Sarcastic criticism may amuse somewhat, but trashing someone else’s work in a way that makes it unviewable by others is not art criticism; it’s just more moronic graffiti vandalism. This is on Rose St. Some street art is not very good; some artists get better and some quickly disappear. As the audience we have no right to ‘deserve’ anything. If you don’t like it, leave it alone because someone else may.
18 April 2012 at 7:25 pm
like dicknose?
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
19 April 2012 at 10:57 am
I disagree, the conversation that has happened here is the art and hilarious as well.
Far better, more time consuming pieces get slashed everyday. People bag graffers as entirely ego driven, which in most part they are. Who says “street artists” or regularly traditional artists aren’t just as ego-centric.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
19 April 2012 at 11:09 am
Well done on missing the point. ‘Artists’ tend not to damage or destroy each other’s work. Vandal taggers are the ones who can’t do anything creative and who can only interfere in the work of others. There seems to be no correlation between teh subjective quality of street art and whether it gets tagged.
Like or Dislike:
3 
7
19 April 2012 at 2:38 pm
Nope, yet again YOU’VE missed the point entirely.
street art is temporary, transient and forever changing.
What the fuck are you talking about “‘Artists’ tend not to damage or destroy each other’s work”?
Plenty of “street artists” happily and regularly stick up sub par paste ups right out of photoshop over other peoples work!
Like or Dislike:
8 
1
19 April 2012 at 4:08 pm
I see far more tagging over ‘art’ than ‘art’ over ‘art’.
Like or Dislike:
1 
8