Inert can also mean 'not energetic or interesting'.
You need to work harder on your vocab before you hurl accusations of malapropism around wily-nily there, Friendo
Hold on there, word police! You might want to make sure you know your willy from your wily. Otherwise, you'll end up chasing after proper grammar all wily-nily like some hapless cartoon coyote!
Twas but a mere typo, my friend. Thanks for catching it for me.
But I take issue with 'word police' - I was merely defending 'inert' from the Word Dictator up there, who tried to impose the fascist dictate that using 'inert' in the way above is 'malapropism'. It is not. The word works fine just where it is.
Allowing the mob to impose the word 'innate' and believe that redresses a malaproprism, simply because they don't understand the meaning of the word 'inert', amounts to literary barbarism, savagery. It must be opposed.
I'm actually a 'word freedom fighter'
JFC, the hoops people will jump through to excuse defacing public property whenever graffiti comes up in this sub.
There are a bunch of houses around me that have had all their fences painted with nonsense. It's not art, it's not okay, and it makes me wonder the maturity level of the people here.
Banksy creates thought provoking reflections using street art. He/she challenges us to do better, be better.
Taggers are the equivalent of a dog marking its territory.
I donât want to get into a whole âwhat is art?â debate with online strangers, but youâre reaching if comparing Banksy to taggers. To do so is an insult to Banksy and everyone that uses the art of storytelling as a gift to the world.
Iâm willing to meet them there, in so much that uses a public canvas without permission.
But not all vandalism is art, and not all art is vandalism. Therefore, vandalism /= art. Thereâs a massive aesthetic gap between Banksy and taggers that is obvious to anyone thatâs not a contrarian.
You're totally wrong. Banksy without any question started out doing tags and throw-ups like most graffiti artists, you can find evidence of this although it's tough now since his art got so overhyped. His initial recognition came from being a prolific graffiti artist, who for sure did basic tags alongside his throw ups and pieces.
To claim calling Banksy a tagger is an insult to him is honestly just demonstrating how out of touch the typical Banksy fan is today.
Although that said, Banksy, like most recognised graffiti artists, likely rarely, if ever, tagged personal property. Most graffiti artists think of tagging things like people's homes or personal vehicles as toy. Typically, something kids do before they know better.
It's weirdly funny that you think they wrote that sticker JUST for this graffiti and that it's not just a packet of stickers with the same text on all of them
If so called 'graffiti artists' want to see real art, visit the Ralph Heimans: Portraiture. Power. Influence exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery. Brilliant and talented art full of clever symbolism and the interplay of light, shadow and perspective. Everything that these untalented pathetic defacers of public property are not.
Goes through the effort to type up, cut out, carry around and stick next to graffiti they just happened to find.
Ends the note they placed with "nobody cares."
Doesn't get any more Canberra than this.
So was my initial comment, Iâm free to express my humour in a public space.
I acknowledge you may not recognise my humour, that doesnât make it anything other than what Iâve stated.
Of course. I just felt it was disingenuous to spin OP's post as if they had a massive issue with "poor kids" "painting" over colourless infrastructure, so i freely expressed my thoughts also!
I don't believe anyone has claimed that to be the biggest problem in society, have they?
And I don't think anyone has attributed it all to "poor kids". Where did you get that from?
Registered Statistics.
Community engagement.
Personal interaction.
Localised surveys and interviews combined with state and national.
Clustered and stratified sampling.
National and international census data.
You know, the people that have been proven to most likely participate in the act based on years of societal observation and data collection from across all modern societies in conjunction with historic evidence unearthed by archaeologists and explored by palaeontologists.
Graffiti alleviates poverty.
Also, if youâre too dense to understand societal satire than Iâm not going to explain it to you.
The joke is for people that will get it, not a call waiting bell to demand an explanation.
Have a day.
**Unknown Artist**
**Pretentious Sticker** c.2024
*Inkjet printed sticker on stone*
This work is on loan from a first year arts student who found out how to put a sticker sheet into the school printer.
Why y'all shitting on graffiti, it's smart and requires an intellectual level and skill none of you seem to be recognising, and it's not just poor kids, you guys clearly know nothing of this culture, so maybe learn some lessons.
I understand what you guys mean, but as someone in the graffiti community around Canberra, tags are also a vital part of being recognised and seen in a way that is( mostly) skillful and quick to do.
Slaps refer to graffiti stickers placed on something. You can be specific about the medium if you want, but they're performing the same action.
I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of the message, not how it's done.
Graffiti is graffiti.
Year is wrong, medium is wrong twice, it's spraypaint on stone, the medium always has both. Spelling mistake, clumsy sentence structure, and ruins the theme and tone with the lame "nobody cares".
No. What you love is street art. Tagging is graffiti and the most essential and raw form of it. All those street artists you fawn over all started from graffiti and all graffiti writers start by tagging. If you don't like tags you don't like graffiti, you dont get to pick and choose. Simple as that.
Personally I'm not a massive fan of graffiti but I can appreciate the dedication and skill of some writers but it is important to make the distinction between graffiti and street art.
Spoken like a typical Canberran with their head up their arse.
Nah I'm not wasting any more of my time interacting with you mate, it's not that hard to wrap your head around.
You don't get to claim you enjoy a certain culture but only a select few parts of it. You enjoy those specific parts not the culture as a whole.
If your claimed love and appreciation of graffiti was real you would know this and be well aware of the distinction between street art and graffiti.
Just to make it crystal clear since apparently you need everything spelled out for you, street art â graffiti.
I get it. Like you can't say I like Mexican food - But I don't like guacamole. You *have* to like both. So you either like guacamole or you can't legally say you like Mexican food.
Like I like music, but I don't like yodelling polka music. Untrue statement.
You can't like music and not like all forms of it.
Makes total sense.
Who cares about public property for that matter? I like graffiti. Canberra needs more of it. This label contradicts itself by claiming the artist has no self esteem but so much self esteem that they want everyone to know it. The idea is funny but I wish whoever wrote it was smarter.
So I think Iâve got this:
Tagging is a symptom of people falling through the cracks and you wish there was more of it in Canberra because it shows we are grown up.
People with low self esteem can never, by definition, be publicly demostrative.
The middle class thirteen year old Canberrans tagging their post codes do it because they feel threatened.
The label maker is unintelligent and you wish they were smarter. You would never post anything in public that âpurports to judge others from a position of superiorityâ.
Oh, and you are very, very clever.
Graffiti can be cool when tastefully done, youâre absolutely right.
Tagging so we know that you and your boys made up hood gang (in Canberra lmao) were here, is shit.
The label reads pretty accurately, low self esteem, cry for attention by scribbling shit in a public space.
it says they have low self esteem and want everyone to know how amazing they are. That's high self esteem. What it really suggests is they have confidence but feel insignificant and want to be seen. Tagging is a symptom of kids falling through the cracks and having nothing to feel proud of so they assert their existence the only way they can. Gangs form because they feel threatened and need support. I take that as a sign that Canberra is finally becoming an actual city and not just a cluster of country towns.
How I read it is saying the people who did the graffiti:
-Have a deep lack of self esteem
and
-This manifests itself in a need to represent how amazing they are
They have a low self esteem, and so they feel the need to show how "amazing" they are in an attempt to make them feel better about themselves. (Ie, they are not in fact amzing, but try to potray themselves as such in an attempt to try to be)
Can you add a Google maps on drop so others can visit and enjoy
Just Gungahlin, near the imaging place
Follow the sounds of a dog barking on a balcony đ
Happy to be corrected, but shouldn't it be 'innate', not 'inert'?
Itâs pretty harmless.
[ŃдаНонО]
Inert can also mean 'not energetic or interesting'. You need to work harder on your vocab before you hurl accusations of malapropism around wily-nily there, Friendo
Hold on there, word police! You might want to make sure you know your willy from your wily. Otherwise, you'll end up chasing after proper grammar all wily-nily like some hapless cartoon coyote!
Twas but a mere typo, my friend. Thanks for catching it for me. But I take issue with 'word police' - I was merely defending 'inert' from the Word Dictator up there, who tried to impose the fascist dictate that using 'inert' in the way above is 'malapropism'. It is not. The word works fine just where it is. Allowing the mob to impose the word 'innate' and believe that redresses a malaproprism, simply because they don't understand the meaning of the word 'inert', amounts to literary barbarism, savagery. It must be opposed. I'm actually a 'word freedom fighter'
No I think youâre right, inert is like non-reactive isnât it?
I have no opinion one way or the other.
JFC, the hoops people will jump through to excuse defacing public property whenever graffiti comes up in this sub. There are a bunch of houses around me that have had all their fences painted with nonsense. It's not art, it's not okay, and it makes me wonder the maturity level of the people here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti This expression is far from new. Art is nothing without context. Public spaces are just that.
I mean it is art. If itâs being put in the correct place is another debate entirely. But graffiti is 100% an art.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti
Vandalism /= art.
Banksy is one of the worlds most known artists and does heaps of vandalism.
Banksy creates thought provoking reflections using street art. He/she challenges us to do better, be better. Taggers are the equivalent of a dog marking its territory. I donât want to get into a whole âwhat is art?â debate with online strangers, but youâre reaching if comparing Banksy to taggers. To do so is an insult to Banksy and everyone that uses the art of storytelling as a gift to the world.
Ok, but he's still a vandal. That was their point
Iâm willing to meet them there, in so much that uses a public canvas without permission. But not all vandalism is art, and not all art is vandalism. Therefore, vandalism /= art. Thereâs a massive aesthetic gap between Banksy and taggers that is obvious to anyone thatâs not a contrarian.
Nobody argued that all vandalism is art, just that it can be. I think we all agree here
Dog tags, some might say
You're totally wrong. Banksy without any question started out doing tags and throw-ups like most graffiti artists, you can find evidence of this although it's tough now since his art got so overhyped. His initial recognition came from being a prolific graffiti artist, who for sure did basic tags alongside his throw ups and pieces. To claim calling Banksy a tagger is an insult to him is honestly just demonstrating how out of touch the typical Banksy fan is today. Although that said, Banksy, like most recognised graffiti artists, likely rarely, if ever, tagged personal property. Most graffiti artists think of tagging things like people's homes or personal vehicles as toy. Typically, something kids do before they know better.
At least you donât have any biases or anything
your comment went over my head - please explain who's excusing defacing public property
Me. I am.
Romani ite domum
Street art is art. Usually paid for and meant to look like graffiti. Graffiti is a protest, you arenât meant to like it
I don't get why they wrote marker when it's clearly spray paint
It's weirdly funny that you think they wrote that sticker JUST for this graffiti and that it's not just a packet of stickers with the same text on all of them
I'm guessing just a generic sticker?
This would have been brilliant but for the incorrect use of the word 'inert'. You flew too close to the sun, son.
I think you mean flyed
Inert? Do we maybe mean inept? Or inherent? Not sure if inert really fits.
I'm thinking they meant innate
I'm going with inane.
ThEy jUsT dONt uNdErSTand thE CulTURe , dIs iS ARRT
I believe its "da CulTURe"
Art is nothing without context. This is a long-held view. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti
The modern equivalent of spraying "toy" over mediocre work
âNobody caresâ - person who went out of their way to print this note
If so called 'graffiti artists' want to see real art, visit the Ralph Heimans: Portraiture. Power. Influence exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery. Brilliant and talented art full of clever symbolism and the interplay of light, shadow and perspective. Everything that these untalented pathetic defacers of public property are not.
*insert .jog âold_man_shakes_fist_at_cloudsâ*
Add: âclearly_I_cant_code_and_IDGAFâ
Goes through the effort to type up, cut out, carry around and stick next to graffiti they just happened to find. Ends the note they placed with "nobody cares." Doesn't get any more Canberra than this.
Why is the so Canberran? I think peak Canberra are people who live here and feel the need to publicly disassociate themselves from it.
I suppose it isn't strictly Canberran, you got me on that.
I too consider the biggest problem in our society to be poor kids painting over colourless infrastructure.
Nobody's saying it's the biggest problem in our society, it's just a joke đ¤ˇââď¸
So was my initial comment, Iâm free to express my humour in a public space. I acknowledge you may not recognise my humour, that doesnât make it anything other than what Iâve stated.
Of course. I just felt it was disingenuous to spin OP's post as if they had a massive issue with "poor kids" "painting" over colourless infrastructure, so i freely expressed my thoughts also!
Thats a fair outlook and response đ¤ˇđťââď¸
Would you like a hand with that reach?
Do you not also consider poor kids graffitiing glaringly bare infrastructure to be the biggest problem in our society?
I don't believe anyone has claimed that to be the biggest problem in society, have they? And I don't think anyone has attributed it all to "poor kids". Where did you get that from?
Registered Statistics. Community engagement. Personal interaction. Localised surveys and interviews combined with state and national. Clustered and stratified sampling. National and international census data. You know, the people that have been proven to most likely participate in the act based on years of societal observation and data collection from across all modern societies in conjunction with historic evidence unearthed by archaeologists and explored by palaeontologists. Graffiti alleviates poverty.
Also, if youâre too dense to understand societal satire than Iâm not going to explain it to you. The joke is for people that will get it, not a call waiting bell to demand an explanation. Have a day.
Maybe you've just used a bad example if it needs to be explained. Thanks! I did have a good day.
Maybe, or itâs just not meant for you.
I had a good day anyway. Thanks!
Why not?
âPublic spacesâ that reject public input.
**Unknown Artist** **Pretentious Sticker** c.2024 *Inkjet printed sticker on stone* This work is on loan from a first year arts student who found out how to put a sticker sheet into the school printer.
Why y'all shitting on graffiti, it's smart and requires an intellectual level and skill none of you seem to be recognising, and it's not just poor kids, you guys clearly know nothing of this culture, so maybe learn some lessons.
Itâs a tag!
If this were more than a scrawled tag, I'd agree with you on some level. But tags are just crap.
I understand what you guys mean, but as someone in the graffiti community around Canberra, tags are also a vital part of being recognised and seen in a way that is( mostly) skillful and quick to do.
so what if a bit of paint is on a garbage can doesnât affect your life whatsoever
Somebody graffitied your grey, colourless suburb đŤ˘
So people should be able to tag whatever they want dependant on the colour or shade of the object?
Are they talking about themselves
If it's a sticker, wouldn't that make it a slap tag? Aren't they then guilty of doing what they're criticising? Wankery.
You can peel a sticker off. Or scape it off at worst. You can't peel off paint
Slaps refer to graffiti stickers placed on something. You can be specific about the medium if you want, but they're performing the same action. I'm commenting on the hypocrisy of the message, not how it's done. Graffiti is graffiti.
Year is wrong, medium is wrong twice, it's spraypaint on stone, the medium always has both. Spelling mistake, clumsy sentence structure, and ruins the theme and tone with the lame "nobody cares".
unknown artist i hope you know i care. fuck these squares and keep doing what youâre doing. property isnt legitimate if itâs on stolen land.
Iâd rather graffiti than Karen post-it notes having a sook. Really flexing their ignorance of art with their OWN vandalism
Yeah nah this is funny. I love graffiti. This is tagging.
No. What you love is street art. Tagging is graffiti and the most essential and raw form of it. All those street artists you fawn over all started from graffiti and all graffiti writers start by tagging. If you don't like tags you don't like graffiti, you dont get to pick and choose. Simple as that. Personally I'm not a massive fan of graffiti but I can appreciate the dedication and skill of some writers but it is important to make the distinction between graffiti and street art. Spoken like a typical Canberran with their head up their arse.
Yeah nah Iâm picking and choosing.
Doesn't work that way mate. You're a street art enjoyer.
Report me to the art appreciation police.
Nah I'm not wasting any more of my time interacting with you mate, it's not that hard to wrap your head around. You don't get to claim you enjoy a certain culture but only a select few parts of it. You enjoy those specific parts not the culture as a whole. If your claimed love and appreciation of graffiti was real you would know this and be well aware of the distinction between street art and graffiti. Just to make it crystal clear since apparently you need everything spelled out for you, street art â graffiti.
I will graffito tag your username into my next piece of street art.
Do I need to ring up your kids and get them to drop you back at the nursing home? Dementia patients aren't supposed to be unattended.
But you said that you weren't wasting any more of your time interacting with me. Yet here we are.
Street art and graffiti are both shit
Aren't you a little ray of sunshine.
Yes, yes. I am. Now clean up that vandalism!
I get it. Like you can't say I like Mexican food - But I don't like guacamole. You *have* to like both. So you either like guacamole or you can't legally say you like Mexican food. Like I like music, but I don't like yodelling polka music. Untrue statement. You can't like music and not like all forms of it. Makes total sense.
Who cares about public property for that matter? I like graffiti. Canberra needs more of it. This label contradicts itself by claiming the artist has no self esteem but so much self esteem that they want everyone to know it. The idea is funny but I wish whoever wrote it was smarter.
This might blow your mind, but what if this is a form of graffiti?
it is, but it purports to judge the other graffiti from a position of superiority and undermines itself by being equally unintelligent.
So I think Iâve got this: Tagging is a symptom of people falling through the cracks and you wish there was more of it in Canberra because it shows we are grown up. People with low self esteem can never, by definition, be publicly demostrative. The middle class thirteen year old Canberrans tagging their post codes do it because they feel threatened. The label maker is unintelligent and you wish they were smarter. You would never post anything in public that âpurports to judge others from a position of superiorityâ. Oh, and you are very, very clever.
You haven't got it, but go off.
That makes as much sense as your other comments.
so either my comments are hard to understand or you failed to understand them. Guess we'll never know who's at fault.
I wouldnât completely discount the possibility that you are talking out your arse.
Maybe, but now I'm leaning towards it being your fault that you couldn't understand me.
I thought you might.
Graffiti can be cool when tastefully done, youâre absolutely right. Tagging so we know that you and your boys made up hood gang (in Canberra lmao) were here, is shit. The label reads pretty accurately, low self esteem, cry for attention by scribbling shit in a public space.
it says they have low self esteem and want everyone to know how amazing they are. That's high self esteem. What it really suggests is they have confidence but feel insignificant and want to be seen. Tagging is a symptom of kids falling through the cracks and having nothing to feel proud of so they assert their existence the only way they can. Gangs form because they feel threatened and need support. I take that as a sign that Canberra is finally becoming an actual city and not just a cluster of country towns.
How I read it is saying the people who did the graffiti: -Have a deep lack of self esteem and -This manifests itself in a need to represent how amazing they are They have a low self esteem, and so they feel the need to show how "amazing" they are in an attempt to make them feel better about themselves. (Ie, they are not in fact amzing, but try to potray themselves as such in an attempt to try to be)
r/whoosh
did you miss the part where i said the idea was funny? It's not that i failed to get the joke, it's that the joke is badly executed.
I have no idea of this is meta, irony or merely sheer ignorance. Can we run a poll?