The following is a post by Harvey Garrett in response to a comment recently submitted by Atak (or as B N Blunt states, Atak’s imposter mouthpiece). The initial comment has been reprinted at the end of this post for reference:
Craig, First of all I have to agree with you on three things: 1st – generalization is not OK and I was guilty of it in my post. 2nd – assumptions are not OK and I shouldn’t have assumed that the rumors of your arrest were correct. 3rd – I’m no journalist (I think everyone would agree with you on this one). I think of blogging as participatory journalism – in other words I assume that others know lots of things I don’t and they will add to the original post and correct me if they feel I am wrong about something. That’s what I like about the blogging format. There are many above average writers on Buffalo Rising… and I don’t consider myself a formidable writer.
The photo above was submitted by Charger, a West Side reident who says, “This is the sign I referenced in a comment I made to his “Response to Atak” article. It is what I think of when I read what some of these taggers say about the beauty and benefit of their work.”
Although you have indicated that you aren’t looking for a response, I (much like yourself) feel compelled to respond. I’m impressed with your honesty. Most of the pro-tagging comments were attempting to rationalize destructive behavior – you came right out and said (if I read you right) that you do it because you enjoy it. Although I don’t respect the activity, I respect and appreciate your honesty.
After confessing to my own errors of generalizations and assumptions I have to say that you are guilty of the same. You appear to generalize all abandoned-looking buildings as being owned by negligent owners and therefore tag worthy. In reality, after decades of decline, these old buildings are being bought up by a new breed of local investors who are working very hard at the Herculean task of restoring them. They routinely report all the of their graffiti removal efforts as hindering their goals to restore their investments.
As a tax paying citizen, I take responsibility for many city-owned buildings as well – I spend a lot of my time finding new owners for them and have personally helped to prevented numerous demolitions by finding new owners and putting a great deal of my own time into bringing them back from the grave. So I would have to disagree with your assumptions that you are not vandalizing my property – I spend way too much time contributing to save my own neighborhood to not feel like you are vandalizing me personally. So yes, as much as I hate to admit it, the idea of someone tagging your car or house does sound just to me, I’m just not the sort of person to condone the destruction of personal property.
You also assume way too much about the ease in which graffiti can be removed, or the cost of doing so. This is a widely perpetuated myth in the tagging culture (as evidenced by your response as well as others). This is where you are, ironically, the outsider. I, along with my neighbors, spend far more time removing graffiti than most of the taggers spend putting it up. Especially when it is painted directly on raw brick – something you are guilty of. Our neighborhoods have far more urgent needs for our time, hence our frustration.
You are obviously passionate about your tags. I respect passion; I don’t think anything ever gets accomplished without it. I’m also a very passionate person, unfortunately our passions are at odds because my passion is revitalization of the West Side (and ultimately the rest of the city) and whether you agree with it or not, I find graffiti to be one of the things I’m fighting passionately against. I think you’ll see from all the comments on the original post, I’m not alone here. Your assumption that we are all just a bunch of fools for wanting graffiti-free buildings isn’t any better than the generalizations I made in my post.
I do appreciate, not only your response, but also the clear and articulate way you wrote it. I didn’t just throw a post out and ignore it. As more and more opinions weighed in I’ve tried to stay open to learning why someone would think it was OK to vandalize my neighborhood. I’m obviously tired of constantly removing graffiti on the buildings we are trying to restore, in the neighborhoods we are trying to revitalize. But I’m honestly trying to understand the bigger picture. Am I missing something? Do taggers feel that we don’t have a right to improve our neighborhoods? Do taggers think that we somehow deserve to have our buildings scribbled all over? Don’t they feel we have a right to be angry with them – to want them to stop (or be stopped)? Do they think we did something to them? I don’t get it. I want to improve my neighborhood without having someone from outside my neighborhood coming in and vandalizing my property. That sounds pretty logical to me – what am I missing?
I really am looking to understand. Maybe it’s asking too much. Maybe just waiting for you to be arrested is our only hope, but I’d like to think there is a better way and I’m trying to understand what that might be. I do appreciate the time you took to respond to my post, but I cringe at the idea of all the new graffiti that will show up in my neighborhood tomorrow morning.
From one passionate person to the next, any ideas on how we stop working at odds, or is this just how it is?
Atak’s comment:
Right off the bat I want to clarify a few points made in this
fictional article. I don’t know where any of this information
actually came from, but I was not arrested for a DWI in Amherst. I
know many of you upstanding citizens probably see no difference
between vandalism and DWI, but I would just like to state that I
consider myself above that crime. I have way too much respect for
myself and other’s lives to ever do anything that selfish. I don’t
want to hear any bullshit responses saying how my opinion is tainted
because I commit crimes against other’s property. Any rational person
can see the difference in the two.
Harvey, your descriptions of myself and my “peers” are made
from an outsider’s point of view, and are seriously laughable to me.
I don’t believe in speaking for other people, so any statements I make
are only in direct relation to myself. I always wonder where people
come up with their generalizations. In your article you are trying to
say that the majority of graffiti writers come from the suburbs to
paint inside the city limits, yet the article that you are referencing
states the complete opposite. You are blatantly wrong with that
statement, yet you still post it in order to fuel your fire. Poor
journalism.
You say that the vandals you have dealt with are suprised that
they were arrested. Are you dealing with ten-year-olds? Not only are
you trying to spread falsities about me, but you are also attempting
to make the public perceive me as an idiot. Anyone who takes this
subculture even somewhat seriously knows that there are consequences
for your actions. I am fully aware of what I am doing, and understand
all laws pertaining to it.. probably better than you. Say what you
will, but leave your cheap shots at home. We are both adults.
I find the next few points you try and make probably the most
insulting to me. “They see it as a game, and they even think that they
are improving our neighborhoods in the process”. Harvey, if only I
were so naive. I do not see graffiti as a game at all. To me, it is
more like a second 9-5..but with better benefits. I don’t know if you
have any part of your life that you feel passionately about (besides
your investigative journalism career), but graffiti has far more
meaning to me other than just writing on a wall. You might view a lot
of my graffiti as sensless vandalism (and in some instances, it is),
but a majority of my work is much more than that. I could show you a
portfolio from over the years and you would be suprised as to how much
serious thought has been put into the design and execution of it.
Much like any other non-amatuer graffiti writer I am well versed in
many aspects of traditional art, with an emphasis on design,
placement, and color theory. I’m expecting a large amount of replies
on here trying to get a rise out of me telling me than I suck, I
should focus on canvas painting or other fine art, etc, etc.. so
please save yourself the trouble, because I am not concerned with your
opinions at all.
On top of trying to make us look like idiots, you are also
trying to make us out to be terrorizers of the elderly? You really
scraped the bottom of the jar for that one. Again, I can only speak
for myself.. but i’m more likely to be the one holding the door open
for an old woman at the store. I’m guessing the elderly woman you are
talking about most likely lives somewhere on the west side, where the
majority of the graffiti is done by neighborhood kids writing on
condemned houses. Unless this old woman is walking down the middle of
the highway, or staring at the sky downtown, she will most likely
never come across anything I have done. I have alot of respect for the
elderly, so please, just stop with that blatant lies.
Another thing I want to point out comes up more in the
responses to this article than what was initially written. I hate the
cliche response “maybe we should spraypaint their property and see how
they like it”. Very witty, but very.. stupid. I’m not vandalizing
your cars, or your houses…unless perhaps you own one of the many
dilapidated buildings that I have painted on, in which case I owe you
a personal apology. I would understand most of your hostility if I
was painting your personal homes or your places of worship or
something like that, but this is not the case. A majority of the work
I do is on buildings that are either owned by the city, a business, or
completely uninhabited. Nothing that I do is causing irreparable
damage to the surface itself. These articles honestly are comparing
paint to something like a grenade, making it seem like what I am doing
is crippling the structure and wounding the onlookers. Complete
fiction. Paint can be painted over.
Reading through the replies posted on here I honestly don’t
know where to begin with my own responses to all of the ridiculous
indictments and speculations made. Both sides of the argument really
make me laugh more and more. We have pseudo art critics saying the
photo at the top of the page is ugly and lacking artistic merit. You
know what, you’re right. But, do you have any idea what the
individual had to go through in order to place their tag there? It is
easy to try and insult it, but I can assure you if it were you leaning
over that ledge you would have shit your khakis. Graffiti is not done
in a contained environment, and you have to take into consideration
the fact that everything being done is relying on the strength and
mental capacity of the individual. I don’t have people holding my
hand when i’m climbing on pipes or bridges hundreds of feet above the
ground, nor do I have a personal escort when i’m walking through
hostile neighborhoods. I would love to see you art critics try and
keep your composure while painting elaborate letterforms in high
traffic areas, where every person is either a police officer or a
wannabe police officer, every car is a deterrent, and every move you
make is crucial in keeping yourself out of jail. Have you ever really
thought about it like that? I’m not searching for your applause or
your sympathy, but you really need to stop talking about what you are
totally ignorant of. Also, to whoever said Donn Esmondre really stuck
it to me, or us, or whoever.. please realize that Donn Esmonde gets
paid to write lame articles. He didn’t stick anything to anyone, he
presented another sub-par article in his usual sub-par format. The
Buffalo News, on point as always.
The other thorn in my side is the “pro” graffiti side of this
argument. I hate these people just as much, if not more, than the
oppositional side. By trying to legitimize graffiti, by posting links
to artist’s websites, or by comparing my technical ability or artistic
vision to people completely outside the spectrum of what I do, you are
making me out to be something that I am not. Many graffiti writers
will sit and try and legitimize what they do as a form of art,
attempting to make a wider palette of viewers take their side on the
issue. I am not one of those people. Although I did make a few
comments earlier explaining my knowledge of elements of art, I do not
consider what I do to be comparable to something like an oil painting
on a canvas. If anything I feel that it defies a conventional
definition. I remember someone once saying graffiti is something like
“stylized vandalism”. That may be in the ballpark somewhere.
I have traveled all over the United States, and in comparison to
other cities, Buffalo does not even really have a graffiti problem.
Look at the northeast, Pittsburgh and Cleveland are very similar to
Buffalo on many levels, yet both have a significantly larger amount of
graffiti. How on earth are they surviving? If there is graffiti,
then there are drugs, and with that comes guns, arson, and even worse
murder. Why aren’t they all dead by now? How did my ever-so-popular
and overly referenced “broken window theory” fail me? The media has
created a catch phrase that is eaten up by the general public. You can
try all you want to say that graffiti is an underlying cause of other
crime, but as someone who is probably more knowledgeable about the
mind of a criminal, I can tell you that it is not. Sorry.
Your stereotypes need to stop. I am not an upper-class brat with my
parents’ wallet. I am not a brainwashed thug who is trying to destroy
your community. I am not on the corner selling drugs or committing any
crime that physically hurts anyone. I am educated. I work hard. I
have supported myself for many years, and continue to do so. What I do
in my free time may be very different from your hobbies and the things
you enjoy in life, but by me doing it, I am in no way putting any
limitations on your existence. I am not hurting your children. I am
not throwing acid in your eyes. Please look at the bigger picture.
I can’t really explain why I felt the need to respond here. I
guess it’s just the fact that I really don’t like seeing people try to
explain something that they know nothing about. Harvey Garret,
although you might have some experience in dealing with convicted
graffiti writers, I don’t really feel like you were in a position to
make some of the generalizations that you made. Would any of you sit
quietly if I made written generalizations about buffalo community
leaders being wine drinking faggots who only give a fuck about
elmwood, hertel, delaware park, and whatever other streets they take
on their way to the buffalo philharmonic? No..nor would I ever make
those statements because I believe that generalizations are for the
most part, very offensive, ignorant statements.
Every article I have ever read about graffiti portrays everything in a
negative light.. I can accept that. I would never expect a community
publication to print anything that glorified any sort of crime. I
don’t want the reader to think that by me posting on here I am trying
to persuade you into thinking the way that I do. We are all separate
individuals with separate opinions. I am not telling you what to
think, but since the written word of graffiti can’t really stand up
for itself, I merely am making an attempt to explain myself when
something meaningful to me comes under fire.
Please refrain from asking me any questions on here because I
will not reply to any of you. I regret the fact that this is a forum
in which people will be able to butcher what I say, but I feel that
hopefully my opinions were conveyed in a clear, mature enough way that
there will be no reason to do so.