P]

Paul,

At first I thoughtv this was a classic 'gotcha', but I suspect I am wrong.

The Local Authority is committed to delivering proper regulation of individuals misleading the public as to their intellect, by means of a revenue-neutral licensing regime.

I like people to think I'm a pretty intelligent type. Where do I buy a licence?

[PaulEden]

Genuine or not David, it's very funny. Piers must be an absolute riot at parties.

[Fran]

Piers Lamont was mentioned on this forum once before. And it was HP6 who quoted him then as well, though Piers was (allegedly) on the humbler CDC at the time.

Let's hope at least one of them makes it to the forum meet on Friday 16th March at The Crown: http://www.amersham....?showtopic=4142

[PaulEden]

In my mind Piers exists in many ways, even if he doesn't actually exist.

PS

Damn you HP6.

[Elliott]

I was about to say that a bit of graffiti has never made me worry about increased crime, but recalled my first thought when a local fence was sprayed a few years back - just numbers from 1 to 10 in white paint. On first sight it did give make me pause and wonder what my happy little neighbourhood was coming to. But then I felt, of all things, embarassed that I lived somewhere that produced something so bland and uninspiring. Does that make me a grafitti snob?

[HP6]

Paul Eden is right in that the gentleman is known locally by other names, but don't get me started....

Incidentally, I thought the Original Post was a leg-pull.

[PeterC]

I was about to say that a bit of graffiti has never made me worry about increased crime,

Presumably you just drive past it rather than walking from a bus stop after dark.

[PaulEden]

I've seen this graffiti on the long fence facing the motorway. Last time it said something to the effect of "Why do we do this every day?"

Is this the same as the illiterate, foul mouthed stuff we see on bus stops? Can we form an argument that says if the actual text is not intimidating, it's less damaging to society?

[Fran]

Incidentally, I thought the Original Post was a leg-pull.

So did I, which is why I posted it when I realised it wasn't.

Is this the same as the illiterate, foul mouthed stuff we see on bus stops? Can we form an argument that says if the actual text is not intimidating, it's less damaging to society?

Not the same at all, and then you get the really artistic graffiti too, some of which is commissioned. The trouble is, it's a very subjective distinction: what is art? Artists and philosophers have been debating that for millennia.

[Elliott]

Presumably you just drive past it rather than walking from a bus stop after dark.

In my 50+ years I have never driven so have almost always used Shanks' pony. I get plenty of time to inspect graffiti as I pass. Some graffiti has amused me greatly, some disgusted me, but none has ever made me fearful.

I've lived in small and large towns, including some dodgy parts of London, and graffiti has never been a reliable indication of the level or type of crime in any area I've lived or visited.

[Zoom]

If the fence owner wants to take action against this "intellectual", they are quite within their rights to do so, and I daresay a council might have some powers to order its removal, but the language of the newsletter strikes me as bizarre (is it bad to be intellectual?) and exaggerated (are you more afraid of crime?). What do you think?

The key thing is whether any regulations or laws have been broken. If they haven't then its really got nothing to do with this self-appointed group. And if regulations/laws have been broekn then they should get on with their job of enforcing them rather than spouting forth their subjective opinions.

Where is their evidence that this specific grafitti "is unsightly and unattractive and contributes to a fear of crime that is detrimental to communities and individuals" ? I suspect they are just spouting their own prejudices and opionions using generic evidence about grafitti in general and they are trying to apply those general vague findings to this specific case.

[K&P]

I'm a fan of (what I think is) 'artistic' graffiti; so it surprises me this forum has made me re-assess...

As Fran says, our responses to it are so subjective, and that would imply that it is likely that some viewers will be offended to some degree or another. Based on that, public spaces should be left clean and clear of individual expressions of art or philosophy.

It's the public space vs. the private space - bus shelter vs gallery?

And can we differentiate between 'arty' graffiti and 'political' graffiti? Does the (subversive) political message, by its nature, need to be public?

[Fran]

...Based on that, public spaces should be left clean and clear of individual expressions of art or philosophy...

Ban all advertising?

[K&P]

Ban all advertising?

Absolutely! :-)