I’m not actually upset about all this- I’m not some art-school elitist all in a tizzy about “splashing” so before anyone send me emails telling me to “Grow a Pair”, Let me just say that I fully accept (and expect) my work to be modified or destroyed when I put it up on the street- if by nothing but time alone.

I don’t care. Actually, I like it.

All the same, allow me to write a few lines.

This is the sentiment of the naysayers. (Taken from the comments to my article on the Torontoist)

If he’s so purist and ‘in’ with what’s going on in the graffiti world… why would he go over alot of old tags and throwies of artists who’ve come and gone? Even legends.

F.

Firstly, I’m obviously not a graff “purist”, I’m not sure how you could get that from my article or my work.

Secondly, I know the rules. The graffiti code, if you will.

If you don’t, (and if you can be bothered to care) here it is:

The hierarchy of Graff is as such:

Tags -Like these

or this.

Throwups -Like this

or this.

Pieces -Like this

or this.

You should always avoid going over other writers, but, if the buff isn’t keeping up and you wanna get up, you can go over- if you’re doing something better. i.e.- Throwups trump tags, Pieces trump everything but better pieces.

Still, you ought to never go over old legendary pieces or stuff from writers who have died.

If you do decide to go over someone, and they wanna do something about it, the appropriate response is for that person to go over your work in kind. This is “Beef”.

The next stage of beef is simply crossing out a persons work; even so, you are supposed to leave your name. Not taking credit for crossing out someones work is seen as cowardly.

(You might have noticed, that today’s update, like yesterday’s posters that were crossed out, or had “TOY” written on them, nobody is taking credit for any of it.)

And thirdly, the Code is more what you’d call “guidelines” than actual rules.

It’s just like the unwritten rules of etiquette. Madame Cecil’s guide to being a polite Vandal. In anycase, I’m not one to get all dogmatic about this stuff. (Although, I do feel compelled to point out that vulgarities are supposed to be a faux pas. Scrawling “FUCK YOU” like that in a public place is awfully rude. It’s akin to shouting it out. Maybe in back alleys, but this is right in Kensignton market. There are kids and old ladies there, dude.)

My point is that these people are holding me to a higher standard than writers. I know the code- I colour in the lines as much as I can. I place my posters somewhere in-between throwups and pieces, so, I feel able to go over tags, and the occasional throwup.( But [and this is the “art fag” in me] I really feel like these are blind collaborations.) (Also, when my poster eventually falls, the underlying work will still be there.) (ALSO, writers tag on my posters all the time! )

(also, writers- just to be clear, I don’t mind if you tag my posters.)

But, as this unknown person (kinda) says “Posters over classic tags are wack.” Some clearly feel that my place, if any, is on a completely blank wall. I’m allowed to play only if I never touch them and stay on the far side of the playground.

Well, if these are going to be your restrictive rules, then they’re not rules worth following. If you really are a graffiti writer, then this is a sentiment you might be familiar with.

Maybe bucking these restrictive rules is what’s upsetting “Purists”.

Or, Perhaps what’s really upsetting “Purists” about me or my article is my suggestion to make community accessible free walls. Why would that upset graffiti writers? If graffiti is decriminalized it is no longer “graffiti” at all, it’s just painting a wall for free. Doesn’t sound very hard, does it?

P.S.- You misspelled “Classic”, buttwipe.

OH SNAP.

BURRRRRN.

(Original stencil here.)