1. A lot of times when graffiti gets painted over it looks like this. Well, actually it would be three bars in this case or maybe one block for each letter. But you can always tell there was graffiti there and it doesn’t really look any better than what was there before. It’s just denying a tagger the notoriety.

  2. To expand on DemetriosX’s comment: they painted over the graffiti and only the strokes of the letters of the graffit, so all they actually did was change the color of the letters.

  3. I thought it was quite funny. Literally true – the city indeed painted over the graffiti – but the result is no better and possibly slightly worse, or anyway duller.

  4. The painted over the graffiti but they painted it over with another color paint, which is what they always do, rather than paint the whole wall. It never matches.

  5. I laughed.

    Sometimes in real life it isn’t even this good, as some underfunded city graffiti abatement teams only get limited amounts of a few colors of paint. Thus, you get unsightly black and white splotches that don’t match the rest of the surface, not unlike gas stations that cover up bathroom graffiti with white-out. This seems most common on railroad bridges and infrastructure.

  6. Do most cities use paint? In Chicago, they blast off the spray paint. It’s not sand, but something else… salt? (googlegooglegoogle) Nope, it’s baking soda. Works really well, too.

  7. I think most cities use law, as in “say, property owner, you have 3 days to get rid of that graffiti. We don’t care how”. And also sometimes they use community service restitution… “Say, Mr. tagger we caught in the act, for punishment, you have to come to cover up the graffiti, in all these places you didn’t think of to tag until just now.”
    I can see the attempt at logic in using people who do graffiti to clean up the graffiti, but all it does is tell the people who do graffiti exactly when and where there will be a blank canvas.

  8. But if they didn’t use the method that chak identifies, how could they go around calling themselves “Mayor Daley’s Graffiti Blasters”?

  9. Do they still? They haven’t changed over to El Rahm? I just realized I haven’t seen one in a while.

  10. I used that name because it was what lodged in my memory when the program started. Of course I wouldn’t expect them to still reference Mayor Junior, but I didn’t know the “Blasters” was gone. But at https://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/streets/provdrs/graffiti_blasters.html (where you see the URL still says blasters) the official designation seems to be “The Graffiti Removal Program”. There does seem to be an echo of blasting in the URL as just mentioned as well as the description

    The Graffiti Removal Program employs “blast” trucks that use baking soda under high water pressure to remove painted graffiti from brick, stone and other mineral surfaces. The program also deploys paint trucks to cover graffiti on surfaces such as metal or wood.

    So, both blasting and paint. Shrug…

  11. Reminds me of my Chicago years, when I lived in an apartment with a view across an alley at a wall that got graffitied occasionally. I got fed up with it and asked the owner for permission to paint it out. Problem solved: he didn’t care, and I didn’t have to look at graffiti any more. (But I matched the paint color properly!)

  12. Some artists had decorated a building in NYC with graffiti art. It was there for years. The owner finally painted it over. The artists sued and won.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s