Advertisement

A short message from Girt_Hindrance to the Falsies Mob

By 13 November 2012 44

falsies

This in from Girt_Hindrance in relation to the falsies.

Get a f***ing hobby, or at least some talent

Got an image of Canberra you want to share with the world? Email it in to images@the-riotact.com .

Please login to post your comments
44 Responses to A short message from Girt_Hindrance to the Falsies Mob
#31
Keijidosha9:10 am, 15 Nov 12

Tagging, street art, graffiti… the label doesn’t matter. Defacing property without permission is vandalism. Street artists who wish to hone their talent should find a legal canvas.

#32
NicholasBurns9:22 am, 15 Nov 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Hey bro, its not name calling if im just stateing dem facts.

It is name calling, and that is all you are doing.

NicholasBurns said :

I tried to express it to you in a way somebody who thinks tags are art would be receptive too, cleary that was to hard for you tio grasp.

You expressed it with contempt that no one else has shown you thus far. You’ve made wide, crude and damning statements with no merit nor any justification and everyone else has shown you at least a modicum of respect. Grow up.

NicholasBurns said :

And duh, if they are girls, then they have the smallest of penises, ones that you can even see.

You aren’t actually funny.

Just for debates sake, can you explain to me what sort of skill or artistic integrity the vandalisation in the picture shows?

Colour composition, placement, the ability for the artist to express themselves in a medium and location that others aren’t capable of. Have you ever tried to use spraypaint? Have you ever had roughly three seconds to place a picture? Thought not.

NicholasBurns said :

Fact is, its litteraly impossible to justify as anything but kids ruining someones wall with childish letters.

“Fact is” it is impossible to argue facts with someone who can offer none, which you’ve proven again and again. I don’t see why I should waste my time arguing with someone who cannot even begin to argue like a grown up. For all your accusations of childish meanderings, you’re the most evident example of childish behaviour in this article/thread. Again, grow up.

#33
NicholasBurns9:27 am, 15 Nov 12

Keijidosha said :

Defacing property without permission is vandalism.

NicholasBurns said :

Street artists who wish to hone their talent should find a legal canvas.

I think it is very important to seperate those two arguments.

I agree that it is vandalism, but I do think it is a bit misguided to think that the work demonstrated here is nessecerally about “honing” a skill in the traditional, visual arts practice sense. This isn’t work done to eventually go up in a gallery, nor to make “political” statements or to “move” people. It is work done for the sake of doing, for the enjoyment of others who “get” it I guess.

#34
bundah9:50 am, 15 Nov 12

Anyone caught tagging should be made to remove their handy work with caustic solution and a toothbrush (Hillier style)!

#35
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd10:25 am, 15 Nov 12

NicholasBurns said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Hey bro, its not name calling if im just stateing dem facts.

It is name calling, and that is all you are doing.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

I tried to express it to you in a way somebody who thinks tags are art would be receptive too, cleary that was to hard for you tio grasp.

You expressed it with contempt that no one else has shown you thus far. You’ve made wide, crude and damning statements with no merit nor any justification and everyone else has shown you at least a modicum of respect. Grow up.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

And duh, if they are girls, then they have the smallest of penises, ones that you can even see.

You aren’t actually funny.

Just for debates sake, can you explain to me what sort of skill or artistic integrity the vandalisation in the picture shows?

Colour composition, placement, the ability for the artist to express themselves in a medium and location that others aren’t capable of. Have you ever tried to use spraypaint? Have you ever had roughly three seconds to place a picture? Thought not.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Fact is, its litteraly impossible to justify as anything but kids ruining someones wall with childish letters.

“Fact is” it is impossible to argue facts with someone who can offer none, which you’ve proven again and again. I don’t see why I should waste my time arguing with someone who cannot even begin to argue like a grown up. For all your accusations of childish meanderings, you’re the most evident example of childish behaviour in this article/thread. Again, grow up.

Yes i can write letters on a wall, as can my 4 year old. i use lots of spray paint at work. pretty basic stuff.

Stop trying to justify talentless rubbish that is not art. You think some scribbles and letters on a wall is art and you tell me to grow up? lol.

also, i have not insulted or been rude to anybody in this thread, let alone treated anyone with contempt. i would liek you to point out where you think i did or issue a apology.

thanks in advance.

#36
Antagonist11:17 am, 15 Nov 12

NicholasBurns said :

“Fact is” it is impossible to argue facts with someone who can offer none, which you’ve proven again and again. I don’t see why I should waste my time arguing with someone who cannot even begin to argue like a grown up. For all your accusations of childish meanderings, you’re the most evident example of childish behaviour in this article/thread. Again, grow up.

The irony here is that you have offered no facts yourself. You have simply responded with assertions and sweeping generalisations, not unlike those that you have been so critical of.

As for tagging: My understanding is that it has its origins in US-based gangs to mark territories, and to warn other gangs away from the area. The ‘tagging a tag’ would occurr when a block or similar piece of gang territory had been claimed by a rival gang, or just to sh!t stir rivals. This is the artistic ‘communication’ to which you refer. Tagging has no cultural relevance over here, and it still is not ‘art’. It is just an act of vandalism.

If I take a dump in Garema Place, will it provoke thoughts or discussion? Most likely. Does that make it art? No.

#37
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd1:28 pm, 15 Nov 12

Antagonist said :

NicholasBurns said :

“Fact is” it is impossible to argue facts with someone who can offer none, which you’ve proven again and again. I don’t see why I should waste my time arguing with someone who cannot even begin to argue like a grown up. For all your accusations of childish meanderings, you’re the most evident example of childish behaviour in this article/thread. Again, grow up.

The irony here is that you have offered no facts yourself. You have simply responded with assertions and sweeping generalisations, not unlike those that you have been so critical of.

As for tagging: My understanding is that it has its origins in US-based gangs to mark territories, and to warn other gangs away from the area. The ‘tagging a tag’ would occurr when a block or similar piece of gang territory had been claimed by a rival gang, or just to sh!t stir rivals. This is the artistic ‘communication’ to which you refer. Tagging has no cultural relevance over here, and it still is not ‘art’. It is just an act of vandalism.

If I take a dump in Garema Place, will it provoke thoughts or discussion? Most likely. Does that make it art? No.

i only ever deal in facts.

#38
Dante1:50 pm, 15 Nov 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

i only ever deal in facts.

A personal opinion is never a fact.

Facts have their grounds in objectivity and so far you’ve shown a complete lack of basic logical reasoning in your comments. It’s a shame people have to troll reasonable discussion.

#39
NicholasBurns6:17 pm, 15 Nov 12

Antagonist said :

The irony here is that you have offered no facts yourself. You have simply responded with assertions and sweeping generalisations, not unlike those that you have been so critical of.

Art is a subjective beast and as such finding any “facts” on the ability to grade, merit or criticise is entirely subjective and “facts” become murky territory.

You can decry the method of delivery, you can subjectively assess and appraise a work, but you cannot ever assert the personal preference of an artistic work as a fact. It is subjective opinion. That, I guess, is a fact.

Even those with opinions held in high regard are still considered to just have an opinion. An opinion can change and is a subjective thing. A fact, ideally, is disputable. I guess?

Whatever I’m done for now.

#40
tuco6:53 pm, 15 Nov 12

Did I just hear the sound of toys being tossed from the cot?

#41
NicholasBurns7:59 pm, 15 Nov 12

NicholasBurns said :

A fact, ideally, is disputable. I guess?

Sorry, indisputable. oops

#42
LSWCHP8:32 pm, 15 Nov 12

NicholasBurns said :

Antagonist said :

The irony here is that you have offered no facts yourself. You have simply responded with assertions and sweeping generalisations, not unlike those that you have been so critical of.

Art is a subjective beast and as such finding any “facts” on the ability to grade, merit or criticise is entirely subjective and “facts” become murky territory.

You can decry the method of delivery, you can subjectively assess and appraise a work, but you cannot ever assert the personal preference of an artistic work as a fact. It is subjective opinion. That, I guess, is a fact.

Even those with opinions held in high regard are still considered to just have an opinion. An opinion can change and is a subjective thing. A fact, ideally, is disputable. I guess?

Whatever I’m done for now.

Well thank a random deity for that.

FWIW, I reckon C&GN is on the money. Screw these dimwits and their spray cans, in almost all cases they’re just introducing visual pollution that benefits nobody.

I probably should have preceded that with “My opinion is…”, but I really can’t be bothered doing that with every sentence I write here.

#43
Sandman10:02 pm, 15 Nov 12

Dante said :

Either way, it’s eliciting an emotional response from you in one form or another, which art sets out to do.

I’m not sure that “art” and “eliciting an emotional response” are mutually exclusive. I can think of a little goings on in New York city one morning in 2001 that elicited the biggest emotional response in recent history, yet I’ve never heard anyone refer to that event as a defining artistic moment.

#44
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd10:18 pm, 15 Nov 12

LSWCHP said :

NicholasBurns said :

Antagonist said :

The irony here is that you have offered no facts yourself. You have simply responded with assertions and sweeping generalisations, not unlike those that you have been so critical of.

Art is a subjective beast and as such finding any “facts” on the ability to grade, merit or criticise is entirely subjective and “facts” become murky territory.

You can decry the method of delivery, you can subjectively assess and appraise a work, but you cannot ever assert the personal preference of an artistic work as a fact. It is subjective opinion. That, I guess, is a fact.

Even those with opinions held in high regard are still considered to just have an opinion. An opinion can change and is a subjective thing. A fact, ideally, is disputable. I guess?

Whatever I’m done for now.

Well thank a random deity for that.

FWIW, I reckon C&GN is on the money. Screw these dimwits and their spray cans, in almost all cases they’re just introducing visual pollution that benefits nobody.

I probably should have preceded that with “My opinion is…”, but I really can’t be bothered doing that with every sentence I write here.

No it’s not your opinion, your just stating dem facts!

Never apologise for stating facts!

Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.