“Love Ludlow.” That’s the message as you walk under the railway between Sheet Road and Sandpits. A more recent expression of artistic talent on Market Square is “I’m making a call”. Should you want to see a female ‘brother’ – drop down to Friars Walk.
All these illegal artworks send messages. All are graffiti. All could be described as vandalism or even criminal damage. But aren’t they art? Don’t they brighten up our town? Do they create talking points?
Let me know you views.
These are not the only examples of graffiti around the town of late. Images on Temeside have been painted over. I hear that there has been graffiti on Bread Walk but haven’t seen it. And there is still a bit of random tagging around the town. That in my view doesn’t qualify as art.
What do you think about these three recent graffiti images? Should graffiti be considered art or vandalism?
It is art except for the ‘Love Ludlow’ graffiti around the words. The art gives tourists and ‘Ludlowdians ‘ .a a talking point. It encourages discussion etc You can put them on the net for the country to comment on, that could increase tourism, good for business.
Thank you, as always, for your blog.
The graffiti that I have seem have been well executed, amusing and have the art of bringing smiles to the faces of residents and visitors alike. They lighten our town However, too many of them
produced less well, and in unsuitable places, could lessen our pleasure, and become tedious.
The three examples you show are fun and appropriate to where they have been put. I agree with you that “tagging” is not “art”; I’d call it territorialism, displaying the tagger’s identity, maybe audacity rather than enhancing the town. I’m not sure I’ve seen much around Ludlow but it’s often ugly and an eyesore. Some towns/cities supply empty spaces/walls for “street art” – should we?
Whether you love or hate them is in the eye of the beholder.
However they are all criminal damage without permission being obtained.