Richard J. wrote:

I would hardly call painting the Mona Lisa "defacing" the canvas.

The canvas was there to be painted on. Someones wall isn't. Perhaps
this is too complex a concept for you to understand?

Yes, there *are* graffiti artists who create real works of art on
surfaces which previously had no visual value. For example, a
café-front shutter in Paris (see http://images.fotopic.net/y74ltp.jpg )

Is that supposed to be the best example you can find? It looks no
better than a million pictures in childrens books. Its hardly on par
with Da Vinci.

where the painting was sprayed on to a previously blank shutter, doesn't
interfere with the café business (because it's out of sight when the
café is open), and was attractive or at least interesting to look at.

What if the owner didn't want it on his shutter? Does that not matter
to you? Perhaps he ran a nice sophisticated little cafe and doesn't
like a bloody kids cartoon character all over the front of it , not to
mention the fact that ANY graffitti is generallty a turn off to anyone
old enough to vote. You seem to be under a standard juvenile impression
that just because YOU like someone and don't think it does any harm
then everyone else should be of the same opinion. You're soon might
learn that the world doesn't work like that.

I'm not sure where you would draw the line between vandalism and art.

Vandalism is any kind of change to an object or surface that is
unwanted by the owner. Is that simple enough for your lonely braincell
to comprehend?

B2003