Taggers have sprayed graffiti on 27 stories of a downtown Los Angeles skyscraper(latimes.com)
latimes.com
Taggers have sprayed graffiti on 27 stories of a downtown Los Angeles skyscraper
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-02/graffiti-highrise-downtown-la
150 comments
https://archive.md/ciRbI
I’d rather look at some ornate tag than a billboard. Extra points for actually bombing a billboard! I didn’t choose to decorate my neighborhood with either.
The real blemish on the cityscape is a half-finished luxury condo building, not the colorful paint job.
The real blemish on the cityscape is a half-finished luxury condo building, not the colorful paint job.
Sure, if you own the building, you can have it tagged however you want. However this is a property rights issue. When you accept some form of lawlessness or disregard to property, you can bet that it won't stop there. Who's to say your car doesn't need a colorful new paint job?
My car isn’t towering over the city! It’s also a lame and easy target. A skyscraper is gonna earn some props that my minivan ain’t.
Disregard for property is not the motivating factor for these artists.
Disregard for property is not the motivating factor for these artists.
Head over to Reddit fuckcars. You'll find plenty of people that find your car offensive. God help you if you have an SUV.
Doesn't matter what the motivating factor is. Maybe they are artists but when others see lawlessness is accepted and even applauded, theyll seize the opportunity.
Doesn't matter what the motivating factor is. Maybe they are artists but when others see lawlessness is accepted and even applauded, theyll seize the opportunity.
You’re inventing a problem though. There’s no overlap between car hating and tagging. Car tagging isn’t common at all and saying we have to enforce one to prevent the other is a scare tactic used to deploy aggressive forms of enforcement.
You're missing the point. The car comment was a bit of a tongue in cheek joke about an unfinished sky scraper being ugly and your car isn't offensive when plenty of people on Reddit find your car offensive.
My point is that lawlessness breeds more lawlessness. I see it myself, when im in a neighborhood that's pristine, I act accordingly. I remember in Tokyo waiting for a walk to cross when there were no cars nearby or queuing to get on the subway, something unthinkable in NYC.
Laws should be reasonable (e.g. littering, vandalism, can't tag other people's property) and widely enforced. We should condeme lawlessness without consideration of the victim and offending party
My point is that lawlessness breeds more lawlessness. I see it myself, when im in a neighborhood that's pristine, I act accordingly. I remember in Tokyo waiting for a walk to cross when there were no cars nearby or queuing to get on the subway, something unthinkable in NYC.
Laws should be reasonable (e.g. littering, vandalism, can't tag other people's property) and widely enforced. We should condeme lawlessness without consideration of the victim and offending party
Sometimes the lawmakers need condemning, though, and it’s their efforts that allowed the incomplete tower travesty to occur. We should condemn anti-social lawlessness — but whatever this may or may not be, it isn’t an intrinsic harm the social good.
Enforcement is a high cost and that should be factored in and I’m not saying it should be legal to tag property that isn’t yours but the bystander effect should address concerns of lawlessness spreading to personal vehicles.
Buildings and billboards get tagged because no one really cares about faceless conglomerates of real estate developers. It’s only natural that they don’t derive the same level of sympathy an individual would get if their car got spray painted.
Buildings and billboards get tagged because no one really cares about faceless conglomerates of real estate developers. It’s only natural that they don’t derive the same level of sympathy an individual would get if their car got spray painted.
> no one really cares about faceless conglomerates of real estate developers.
I don't care about faceless conglomerates but neither do I care about hooligans covering buildings in graffiti. It is possible to dislike both and a lot of people do.
I don't care about faceless conglomerates but neither do I care about hooligans covering buildings in graffiti. It is possible to dislike both and a lot of people do.
> Disregard for property is not the motivating factor for these artists.
Probably true, but isn't that true for nearly all property crime?
Very few bicycle thieves for example are motivated by disregard for the cyclist's property. They are motivated because they want the money that they can get for the bike. Same with car thieves, bank robbers, pickpockets, and purse snatchers.
Probably true, but isn't that true for nearly all property crime?
Very few bicycle thieves for example are motivated by disregard for the cyclist's property. They are motivated because they want the money that they can get for the bike. Same with car thieves, bank robbers, pickpockets, and purse snatchers.
Motivation has nothing to do with it. Destroying someone else’s property is not something I’d support society doubling down on. Saying your car doesn’t count is horse pucky.
>When you accept some form of lawlessness or disregard to property
You talking about the example set by the owner's who have disregarded this unfinished property for years?
You talking about the example set by the owner's who have disregarded this unfinished property for years?
"Sure, if you own the building, you can have it tagged however you want."
Your HOA might disagree.
Your HOA might disagree.
Sure, and that's because you(or some previous owner of your property) gave away certain rights relating to the property to the HOA.
Because HOA owns that community. So "if you own the building" condition is not met, by definition.
That's not how that works. At all.
It kinda is how it works in practice. Seeing most of my friends who bought houses governed by an HOA constantly struggle with them has convinced me that HOAs are evil and should be avoided at all costs.
That's pretty much how it works here in norcal. HOA owns the land under the community, the common places etc. Only thing a "homeowner" has control over is from "everything inside from color of the walls onwards".
[deleted]
You can't own the commons.
You don't get to spew air pollution from your property. Or constantly play loud music.
You shouldn't be allowed to force your eyesore on people either.
You don't get to spew air pollution from your property. Or constantly play loud music.
You shouldn't be allowed to force your eyesore on people either.
> the colorful paint job
There may be a discussion about whether painting on someone else's things is justified or not, and in which cases. But another thing is that tagging is really the lowest form of graffiti, barely any "art" in it, certainly no creativity. It's usually the same low effort, low complexity "stamp" repeated over and over again by the same group. Where's the art in that? Because there's certainly vandalism.
There may be a discussion about whether painting on someone else's things is justified or not, and in which cases. But another thing is that tagging is really the lowest form of graffiti, barely any "art" in it, certainly no creativity. It's usually the same low effort, low complexity "stamp" repeated over and over again by the same group. Where's the art in that? Because there's certainly vandalism.
Have a look at the article, they're actual pieces (I believe the kids call them).
Of course I looked, I'm a big fan of (sanctioned) street art and was expecting to see 27 stories wonderfully engulfed in a creative dreamworld. Searching for "graffiti pieces" on your hint turned up some quite skillful pieces, nothing like 90+% of the tags in the article.
Does anyone consider the words "SOUP" written in blue letters and pink contour (top left title picture), or "AKDE" in all black bold letters (top right), or plain white lettered "LOSTKA" (second picture middle), or the absolute jumble of plain green text right next to it as anything other than low effort spraying of paint on a wall?
Nobody presumes some guy shouting in the park is a talented singer and the shouting is quality art. And someone kicking in your door wasn't actually a ballet dancer performing their art. Tagging your name or your crew on a wall is nothing different. People want their name on a wall because it makes them feel important or memorable. They are neither, and this "tag" art is in the same vein as someone drawing dicks on the side of library books. Low effort, low skill, just making the real artists look bad in the name of some short lived boost of ego and self-importance.
Some decades ago I organized in my adoptive home town several yearly "celebrations" that were a combination of book-fest, food-fest, and street-art-fest. As a thank you for organizing this I was always invited to put my own "art" on the walls. Due to my distinct lack of talent in this area it was limited to a tag-style signature in a corner of some real art. So I managed to do the same level (albeit slightly smaller scale) of street art as these taggers with no preparation and two left hands. It was a punchline against the incredible art the others put on there. Random internet examples [0].
[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=graffiti+art&iax=images&ia=images
Does anyone consider the words "SOUP" written in blue letters and pink contour (top left title picture), or "AKDE" in all black bold letters (top right), or plain white lettered "LOSTKA" (second picture middle), or the absolute jumble of plain green text right next to it as anything other than low effort spraying of paint on a wall?
Nobody presumes some guy shouting in the park is a talented singer and the shouting is quality art. And someone kicking in your door wasn't actually a ballet dancer performing their art. Tagging your name or your crew on a wall is nothing different. People want their name on a wall because it makes them feel important or memorable. They are neither, and this "tag" art is in the same vein as someone drawing dicks on the side of library books. Low effort, low skill, just making the real artists look bad in the name of some short lived boost of ego and self-importance.
Some decades ago I organized in my adoptive home town several yearly "celebrations" that were a combination of book-fest, food-fest, and street-art-fest. As a thank you for organizing this I was always invited to put my own "art" on the walls. Due to my distinct lack of talent in this area it was limited to a tag-style signature in a corner of some real art. So I managed to do the same level (albeit slightly smaller scale) of street art as these taggers with no preparation and two left hands. It was a punchline against the incredible art the others put on there. Random internet examples [0].
[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=graffiti+art&iax=images&ia=images
> I'm a big fan of (sanctioned) street art
Exactly. In my old neighborhood the local college organizes a matching service - building owners and artists. The building owner (and random people that make donations) pays artists to make public art on their buildings. It provides housing (if they are from out of town), lifts and safety gear (if needed), paint, etc.
Some of them are huge [1] [2] [3] [4] but most are pretty small, that you would miss unless you are walking through the area [5] [6] [7]
[1] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/big-walls-ella-...
[2] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/diosa-jasmina-c...
[3] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/big-walls-kobra...
[4] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/mad-c/
[5] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/wabash-arts-cor...
[6] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/tima-fatima-ezz...
[7] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/wabash-arts-cor...
Exactly. In my old neighborhood the local college organizes a matching service - building owners and artists. The building owner (and random people that make donations) pays artists to make public art on their buildings. It provides housing (if they are from out of town), lifts and safety gear (if needed), paint, etc.
Some of them are huge [1] [2] [3] [4] but most are pretty small, that you would miss unless you are walking through the area [5] [6] [7]
[1] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/big-walls-ella-...
[2] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/diosa-jasmina-c...
[3] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/big-walls-kobra...
[4] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/mad-c/
[5] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/wabash-arts-cor...
[6] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/tima-fatima-ezz...
[7] http://wabashartscorridor.org/portfolio_page/wabash-arts-cor...
Call me crazy but I don't think there's any debate about whether painting on other people's things is justified.
I was thinking more grey area like abandoned and completely derelict building or vehicles. They may be an eyesore but nobody can or will do anything about it, and the act of painting them will in no way diminish their value. I'm just saying I see why some people might believe there's a discussion to be had about that.
Technically anything that is illegal is prohibited and yet we all find justifications for doing some of those things anyway. Sometimes because you believe the law is unjust, or because you believe some exceptions should be granted, etc.
Technically anything that is illegal is prohibited and yet we all find justifications for doing some of those things anyway. Sometimes because you believe the law is unjust, or because you believe some exceptions should be granted, etc.
While I think the concept is pretty cool, I do think this tagging will add extra cost to whomever takes over this project. On the other hand, if the graffiti rose to the level of "art" and the windows could be removed and sold, then it would help redevelopment efforts.
If humans had better noses these taggers would simply have urinated against those buildings to mark their territory but since this does not leave a recognisable mark (for humans) they use spray paint instead of urine. The purpose, effect and level of artistry are comparable to that of a dog lifting its leg next to a lamppost.
I'd rather look at neither, and describing sloppy name tags as "art" is an affront to the concept.
Why this is such a difficult position for people to take, I don't understand. I guess everyone has to either be for or against something, without any sort of nuance possible.
Why this is such a difficult position for people to take, I don't understand. I guess everyone has to either be for or against something, without any sort of nuance possible.
Yea but unilaterally imposing your sense of aesthetic to everyone else ?
I do not find those graffiti attractive. It is not art, like a huge beautiful wall mural, it is rather the human equivalent of dogs peeing on trees to mark their territory.
I do not find those graffiti attractive. It is not art, like a huge beautiful wall mural, it is rather the human equivalent of dogs peeing on trees to mark their territory.
>unilaterally imposing your sense of aesthetic to everyone else
...is what billboards do as well. And certainly they have more nefarious purposes than just "marking territory" or getting cred or just showing off your skill at writing stylized letters.
...is what billboards do as well. And certainly they have more nefarious purposes than just "marking territory" or getting cred or just showing off your skill at writing stylized letters.
Billboards are what we all agree to be put there via a bunch of means, like electing local politicians who agree on laws and regulations about billboards. If you don't like them and find enough like-minded colleagues, very easy to get them banned. Sao Paulo managed that.
> very easy to get them banned.
It is the exact opposite of this. It's extraordinarily difficult. That some cities have done it shows that it's possible, not that it's easy.
It is the exact opposite of this. It's extraordinarily difficult. That some cities have done it shows that it's possible, not that it's easy.
Or, a lot of people just don't care about billboards and would rather have the revenue from putting ads there. City and the billboard owners benefit and no one is passionate enough to counter them politically.
I completely agree with you. If a billboard company puts up a billboard against the property owner's will and then claims they can't take it down because it's their preferred form of art, and it's really truly their right to place billboards wherever they want, I believe the company should be dissolved, its executives jailed, and the proceeds of the asset sale distributed to those wronged.
Now lets apply the same standard to graffiti.
Now lets apply the same standard to graffiti.
For me it's not so much about the property owner who owns the place where the billboard or graffiti is put up, but the people who are forced to look at it when they walk around town. From that perspective I think graffiti and billboards are about equally lacking in free choice on the part of who has to look at them, and billboards aim to manipulate you, grab as much attention as possible, and make you spend money, while graffiti is mostly just sitting there. So as long as cities are full of billboards I will never complain about graffiti.
> but the people who are forced to look at it
Those people have rights to vote for politicians, or run for local offices, who control such billboards. They should exercise those rights.
Those people have rights to vote for politicians, or run for local offices, who control such billboards. They should exercise those rights.
Sure, but until/unless they are successful, they're still being forced to put up with that corporate graffiti.
So, only one election cycle? Given that corporate graffiti has been around for centuries maybe, I guess no one really cares about it being there.
You do not have a right to not see other people or their things. That is not a right. Your rights end the moment you're talking about someone else's being. What next? The right not to look at children? Come on, this is ridiculous. Corporations are groups of people and people have a basic human right to congregate.
Personally, I like some grafitti, but I'm absolutely against tagging. It is immoral, unethical, and thuggish behavior. When property owners put up graffiti of their own (or commission an artist to do it), I think it can be a nice splash of color in an urban environ.
Personally, I like some grafitti, but I'm absolutely against tagging. It is immoral, unethical, and thuggish behavior. When property owners put up graffiti of their own (or commission an artist to do it), I think it can be a nice splash of color in an urban environ.
> is what billboards do as well
not really. in theory there is some kind of process where we could collectively decide about the existence / frequency / size of billboards, as can be seen in many towns that have advertising banned, or as can be seen when you contrast New York with any European city.
with wanna be gangster teenagers and adults with Peter Pan syndrome ? not really.
p.s. I hate billboards as well, if you ask me both should not exist
not really. in theory there is some kind of process where we could collectively decide about the existence / frequency / size of billboards, as can be seen in many towns that have advertising banned, or as can be seen when you contrast New York with any European city.
with wanna be gangster teenagers and adults with Peter Pan syndrome ? not really.
p.s. I hate billboards as well, if you ask me both should not exist
In theory we could ask all graffiti artists kindly to stop doing it. I think both are about equally realistic. (Any European city save a few exceptions still has billboards btw).
There are cities where billboards are not allowed, and also I did not say that European cities do not have billboards, I said that there is a stark contrast between European cities and New York, due to regulations.
Times square is a disaster the magnitude of which cannot be found in Europe.
Times square is a disaster the magnitude of which cannot be found in Europe.
>Times square is a disaster the magnitude of which cannot be found in Europe.
Who is Times Square for but Europeans and other tourists? Do you think New Yorkers go there to see the latest billboards? I feel bad for anyone I know who has to work in the few big towers in times square.
Who is Times Square for but Europeans and other tourists? Do you think New Yorkers go there to see the latest billboards? I feel bad for anyone I know who has to work in the few big towers in times square.
Are you suggesting that it is because of Europeans that Times Square is a clusterfuck?
Europe has destinations that are way more touristic than Times Square, and you cannot find this atrocity.
Europe has destinations that are way more touristic than Times Square, and you cannot find this atrocity.
I'm saying its because of tourists, which does include Europeans.
>Europe has destinations that are way more touristic than Times Square, and you cannot find this atrocity.
Okay? It's not New Yorkers going there to gawk.
>Europe has destinations that are way more touristic than Times Square, and you cannot find this atrocity.
Okay? It's not New Yorkers going there to gawk.
Honestly there are relatively few billboards in nyc outside of Times Square relative to somewhere like Houston
In my opinion, billboards are just as bad as graffiti for this reason.
[deleted]
I think I'd rather have neither.
How do you feel about people illegally exerting their aesthetic opinion about your property?
Not liking the look of something does not give you the right to alter how it looks.
That's a dark path set off on.
I'm sure you'll feel the same when someone paints "vote Trump" on your house.
Yeah the real problem with the city is all that city.
You don't need billboards for something to count as a city.
Case in point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cidade_Limpa
https://99percentinvisible.org/article/clean-city-law-secret...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cidade_Limpa
https://99percentinvisible.org/article/clean-city-law-secret...
Yep, perfect city lol
https://www.numbeo.com/crime/in/Sao-Paulo
https://www.numbeo.com/crime/in/Sao-Paulo
Nobody even tried to claim it was a perfect city, whatever "perfect" is supposed to mean. It's just an example of a city with no billboards, no more, no less.
... Does crime invalidate São Paulo's status as a city?
Everyone is focused on the graffiti and not on the fact that these skyscrapers are sitting there unfinished and empty for years because of poor management. That is the real story here.
You normally see stuff like this in developing countries... not in the middle of one of the largest cities in America.
You normally see stuff like this in developing countries... not in the middle of one of the largest cities in America.
[deleted]
What exactly is the story? "These people suck at building buildings"? Surely, the incompetent managers wish they didn't screw it up and turn their idea into a money pit.
> If someone tried this at Art Basel, it would sell for millions. If Banksy pulled off a project of this scope, he’d be hailed as a genius.
Only, if it were a Banksy, it'd be throught-provoking, good looking art, instead of these gaudy, multi colored balloon letters
Only, if it were a Banksy, it'd be throught-provoking, good looking art, instead of these gaudy, multi colored balloon letters
> throught-provoking, good looking
It is conceptual yes but it's not exactly deep in it's thinking.
Good looking yes but isn't exactly provocative or beautiful in its aesthetics.
Banksy is friendly and harmless and non threatening. Easy to digest and understand and appreciate. Its very understandable why his works are so valued - they are good products to be consumed.
Graffiti is threatening, and is less easy to digest and understand. It's also less valued by the world. Arguably graffiti doesn't aim to be consumed as art or to be approved of by cities.
Personally I would rather not see either! But as the above outlines this would be for different reasons.
It is conceptual yes but it's not exactly deep in it's thinking.
Good looking yes but isn't exactly provocative or beautiful in its aesthetics.
Banksy is friendly and harmless and non threatening. Easy to digest and understand and appreciate. Its very understandable why his works are so valued - they are good products to be consumed.
Graffiti is threatening, and is less easy to digest and understand. It's also less valued by the world. Arguably graffiti doesn't aim to be consumed as art or to be approved of by cities.
Personally I would rather not see either! But as the above outlines this would be for different reasons.
I'm a simpleton, and no critic of art. So I'll take looking at easy to digest Banksy over the spray paint equivalent of a gang war cross-breed with a teenager yelling "MUH DICK".
yes, if there was only a choice between the two options. In theory, we in western democracies have a choice what happens in our places, I would have neither. In practice and it seems that bringing up the very notion of impartiality is worse than any problem being examined, I would rather have the easily digested Banksy.
> they are good products to be consumed.
No, they are good pieces of art to be enjoyed.
No, they are good pieces of art to be enjoyed.
Really? I think it adds much more to a city's character than Banksy's hokum. I'd happily pay to put this up across my local skyline.
Yeah, says someone who doesn't live in Los Angeles.
The only character this kind of crap adds is the kind of shady character that makes me not want to walk around Downtown at night.
LA has been getting worse and worse. The Westside has been pretty much given over to drug addicts and the criminally insane. The Valley is rapidly suffering the same fate.
The only reason this sort of thing even exists is pure neglect, plain and simple. If your property doesn't mean enough to you to either finish it or sell it to someone who will, then maybe you have no business owning it in the first place. Wanna bet that this property is owned by Chinese interests that don't give two shits about this city?
Oh wait, that's literally in the article. What a shock.
The only character this kind of crap adds is the kind of shady character that makes me not want to walk around Downtown at night.
LA has been getting worse and worse. The Westside has been pretty much given over to drug addicts and the criminally insane. The Valley is rapidly suffering the same fate.
The only reason this sort of thing even exists is pure neglect, plain and simple. If your property doesn't mean enough to you to either finish it or sell it to someone who will, then maybe you have no business owning it in the first place. Wanna bet that this property is owned by Chinese interests that don't give two shits about this city?
Oh wait, that's literally in the article. What a shock.
Don't think you can speak for all city residents. I've lived in DTLA for eight years, across the street from another abandoned building. The whole time it's been graffitied from floor to roof.
Like OP, I enjoy the artwork just outside my window.
Like OP, I enjoy the artwork just outside my window.
USC literally tells its students not to walk around alone at night and has a LiveSafe app which "has a useful SafeWalk function that allows friends to monitor each other when someone is en route to a destination" - https://safety.usc.edu/tips/
Being an institution with thousands of students, I'd trust their take more than your random anecdote.
Being an institution with thousands of students, I'd trust their take more than your random anecdote.
How does this possibly correlate to people tagging? Minor non-destructive property crime on the paint of a building is not the same as violent crime, and also the LA crime rate has been shrinking for years. Every college has campus safety guidelines as well that tend to say things like that
Why do you think tagging is a thing? It’s a way for gangs to mark their turf, plain and simple. Tagging means gang activity, which means violent crime.
And your assertion about the LA crime rate shrinking for years is incorrect: https://www.laalmanac.com/crime/cr01.php
In fact, violent crimes reached their lowest level around 2013, and have been steadily on the rise since then.
And your assertion about the LA crime rate shrinking for years is incorrect: https://www.laalmanac.com/crime/cr01.php
In fact, violent crimes reached their lowest level around 2013, and have been steadily on the rise since then.
Its not plain and simple. As someone who has talked to people who actually do it, it’s much more common to be art-related and marking that someone exists than anything gang related. Maybe it used to be a certain way but it certainly isn’t strongly correlated now.
> Every college has campus safety guidelines as well that tend to say things like that
I have been to a bunch of college campuses to visit my friends over the years. None came close to USC in terms of how scared the local student population was to walk alone outside at night.
I have been to a bunch of college campuses to visit my friends over the years. None came close to USC in terms of how scared the local student population was to walk alone outside at night.
"Under the broken windows theory, an ordered and clean environment, one that is maintained, sends the signal that the area is monitored and that criminal behavior is not tolerated. Conversely, a disordered environment, one that is not maintained (broken windows, graffiti, excessive litter), sends the signal that the area is not monitored and that criminal behavior has little risk of detection."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
It is 'just' a criminology theory, with many people who disagree with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
It is 'just' a criminology theory, with many people who disagree with it.
Improving and more importantly maintaining the environments where people live does reduce crime. Most of the problems people have with broken windows theory is how it has been used to justify excessive policing that victimized people instead of improving things for them.
I mean, I believe you, because obviously people don’t care enough about petty crime that LAPD doesn’t do crap about it (and yes, I admit that’s a cheap target, I really mean the LA City Council and more broadly, the LA County Board of Supervisors). But would you be okay admiring that art while walking around at 11:30 PM to get a gallon of milk?
If so, please let me know exactly what street you live on, because speaking as a USC graduate who has lived in the LA area for the better part of four decades, I sure as hell wouldn’t.
If so, please let me know exactly what street you live on, because speaking as a USC graduate who has lived in the LA area for the better part of four decades, I sure as hell wouldn’t.
Yes, I do routinely take late night walks around the neighborhood. Never had any problems - the worst thing is lousy drivers.
Not sure what to tell you. Only a matter of time, I guess.
I once came within seconds of having to pull a knife to protect myself in that area at 2:00 AM. I can tell you, it is NOT safe.
I once came within seconds of having to pull a knife to protect myself in that area at 2:00 AM. I can tell you, it is NOT safe.
[deleted]
I've heard this reactionary spiel my whole life—it's easy to be afraid. Terrible way to run a society, though.
Have you ever been mugged? You ever been put in a situation where you feared for your life?
If not, climb out of your comfortable ivory tower armchair and recognize that there are bad people in this society, and you are doing nothing but enabling them for the simple reason that you, like your average teenager, have never been anyone’s victim and therefore think you’re invulnerable.
If not, climb out of your comfortable ivory tower armchair and recognize that there are bad people in this society, and you are doing nothing but enabling them for the simple reason that you, like your average teenager, have never been anyone’s victim and therefore think you’re invulnerable.
Sure, but that doesn't mean I lost my brain in the progress. Most of the bad people in society certainly aren't criminals.
Reactionary?
Denial isn't just a river in Africa after all!
Denial isn't just a river in Africa after all!
As someone who knows a lot of people who tag, they add significantly more to the character of a city while being more of a supportive community than most groups of artists, I would rather have that in my city then some random “fake deep“ piece that gets a pass because it’s more marketable.
Banksy is not tribal.
Banksy is not marking things for a race or gang.
These markings are tribal and represent violence to people that violate these peoples turf.
These markings are tribal and represent violence to people that violate these peoples turf.
This is not true, the majority of tags are not gang related
“Is it nice or is it bad?” asks the article then immediately links to an article under “More to read” about gunshots coming from the same building the day after this article was written.
The LAPD have said the graffiti will eventually be removed which seems rather pointless for a building that is probably eventually going to be torn down before it's finished.
https://twitter.com/LAPDCentral/status/1752850179680768313
https://twitter.com/LAPDCentral/status/1752850179680768313
It's all about creating the appearance of wasted effort on the side of the taggers, possibly sprinkled with a little political nudging to stop highlighting that specific bit of failure.
I hate tagging done in places where people obviously care about the building the walls are part of, but in this case it's hard not to see this as a public service:
“Look at this hubris. Hard to ignore now isn't it? A huge newly built tower abandoned for all intents and purposes. It's a waste of space, money, and it raises questions about sustainability and fairness.”
I hate tagging done in places where people obviously care about the building the walls are part of, but in this case it's hard not to see this as a public service:
“Look at this hubris. Hard to ignore now isn't it? A huge newly built tower abandoned for all intents and purposes. It's a waste of space, money, and it raises questions about sustainability and fairness.”
Waste of space: Not really? The plot of land the building is on is ~ 1/3rd of an acre. Immediately adjacent to it are multiple street level-only parking lots that have a larger footprint. I guess providing parking to 60 cars is more useful than an empty building, but not by much, especially considering the building will probably be rehabbed eventually. For reference the LACC 1 block away has parking for 6000 cars, and done in a reasonable, space-efficient manner (multilevel underground parking).
Waste of money: Whose money? The developers? Sure. But it isn't like random tax paying citizens of LA had any kind of stake in it.
Waste of money: Whose money? The developers? Sure. But it isn't like random tax paying citizens of LA had any kind of stake in it.
Now rebut the idea that condoning the breaking of windows and laws has a negative impact.
The connection between supporting broken windows, and those who break them is a lot more direct.
>The real blemish on the cityscape is a half-finished luxury condo building, not the colorful paint job.
The connection between supporting broken windows, and those who break them is a lot more direct.
>The real blemish on the cityscape is a half-finished luxury condo building, not the colorful paint job.
Is "abandoned" the narrative speak for a essentially bank owned real estate that's sitting in bankruptcy court somewhere? The premise this is a billion dollar asset that no one wants is patently asinine.
Is there anyone currently residing in it? If the reason that it is disused is merely some bureaucratic snafu, then that actually feels even more dystopian than some run-of-the-mill abandonment.
> currently residing in it?
> run-of-the-mill abandonment
That's a lovely way to try to frame the narrative, take that all the way through and every vacation home or place for sale/ready is "abandoned" and therefore morally acceptable for someone to take. Double plus good.
Don't let the fact the Oceanwide lot alone being worth $100m plus stop though, though. Definitely abandoned, no one likes money.
That's a lovely way to try to frame the narrative, take that all the way through and every vacation home or place for sale/ready is "abandoned" and therefore morally acceptable for someone to take. Double plus good.
Don't let the fact the Oceanwide lot alone being worth $100m plus stop though, though. Definitely abandoned, no one likes money.
Given that homelessness is at record highs, I wouldn't worry too much about those with more homes than they can use; I think they'll be OK.
> Given that homelessness is at record highs, I wouldn't worry too much about those with more homes than they can use [..]
Well, apart from that homelessness is not just a housing problem[0], and that homeless people in Western countries are substantially more likely to have alcohol and drug dependence than the age-matched general population in those countries, and the prevalences of psychotic illnesses and personality disorders are higher.[1]
Of course there is the idea of "housing first"[2], 'the idea [to] help people find permanent housing right away, without conditioning this housing on sobriety, mental health treatment, employment, or anything else'.
...aaand then it ends up being political.
[0] Homelessness Is Not Just a Housing Problem https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2605901/
[1] The Prevalence of Mental Disorders among the Homeless in Western Countries: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2592351/
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/oct/20/housing-first...
Well, apart from that homelessness is not just a housing problem[0], and that homeless people in Western countries are substantially more likely to have alcohol and drug dependence than the age-matched general population in those countries, and the prevalences of psychotic illnesses and personality disorders are higher.[1]
Of course there is the idea of "housing first"[2], 'the idea [to] help people find permanent housing right away, without conditioning this housing on sobriety, mental health treatment, employment, or anything else'.
...aaand then it ends up being political.
[0] Homelessness Is Not Just a Housing Problem https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2605901/
[1] The Prevalence of Mental Disorders among the Homeless in Western Countries: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2592351/
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/oct/20/housing-first...
As a mentally ill homeless person myself, I don’t doubt that there is some connection. What I would question is if the current increase in homelessness corresponds to an increase in mental illness.
And there it is.
All fun and games till they come for your stuff, with the same argument. As someone with a first hand experience in that, I find it extremely peculiar these arguments are almost elusively made by 30 something year old white kids that grew up in upper middle class US suburbs.
All fun and games till they come for your stuff, with the same argument. As someone with a first hand experience in that, I find it extremely peculiar these arguments are almost elusively made by 30 something year old white kids that grew up in upper middle class US suburbs.
You're not exactly over the target, but it is a bit novel to see an acknowledgement of white privilege mixed in with what is more traditionally a conservative concern about property.
the vast majority of minority communities (in the USA) are in fact conservative on property crime and law an order. They also support increased law enforcement (they just don't want cops to be less racist).
Most modern disestablishmentarian movements simply exploit minorities and claim to speak for them, but dont actually represent their views.
Most modern disestablishmentarian movements simply exploit minorities and claim to speak for them, but dont actually represent their views.
If no one has lived in the vacation home for five years and it’s currently hosting squatters, then yes I would call that abandoned.
I think we should tax the heck out of vacation homes and those that are otherwise just sitting empty.
Why would they tear down a brand new - fully compliant with the current code - nearly finished building?
Unfortunately, it’s been abandoned (and likely unmaintained) for nearly 5 years — with incomplete weatherproofing, etc. Who knows what’s been damaged or destroyed, invisibly?
It would be a major liability.
It would be a major liability.
The creditors have covenants to protect the asset and they've taken the possession in the fall of last year. 1)
None of what you wrote makes sense - it's functionally owned by new york hedge fund 2) that specializes in real estate financing, and there's some local muni nonsense 3) that's slowing down the process.
1) https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/09/29/bermuda-court-orders-l...
2) https://dwpartners.com/
3) https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/08/23/california-court-block...
None of what you wrote makes sense - it's functionally owned by new york hedge fund 2) that specializes in real estate financing, and there's some local muni nonsense 3) that's slowing down the process.
1) https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/09/29/bermuda-court-orders-l...
2) https://dwpartners.com/
3) https://therealdeal.com/la/2023/08/23/california-court-block...
I mean, sure, legally. But how many large-scale structures like this, that were paused for 5 years, end up completed?
I only know of 22 Bishopsgate [1] — and that’s with the big caveat that they gutted the structural core of the building and replaced it.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love for someone to have been maintaining it, and for construction to complete rather than going entirely to waste. But given the levels of fraud that have been alleged around the project, I’m not holding my breath.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/22_Bishopsgate
I only know of 22 Bishopsgate [1] — and that’s with the big caveat that they gutted the structural core of the building and replaced it.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love for someone to have been maintaining it, and for construction to complete rather than going entirely to waste. But given the levels of fraud that have been alleged around the project, I’m not holding my breath.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/22_Bishopsgate
Not uncommon, there was a ton of it after 2008. For steel and concrete highrises, it's not a huge deal.
As matter of fact developers build these things in parallel, lower levels are getting interiors while upper floors are still open to elements concrete and middle is getting framed out for interior. Kinda interesting to see a tower that's getting washers/dryers and exterior windows installed at the same time...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704226004575262...
As matter of fact developers build these things in parallel, lower levels are getting interiors while upper floors are still open to elements concrete and middle is getting framed out for interior. Kinda interesting to see a tower that's getting washers/dryers and exterior windows installed at the same time...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704226004575262...
Sure, but I think this is a bit apples-and-oranges. 2008-era restarts were overwhelmingly completed by the original owners, with < 2y pauses, and most were pretty small.
We’ll just have to wait and see I guess!
We’ll just have to wait and see I guess!
Fountainebleau Las Vegas
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fontainebleau_Las_Vegas
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fontainebleau_Las_Vegas
Oooh, good example! Thanks!
I'm late to this discussion, but for what it's worth, these aren't gang tags, and there's nothing tribal or territorial about it -- a bunch of known writers just got up on a derelict, piece of shit building [0] because it's there, it's an eyesore, and they could.
Actual gang tags [1] have arguably no artistic value and serve a very different purpose.
Anyways, just wanted to point out the distinction -- discussions about the morality of it are a separate topic.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanwide_Plaza
[1] https://www.instagram.com/fxckyourhood
Actual gang tags [1] have arguably no artistic value and serve a very different purpose.
Anyways, just wanted to point out the distinction -- discussions about the morality of it are a separate topic.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanwide_Plaza
[1] https://www.instagram.com/fxckyourhood
>Instead, the taggers took it upon themselves to transform something ugly into something far more vibrant. Isn’t that L.A. at its finest?
>[...]
>More to Read
>LAPD investigating gunfire at graffitied skyscraper in downtown L.A.[0]
[0] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...
>[...]
>More to Read
>LAPD investigating gunfire at graffitied skyscraper in downtown L.A.[0]
[0] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...
It makes LA look more like the sci-fi I grew up reading! Funny how the world works and how accurate old sci-fi was.
Those were 'dystopias'
This would be an awesome coffee table book. Each page a separate tag and also several pages of high quality shots from various angles showing the building, parts of the building, surrounding areas, etc... interviews with some of the taggers.
I would purchase this and would love to have something like this.
I would purchase this and would love to have something like this.
>If Banksy pulled off a project of this scope, he’d be hailed as a genius.
Right, Banksy's work usually has a message or some intellectual content embedded in it. These are just inscrutable letters that have no meaning.
The building does have a pretty Cyberpunk look to it now though I guess.
Right, Banksy's work usually has a message or some intellectual content embedded in it. These are just inscrutable letters that have no meaning.
The building does have a pretty Cyberpunk look to it now though I guess.
> Even Kevin de León, the city council member who represents downtown, emerged from his hiding hole on Groundhog Day to tell KTLA Channel 5 that Los Angeles should not be an “open canvas [for] budding artists.”
I don’t know de León, but I see he’s got the conservatives’ gift for describing his opponent’s desired world in the coolest possible way. “Taco truck on every corner” vibes here.
I don’t know de León, but I see he’s got the conservatives’ gift for describing his opponent’s desired world in the coolest possible way. “Taco truck on every corner” vibes here.
Death penalty.
Sheltered clueless people dont realize how disrespectful this is.
Disrespectful to who? Large capital holders who create blight?
Pretend you like your job, your area, and your community for a moment - you come into work one day and you find out that someone had tagged your dumpster.
Does it only degrade trash corp llc? Or you do you feel an effect?
Does it echo outside your company, how do your neighbors perceive it?
Someone drives past, that has no overlap all at with any of those factors.. they're gonna have an internal reaction too.
I guess if someones a fan of burning society down you can make a pitch that there's some progress being made by someone spraying their tag handle on some symbol of capitalistic structures.. but I have a hard time seeing depth of meaning from an act that's usually ego-driven(tagging).
Someone drives past, that has no overlap all at with any of those factors.. they're gonna have an internal reaction too.
I guess if someones a fan of burning society down you can make a pitch that there's some progress being made by someone spraying their tag handle on some symbol of capitalistic structures.. but I have a hard time seeing depth of meaning from an act that's usually ego-driven(tagging).
If I like my community and some large scale corporate developer came in, badly managed a project, and left a half finished building in the place where some useful buildings were once, I'd probably be pro-tagging it.
That's the community in action, not some development firm who would mostly act as an extraction tool to siphon money out of the community once it was complete.
That's the community in action, not some development firm who would mostly act as an extraction tool to siphon money out of the community once it was complete.
But a dumpster is a complete and functional item. I think that's a key distinction. This is an incomplete high rise blighting the landscape until it's taken down.
What if you like your job, your area, and a developer shows up one day and installs 2/3rds of a dumpster in the parking lot. There is a partially completed trash enclosure there, clearly unfinished, blighting the view from your office.
If someone drives past, they're not going to get a positive impression whether it's painted or not.
If someone paints the wreckage of the incomplete dumpster, how do you feel about it? It seems to me the disrespect here is really from the people who built a pile of garbage in your parking lot.
What if you like your job, your area, and a developer shows up one day and installs 2/3rds of a dumpster in the parking lot. There is a partially completed trash enclosure there, clearly unfinished, blighting the view from your office.
If someone drives past, they're not going to get a positive impression whether it's painted or not.
If someone paints the wreckage of the incomplete dumpster, how do you feel about it? It seems to me the disrespect here is really from the people who built a pile of garbage in your parking lot.
If someone tags a dumpster I'll think less about it than I did reading this comment section.
Seriously who cares? It is paint. Wash it off or paint over it if it bothers you.
Seriously who cares? It is paint. Wash it off or paint over it if it bothers you.
Seeing this makes me wonder when these "artists" start realising they can use drones to put their "tags" on all those nice big flat unreachable areas high up on buildings.
Am I glad I don't live in a city. Around me the only "tags" are left by territory-marking animals of the non-human kind.
Am I glad I don't live in a city. Around me the only "tags" are left by territory-marking animals of the non-human kind.
Pay no attention to the banking crisis... there is no banking crisis... riiight.
Apparently this building is also a target pratice range: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...
Apparently this building is also a target pratice range: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-03/lapd-inv...