Posts by George Darroch
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I/O said
They are not interested in doing proper graffiti 'murals' because that is too hard and they are lazy kids who just want to be 'famous' by throwing up their scrawl wherever they can.
Which seems only partly true. There are some who are only interested in getting their tag out as widely as possible, others who are only interested in creating work of the highest quality, and others - probably the largest group - who want both widespread recognition and respect for their tag. Growing up in Mangere in the 90s-00s, I used to hear boasting about how awesome a particular tag was. I can't imagine things have changed particularly much.
When you increase enforcement and painting over, you increase the risks that they're going to get caught, and it stands to reason that they'll want to tag quickly, and then bugger off. They're not going to stand round painting a masterpiece. You get less full size multicoloured 'bombs' and more ugly scrawls (tags). Painting over also means there's less incentive to put effort and money into creating something substantial.
The other option for them is to tag in obscure locations where their work will be seen by their peers, but with reduced risks, and greater payback (it'll last for longer).
A lot of kids do seem to want the recognition that comes with something spectacular, but they're denied the chance. Graffiti walls don't cater to all, but they do provide for quite a few.
That said, I'm out of the loop and don't know anyone who tags anymore, so all this is from a distance.
-
Slightly off topic;Graham alluded to a lack of transparency/accountability in NZ selection processes.
If you like the idea of voting for your candidates - you could do worse than the Greens, who let their members choose their candidates in a 'list ranking process'. It's a secret, postal ballot, where members list the top 30. It is of course, not completely democratic - a committee adjusts the list for things like sex and geographic representation, but rarely significantly moves candidates.
-
As Jule Fairey said, it was the Labour Party's lack of nous in giving this award that was most disturbing for me. However deserving he may or may not have been of the order, it was certainly an uncalculated move. They're going to need to work hard to regain enough momentum, and mistakes like this don't help.
-
I gotta say this - wherever you were posting from in the world, you made this Mangere whiteboy homesick for Auckland's 'nesian, Asian mash up, even if I was just in Wellington.
I feel your pain, being in an expat in a public service paradise, which is even whiter than Christchurch. However, being in a school of Pacific and Asian History does salve things somewhat...
I certainly hope that you keep writing in other mediums and forums, you have a brilliant voice that deserves further expression.
-
Robyn said
This is a good idea, but I can't find anything official from any NZ politicians. Not even my local MP - a blogger - is on Facebook.
As long as I don't get "Click here to be a pirate/ninja/vampire" spam, I'd be happy to have a political Facebook friend.
Well, you could try the Greens - Sue Bradford, Nandor, Metiria, Russell Norman, Keith Locke, and Jeanette are all there, happily facebooking...
-
Contrast Te Papa and other NZ public institutions with the British Museum, which is quietly releasing it's collection onto the web: image database
-
But some people in Guantanamo haven't seen any lawyers, and they've been waiting 5 years. They have no prospect of seeing one soon. Let's keep things in perspective.
This argument; 'things are worse somewhere else', 'you'd get locked up in Zimbabwe etc.', is repeated far too often here. It simply doesn't make any sense, unless you're suggesting that we have liberties we can afford to lose.
Yes, New Zealand is a better place than most - but that's the way I like it, and the way I intend to keep it. I'm very happy that if I get arrested I have a right to see a lawyer promptly, and discuss my case. I assume most commenters here like the set of liberties we have. Taking them for granted, and challenging those who stand up for them is a great way to see them go.
-
Kyle Matthews said:
Seriously, the photo on stuff of the protester with the covered up face and the dog with a muzzle on. That's a future class in 'bad public relations'.
Well, this is how the Dom Post and other NZ media reports things - you have a large demonstration somewhere, and it's who-ever wears a bandanna, or scuffles with the police who gets photographed. Am I going to tell that person to go home, or remove their bandanna? Would they listen to me if I did? No. Does that person represent what I think? No.
I stopped going to protests for a while, because I realised that it didn't really matter the content, the media had a narrative that they'd happily insert you into for their convenience.
-
A S said:
Sad but true. And I'd hate for us to think that there was actually some neutral body making rational calls on this somewhere after all....
Well, that's what the courts are for, and since the courts ruled there wasn't enough for a trial, the matter was closed. Until the police decided to fire another salvo.
There are people facing arms charges, and those people were facing considerable damage to their reputations anyway for their involvement in things that were stupid but not illegal, but there was and is no terrorism. That's was state's decision, but the police, and the media, and a considerable section of New Zealand's population don't want to accept that conclusion.
-
And where's the bloody context? If X, Y, or Z say something in the midst of a conversation, then the whole thing needs to examined to determine intent etc. In court you get that opportunity - in the media there is no way of defending yourself and presenting a defence against cherry picked comments from two years of surveillance. Seriously, %&* this trial by media, and trial in the comments sections of blogs.