Deep triceratops mural bombed

Some of you may remember from last week the sweet triceratops mural Deep’s (tricycle speaker guy) pal Adrian painted on the plywood barricade erected around his garage to protect expanded construction of the city’s first residential parklet (which so far has looked quite amazing).

Unfortunately, while the mural was originally designed with the idea to ward off taggers who seemed to enjoy hitting up the blank wall, it doesn’t seem to have worked for long, as Deep came home last night to see even this peaceful thunder lizard covered in some illegible scrawl.  Having exhausted preventative measures, he wants to know what you guys think of the situation:

Some tagging is really lame while other tagging is considered street-art. Where do you draw the line?

Previously:

Mission Market mural bombed

20 Responses to “Deep triceratops mural bombed”

  1. nio says:

    that’s unfortunate but too predictable. even the best street artists with street cred get vandalized. there’s no hard-fast rule about street-art vs vandalism, but most street artists who’ve invested time developing technique and an aesthetic value the work of other artists so they don’t cover other works unless there’s a personal rivalry. that person hasn’t and doesn’t. sorry!

  2. Jon says:

    What’s to stop someone from setting up a webcam and record all activity? Granted it won’t help if the snot nosed kid is hiding in a sea of baggy clothing, but it certainly would be a deterrent and maybe catch the creep in the act.

  3. Franz says:

    Add sensors: when someone sprays, they will spray back. Expensive, but imagine the satisfaction!!!!

  4. siobhan says:

    Nought may endure but Mutability — Shelley

  5. SFdoggy says:

    It really doesn’t matter whether some people consider tagging street art or not (and how anyone could consider this scrawl art is beyond). Basically, this is just typical graffiti vandalism by some worthless punk who thinks he is being a rebel rather than accepting he is just a loser.

  6. Adrian says:

    Given it was a temporary wall, I knew it was mutable, Siobhan. Just a little sad is all. Off to go see what I can do with it.

  7. Herr Doktor Professor Deth Vegetable says:

    Taggers sure do suck a lot.

  8. Eric says:

    That sucks. Personally I’ve never really agreed with the concept of tagging as street art, regardless of what it looks like, since neither the private owners NOR the community agrees that they want it. It is done by one or maybe 2 people in the dark of night and selfishly.

    But no matter what people believe about that stuff, I think most people would agree that this tagging really sucks. That said, the triceratops needs to get back on the job! Was he napping or something?!?

  9. The Frederale says:

    Who is to say that this black lettered painting is somehow less worthy than the dinosaur painting beneath it?

    It’s all beautiful street art that must be supported.

    Right?

    • Eric says:

      The difference is that in once case there was a publicly promoted and community based piece of art, whereas the black lettered “painting” was done secretly by someone not willing to identify themselves. If it were equally beautiful and worthy, then they should be confident enough to identify with it and then see how the community responds….

    • SFdoggy says:

      ummm, no. But hopefully you were being sarcastic.

    • Slatts says:

      Me for one. And a hell of a lot more work went into that dinosaur mural than did Libre’s 10 second spank-ass throw-up.

      Wrong.

    • speedkitty says:

      I don’t agree at all. That tag is not beautiful street art. He destroyed a beautiful mural that was thoughtful and well executed with a juvenile attempt at self-expression.

  10. sixtypercenttogether says:

    it’s all vandalism.

    • yawn says:

      you must be confused by the term ‘vandalism’. if you paint on a privately owned space, and you are the owner of that space, it’s not vandalism. just like taking money out of your own bank account is not robbery . . .

  11. Mike K. says:

    Look,
    I’ve dealt with youth from 12-15 extensively who have tagging as a hobby. I first expected clients to be really into the “art” of graffiti, only to find that it wasn’t art that most of them were after. It was the “thrill of the chase”, or almost getting caught.

    One of your other commenters had it right in that it doesn’t matter if the taggers consider it art. If it’s yours and someone defaces it, it’s a crime. That simple. Would you put up with someone spraypainting your clothes? No? Well you shouldn’t have to worry about your building, either.

  12. Cnote says:

    This is why we can’t have nice things. Boo.

Leave a Reply

Current month ye@r day *