Increase in Graffiti on the network

[Donny_m]

Thank you for the conformation.
So, after 180 years, the brickwork is now irreversibly impregnated with spray paint.

There is a farm tunnel under the railway at keynsham absolutely covered in etchings of initials from the mid 1800’s. Very interesting insight into the time, and of definite historical value now. I can imagine the youth of the time using the same path to swim in the river, and deciding to leave their mark. The only difference is they simply took a chisel and not a spray can.

Can you imagine the reaction if the chisel became the new marking tool again? Considerably more of an irreversible act than a layer of paint.

Something to think about. (Although thinking about things in context seems vacant to many in this thread)

 

[warwickshire]

Has anyone noticed that on particular rail bridges and structures, in the most hard to get places, especially in public facing view points, especially all over south east areas, Midlands and the north west the graffitied tags the 10 foot. Is this someone's mad ambition to tag all bridges and structures with this tag. Also noticed in particular some off these have been redone especially where original tag has been faded away.

 

[Welly]

The issue with the question is railway vehicles aren’t someone’s personal property, no one individual has worked hard to acquire it, so in my opinion it’s a tedious comparison and I believe there are better that could be made.

The extra cost to the railway company in fencing off the depots and other infrastructure, removing rolling stock for cleaning off the graffiti and painting over the graffiti on the infrastructure is passed onto the farepayer and also the taxpayer - I have worked hard to acquire the money to pay the fares and hand to the HMRC and I don't welcome the extra costs!

 

[Turtle]

The extra cost to the railway company in fencing off the depots and other infrastructure, removing rolling stock for cleaning off the graffiti and painting over the graffiti on the infrastructure is passed onto the farepayer and also the taxpayer - I have worked hard to acquire the money to pay the fares and hand to the HMRC and I don't welcome the extra costs!

Seconded.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Seconded.

Thirded and it is very anti social.

 

[alex397]

If it is on abandoned buildings, building site hoardings or whatever, at least it isn't really affecting anyone (not that I condone it at all). But, a lot of it ends up on people's private homes, on historical buildings (the Norman walls in Canterbury, for example!), on street signs, and important infrastructure, such as on railways like we are talking about. All things which should never be vandalised, regardless of how 'artistic' it is. Even if some of the graffiti doesn't affect day to day operations, some of it does, like if it is covering important parts of the train or covering windows.

Even more unacceptable is graffiti on heritage railways - which has happened quite a lot, even from the more 'professional' graffiti 'artists' - of course, most workers on heritage railways are volunteers who i'm sure would rather spend their valuable time doing something else rather than cleaning off paint.

 

[Need2]

Thirded and it is very anti social.

And fourthed!

Network Rail alone spend £3.5 million pounds a year (£9500 every single day) removing this blight, they could easily spend more but this figure is their budget.
This figure does not include the money that Toc's and Foc's have to spend.

Removing graffiti will 'boost confidence' in railway, says Shapps

The transport secretary says quicker action will help give passengers "confidence" to return.

www.bbc.co.uk

How's about people stop saying its not much of a problem and it doesn't hurt anyone?

The reason I found it difficult to answer the question about wether I would like someone to deface my personal property, the answer Is obviously no, and I would never deface someone else’s car or house, when have you ever seen graffiti on someone’s car? The issue with the question is railway vehicles aren’t someone’s personal property, no one individual has worked hard to acquire it, so in my opinion it’s a tedious comparison and I believe there are better that could be made.

And in my opinion, that is one of the most absurd comments I have read for a long time, absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Ladder23]

And fourthed!

Network Rail alone spend £3.5 million pounds a year (£9500 every single day) removing this blight, they could easily spend more but this figure is their budget.
This figure does not include the money that Toc's and Foc's have to spend.

Removing graffiti will 'boost confidence' in railway, says Shapps

The transport secretary says quicker action will help give passengers "confidence" to return.

www.bbc.co.uk

How's about people stop saying its not much of a problem and it doesn't hurt anyone?


And in my opinion, that is one of the most absurd comments I have read for a long time, absolutely ridiculous.

Not as ridiculous as the above post suggesting graffiti removal will encourage people to use the railway. Like people really hold back because of artwork. Utter nonsense.

 

[alex397]

Not as ridiculous as the above post suggesting graffiti removal will encourage people to use the railway. Like people really hold back because of artwork. Utter nonsense.

Not really. I’ve seen videos of the New York Subway in the 1990s - graffiti everywhere inside and out and makes it look very unappealing. I appreciate many consider it art, but it seems for the majority of people it gives the impression of a lack of security, which is not a feeling you want, especially if you are maybe travelling alone at night. We should be doing all we can to give railways an atmosphere of safety and cleanliness, especially now.

The Belgrade commuter line (which acts a bit like an ‘S-Bahn’ line) has rolling stock completely covered in graffiti, covering windows and it was inside too. Sure, it was a fun novelty to travel on it as a tourist (well, as a transport enthusiast), but would I want to travel on that every day to get to work if I had a choice? Not really!

 

[Need2]

Not as ridiculous as the above post suggesting graffiti removal will encourage people to use the railway. Like people really hold back because of artwork. Utter nonsense.

Fair enough,the link was to ‘prove’ the point about the cost of graffiti.
never mind though, some people don’t mind or care because ‘nobody has had to work hard to get it and it isn’t anyone’s personal property’.

 

[hst43102]

In my opinion, graffiti makes an area or train/system look old, unsafe, dirty and unappealing. I personally like the MRT railway system in Singapore, which is modern, clean and well kept. Not that I condone the punishment, but a few years ago some people broke into a depot in Singapore and tagged a train. They were caught and sentenced to nine months in jail, and were also subjected to physical punishment. I think that these measures are rather over-the-top and probably violate some human rights laws, but the lack of graffiti and vandalism really makes for a great transportation system.

 

[Donny_m]

Interesting that the only comparisons made here are either 1980 New York City during a crime wave, a bankrupt Balkan nation, or a dictatorship that gave the last person caught tagging a train 12 lashes and years in jail.

Where are the comparisons to ultra efficient rail systems that leave their tunnels and trackside walls painted and allow the odd unit to run with murals for a few days before its scheduled to be cleaned anyway, such as Germany France or Sweden?

Quite a disconnect with reality in this forum, I felt like I had more to say and I would have thought that seeing as it’s such a misunderstood aspect of the rail-connected ‘underworld’ that you all seem to care so much about, in 4 pages the only question posed was the same old question asked every time and nothing more.

Unsurprising that being a railfan is often seen as such a stagnant endeavour by so many when people are so staunch and archaic in their interests.

 

[43066]

Not as ridiculous as the above post suggesting graffiti removal will encourage people to use the railway. Like people really hold back because of artwork criminal vandalism. Utter nonsense.

Fixed that for you.

 

[najaB]

Not aimed at anyone in particular, but this thread demonstrates one of the main things wrong with modern society: absolutism. There are some posters who seem to be unable/unwilling to acknowledge the existence of area between the polar opposites. To them, all graffiti is bad, all graffitos are criminals and the presence of even a single drop of paint instantly turns the entire area into a dystopian wasteland.

Chill out, and come and enjoy life in the middle ground where some graffiti is nice and some is terrible, some is art, and some is criminal tagging (and a lot of it is just naff). It will do your blood pressure a world of good.

 

[Ayrshire Roy]

Interesting that the only comparisons made here are either 1980 New York City during a crime wave, a bankrupt Balkan nation, or a dictatorship that gave the last person caught tagging a train 12 lashes and years in jail.

Where are the comparisons to ultra efficient rail systems that leave their tunnels and trackside walls painted and allow the odd unit to run with murals for a few days before its scheduled to be cleaned anyway, such as Germany France or Sweden?

Quite a disconnect with reality in this forum, I felt like I had more to say and I would have thought that seeing as it’s such a misunderstood aspect of the rail-connected ‘underworld’ that you all seem to care so much about, in 4 pages the only question posed was the same old question asked every time and nothing more.

Unsurprising that being a railfan is often seen as such a stagnant endeavour by so many when people are so staunch and archaic in their interests.

Unfortunately the stereotype of someone that does graffiti is deeply ingrained in some people going by the replays on here.
Love it or hate it graffiti is a part of rail systems all over the world.
I grew up with a love of hip hop culture and railways so I'll always look at graffiti differently to probably 99% of people here.

 

[alex397]

Interesting that the only comparisons made here are either 1980 New York City during a crime wave, a bankrupt Balkan nation, or a dictatorship that gave the last person caught tagging a train 12 lashes and years in jail.

Where are the comparisons to ultra efficient rail systems that leave their tunnels and trackside walls painted and allow the odd unit to run with murals for a few days before its scheduled to be cleaned anyway, such as Germany France or Sweden?

Quite a disconnect with reality in this forum, I felt like I had more to say and I would have thought that seeing as it’s such a misunderstood aspect of the rail-connected ‘underworld’ that you all seem to care so much about, in 4 pages the only question posed was the same old question asked every time and nothing more.

Unsurprising that being a railfan is often seen as such a stagnant endeavour by so many when people are so staunch and archaic in their interests.

I can definitely see the artistic side of graffiti, but as I have said in my previous post, we need to be doing all we can to make railways seem clean and safe. Even if you consider graffiti ‘art’, graffiti covered trains give the impression of lack of security and uncleanliness, whether you like it or not. We need to be doing all we can to encourage more people to use public transport. Graffiti is very devisive, so perhaps it should be saved for legal walls, abandoned buildings and so on. Keep it away from transport infrastructure (sorry if I’m not being trendy enough)

Would it be acceptable to graffiti a heritage railway? Obviously not. So why a national railway?

 

[dakta]

The reason I found it difficult to answer the question about wether I would like someone to deface my personal property, the answer Is obviously no

"The issue with the question is railway vehicles aren’t someone’s personal property"

Thanks for replying - this logic is what people who want to buy, and maintain nice things are up against.

(and yes I know I'm one of the inflexible people on this particular subject, but I assure you if the owner wanted their stuff tagging I would make the exception).

On that note I wonder what sort of proporiton of organisations and individuals get their property tagged and don't mind

 

[najaB]

Even if you consider graffiti ‘art’, graffiti covered trains give the impression of lack of security and uncleanliness, whether you like it or not.

A single tagged train, no. If it's ubiquitous then yes, without a doubt. But the solution is as much on the part of society generally (giving people an outlet so that they don't feel the need to spray the trains in the first place) as well as on the TOCs to clean up trains fairly sharpish. The destructive taggers are much less likely to tag if they know that it will be removed fairly quickly - it defeats the purpose of tagging.

 

[43066]

Not aimed at anyone in particular, but this thread demonstrates one of the main things wrong with modern society: absolutism. There are some posters who seem to be unable/unwilling to acknowledge the existence of area between the polar opposites. To them, all graffiti is bad, all graffitos are criminals and the presence of even a single drop of paint instantly turns the entire area into a dystopian wasteland.

Chill out, and come and enjoy life in the middle ground where some graffiti is nice and some is terrible, some is art, and some is criminal tagging (and a lot of it is just naff). It will do your blood pressure a world of good.

Yes graffiti can be an art form, if it’s done in an approved place, with with the consent of the owners of whatever is being daubed on.

Otherwise it’s simply criminal damage. Someone trespassing on railway property to deface it is really little different morally (or legally) to a cable thief.

 

[alex397]

Yes graffiti can be an art form, if it’s done in an approved place, with with the consent of the owners of whatever is being daubed on.

Otherwise it’s simply criminal damage. Someone trespassing on railway property to deface it is really little different morally (or legally) to a cable thief.

Good to see a balanced view, which is so very rare.

Many people are completely against graffiti as an art form, or think it should be freely sprayed anywhere. Both of those views are wrong. We need to have legal areas for people to show their work.

But it should never be socially acceptable to freely go about trespassing and vandalising public infrastructure. And not just public infrastructure, but private property and historic buildings too.

 

[dakta]

" Many people are completely against graffiti as an art form "

just as long as they're not defacing 'lawful' graffiti by cleaning it up

which, whilst bizarre would actually be as wrong as defacing someone else nice clean train i guess.

 

[Ladder23]

Fixed that for you.

Really

 

[Bevan Price]

There are some people here who seem to think it is OK to commit criminal damage to other peoples' property. I would suggest that if you want to create modern art - do it to your own property - inside or outside, in your garden (if you have one), etc.

Apart from a few like-minded people, nobody wants to see the results of your self-vanity defacing their towns, trains or countryside. And most of all, we don't want to see the cost of cleaning your c*ap added to add tax bills or rail fares.

 

[43066]

Fixed that for you.

Really

Yes really.

This thread isn’t supposed to be an abstract discussion about whether graffiti is an art form or not, it’s about graffiti on the U.K. railway network where it is, quite literally, criminal vandalism.

I don’t care what was being done in New York forty years ago. 99.9% of 2020 U.K. railway graffiti is rubbish tagging and window etching. If it was really about art - it would be a lot better(!) - and they'd go and do it somewhere safe and legal. It’s clearly more about getting a thrill from doing something dangerous and illegal.

As noted above it’s a blight which costs fare and tax payers millions of pounds per year, and causes a great deal of disruption, especially whenever one of these idiots gets themselves killed, which happens more often than not. In fact an ex colleague of mine bowled over a couple of vandals with spray-cans a couple of years back. Not exactly a great thing to happen to someone in the course of doing their job .

 

[Turtle]

Yes really.

This thread isn’t supposed to be an abstract discussion about whether graffiti is an art form or not, it’s about graffiti on the U.K. railway network where it is, quite literally, criminal vandalism.

I don’t care what was being done in New York forty years ago. 99.9% of 2020 U.K. railway graffiti is rubbish tagging and window etching. If it was really about art - it would be a lot better(!) - and they'd go and do it somewhere safe and legal. It’s clearly more about getting a thrill from doing something dangerous and illegal.

As noted above it’s a blight which costs fare and tax payers millions of pounds per year, and causes a great deal of disruption, especially whenever one of these idiots gets themselves killed, which happens more often than not. In fact an ex colleague of mine bowled over a couple of vandals with spray-cans a couple of years back. Not exactly a great thing to happen to someone in the course of doing their job .

I think your post sums up the position nicely. Just one caveat, 100%, not 99.9%!

 

[Kilopylae]

People on this thread are comparing graffiti on the railway network to burgalars or painting over private homes. Get a grip. I can't decide whether the "it's the worst order of Criminal Vandalism perpetrated by Mindless Thugs" attitude to what is literally spray-painting tags on trains is hilarious or tragic; either way, it's ridiculous.

 

[alex397]

People on this thread are comparing graffiti on the railway network to burgalars or painting over private homes. Get a grip. I can't decide whether the "it's the worst order of Criminal Vandalism perpetrated by Mindless Thugs" attitude to what is literally spray-painting tags on trains is hilarious or tragic; either way, it's ridiculous.

Perhaps you should accept that not everyone has the same opinion as you.

We need to make a compromise, which our society seems to find difficult with lots of things. We need more legal walls for people to do this, and people who spray it need to stop vandalising private property, especially transport infrastructure. It’s not just a bit of paint, it is more than that. Whether you like it or not, it creates an unsafe and unclean atmosphere for many.

There is also the point that on many occasions, graffiti artists put their lives at risk to do this. Maybe not so much in quiet railway yards, but a lot of graffiti can be seen in places where people have clearly had to climb walls, cross live tracks and so on. Not only does that put their own lives at risk, but it is selfish for those who have to deal with the consequences if it goes wrong, which it has done on some occasions.

 

[Kilopylae]

It creates an unsafe and unclean atmosphere for many.

Unless the graffiti is covering up an emergency information poster or a train's windscreen, it's not making the environment any less safe.

 

[alex397]

Unless the graffiti is covering up an emergency information poster or a train's windscreen, it's not making the environment any less safe.

I didn’t say it is making the environment unsafe. I said it creates an unsafe atmosphere.
Sure, some may like to see the graffiti, but public transport is for all, and graffiti can create an unsafe atmosphere for many. Graffiti is clearly a fairly controversial subject, and many people just don’t like it. As I have said a few times now, we need to be doing all we can to make public transport have a clean and safe atmosphere, to encourage people to continue using public transport.

 

[Need2]

Unless the graffiti is covering up an emergency information poster or a train's windscreen, it's not making the environment any less safe.

That's alright then, let everyone spray over anything that's not theirs. As long as it's not a windscreen or a safety information poster.
Utter piffle mate.