Anatomy Theater

see this is my point!!! all of that is unnecessary i mean theres tagging and then there is going a little too far with it

i see what you mean, but consider this: people are tagging over other people's tags, which is just...wrong!

thats is exactally my point if it wasn't done in the first place people wouldn't have wo worry about tagging over others

i completely understand and even agree with you, but seldom do important figures in local art scenes, budding entrepreneurs, or the independently wealthy frequent such abandoned treasures. it's usually just kids looking to blow off steam and, for lack of a better phrase, "fuck shit up." yes, it ruins the sometimes incredible beauty of these places, but if you had to sign a non-violence contract before entering, we wouldn't be looking at these Motts Gems. it's the inherent dichotomy of humanity: take the asshole with the artist...(the bad and the good).

I agree with the fact that the tagging disrupts the overall feel of the place I am fascinated by freaky old building especially one with a history. The tagging --ok I cant completly plain taggers !! For all those who tag, burn, and deface property that would be so much more exciting if untouched.
All the defacing takes away from the sterile disturbing feel and now that we know millions of others have been there (obviously if there names are every where) the forbidden feeling is left with diappointment. just imagine how cool these pictures would look if there we no damage beside of age and weathering it would be a thrill seekers dream now it looks like a local hang out!

As I posted on the last page, "Fool's names..."

Freaky picture. How did you get those effects?
Really cool shot! they almost look like mannequins.

i disagree with the people about the graffiti because i think it looks cool... it would look phater if there where more good tags here and there because I no there is a couple but about those fires i think that is completely stupid unless you are going to keep it under control and it is just to warm up.....and another thing it is probably going to get knock down soon and people want to leave there tags so they can they have been there

I think for the most part that depends on the graffiti and if it is well done and tasteful.For the most part I side with nin though,the graffiti sort of disturbs the feel of many of these places.

I agree with you totally OL. It took me over 20 years to do the one everyone's bitching about. I cried incessantly over and over for two decades until I looked around and saw it was for naught. Out of boredom, I finally caved and made one. I would never do this anywhere else for any reason.

Does that really say AFLAC? Is it just me or am I the only one expecting to find a duck somewhere hidden in this shot? I don't mean to disregard the entire intense atmosphere this shot protrays but I get distracted easily.

Aflac is the nom-de-plume of a really cool dude that we're all friends with. If you met him, you'd like him.

Is vandalism also his calling card, like all the rest?

I spent many days watching them pop open a skull and weigh the brain while having my lunch. Just had to remember not to dunk. seriously. It saddens me to see a piece of history desecrated. When the drugs eat wdeep into the recesses of your gray matter, where will you go? A cardboard box under I-95. Sad.

Desecration. That is the correct word! Byberry has truly been desecrated. It seems by people that have nothing better to do, or nowhere else to go. Sad lives.

So sad....boo-fuckin'-hoo.

Responses show what sad lives the individuals who desecrate this abandoned hospital have.

The Abandoned places have a inner soul and the people that destroy that or desecrate it tell's you allot of how they feel about their own lives ..

I personally have never desecrated anything, except maybe a pair or two of bluejeans of mine.

Hey, I think the "desecration" is fitting for a place once famous for its inhumanity. And I love that the building and its artwork have melded until it's no longer possible to separate them. They are one and the same. Byberry would never be as intense as it is now if it were left in pristine condition.
And to those who mourn the changes, you have your memories. Embrace the now or turn to them for solace.

yep tagging makes it much less eerie. thinks that almost make me shiver are really abandoned places where there is evidence of the original occupants........
It's crap graffiti too.

Get a grip..."desecration"? It's not a temple. It's not even a hospital anymore. It's just a bunch of old buildings that are about to be torn down anyway.

My neighbor has a tomcat, he marks all his surrounding territory.

This tagging is probably similar in scope, pissing al over everything they see.

I think Radical Ed can be forgiven for his solitary tag, it's very artistic, and he's not tagging everything in sight.

People tag over each other on purpose. But that's some of the worse graffiti I've ever seen.

Does anybody know (or remember) what this stuff was called before the word 'graffiti' was coined? All I could come up with is 'the writting on the wall'. I was just into Google trying to find the answer, but came up with this interesting site...
http://www.ccd.rpi.edu...t/grafitti/index.htm

:-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti

I did a paper for a college class many, many moons ago on graffiti. When I get back to work from vacation I'll see if it had anything interesting. I rather doubt it, though.

Thanks Lynne!!!! That was just as interesting as the site I posted. I'm learning a lot about the history and origin of graffiti, but not finding the word I was looking for. I'ld swear people referred to it as 'something else' when I was little. Back in them bade olde dayes, when people drew hungrey rabbits in pencil or carved 'Karen loves Billy' on a tree. Was it just the writting on the wall?

Perhaps the word monicker?

"Writing on the wall". Sound like a chapter from the second Harry Potter book.
A lot of people have brought shame to graffiti. Graffiti is supposed to be art, not random tags on every inch of a building. Radical Ed had the right idea with his tag. He made it represent himself. The random tags just represent thrillseekers who go to Byberry looking for something thats not there, getting disappointed and bored, and randomly tagging on every inch of it. Once is enough, and make it look nice. Byberry would feel much more mysterious and creepy if nobody tagged, but since it has been tagged and nobody can do anything about it, at least make it look nice for those of you who visit it every weekend. Thank you for your time, and I don't mind flamers. I said what I had to say, and I'm proud of it.

Straitjacket, I know you are young, but you writing makes you sound very mature. You must be very intelligent. Hang on to it, you'll go far, kid. :)

both the tagging and the fire setting are are so disgustingly stupid things, destroying such a beautiful place as this

Hmm, well, I guess I wouldn't really call Byberry beautiful. Atleast, not in the sense that I would say many of the Victorian assylums were. It certainly has its own charm, but in a far more stark, sterile, utilitarian kind of way.

Another place I'd love to get my band into for a video shoot...

i agree that that graff is trash.....somone should paint over that...get some real writers in there to do somthing worth the wall space

at least Ed's looked good, and it didnt end in the words "wuz here"

Looking at this and similar pictures, the people who painted this junk up are not graffiti artists. This work is too amature, or "toy", to be a graffiti artist's tagging. If you want to believe it or not, this is mostly done by Explorers who want to leave their names. In this picture, the only part that is true graff handstyle is the CKD at the top.

Graffiti is not art. It is the defacing of property, however it ~is~ a fect of modern life, and I will respect what has been done.

There are other galleries within this website that show buildings in their natural decaying beauty, with little or no human Krylon markings. The faded walls with chipping and peeling paint are nothing short of fantastic. Seek them out.

Just as some members get agitated by certain comments regarding mental health, the phrase 'Graffiti is not art' is equally as ignorant and irritating.

Not art?
http://img485.imagesha...85/6331/monkedh3.jpg

I agree that what we have here cannot considered art, but there are hundreds of thousands of artists in this world who's goal is to improve the visual appeal of a surface. You can get mad at graffiti writers for things like the picture here, but you would only be very wrong. These are not the same people who are out on the real streets throwing their names up.

I have seen very many beautiful decaying surfaces which should by all means remain in their natural fantastic states.

Well, I find that it's very easy to declare "such-and-such is not art," simply because it's an immediate reaction. I agree that most forms of grafitti are not art, but the example you (Quiet Noises) posted is. There are some who may tag once in a while, but don't feel the need to plaster grafitti on every surface. And while some grafitti isn't "art," it's a fact of life (to quote Puddleboy) and we just deal with it. If I don't like it, I don't have to look at it or do it...I don't need to go out of my way to seek out taggers and tell them "that's not art."

I think it would be slightly more understandable if when someone says "that's not art," they step back and think about what they consider art. You may find that someone has said the same thing about your type of art (such as comic books...I find them to be art, my former art teacher doesn't).

And just to press my point, I think most people would agree with me if I said it would be sad to see graffiti on something like Worcester State Hospital, which is far beyond beautiful on it's own.

I understand, but what I am hearing is that it cannot be considered art because it is illegal. How can someone then declare the work like I posted above as art when their original comment contradicts this statement?

What you posted is no more artistic than a black velvet painting of Elvis. Very tacky.

I don't think i'd have a problem with the graffiti if it were actual writers, who knew what they were doing, and not some kid from N.E. Philly writting on a wall for the first time. I mean the graffiti makes it less fun to explore, but if it were decent it would make it more fun for certain people at least, and it wouldn't be graffiti over graffiti over graffiti. Even with all that said, and my defense of graffiti writers, that place would be amazing without the fires or vandalism. Imagine being the first person to step in there after the closure. Imagine spending whole days looking through there.

The graffit acts like a sign in sheet to us locals...u will find our names in every inch of the building....to let eachothers crew kno we have been there......its like sticking a flag in the ground.....we explored it...

I think that mayb everyone needs to get over us tagging because no one is going to stop us because its just young people expressing there feelings so fuck get ove it all ready dam !!!!!!!!!!!!STR8 GURPLE FLAGGIN IT KNO QUEEN

Certainly a most persuasive argument for graffiti, I must say.

Did someone say "Gurple"? :-(

i believe that art can be illegal, most of motts' photography is technically illegal because he's not supposed to be in these buildings. the graffiti in this photo isn't art because it's not creative, it's just like a dog or cat marking it's territory. a real graffiti writer would do something that suits the area. for example: http://www.opacity.us/image4361_vaulted.htm see my comment)

people need to stop bitching.

Where is the morgue?

Same place it has always been.

GRAFFITI !!!! IS !!!! ART MOTHER FUCKER

Hahahahah im so ganking this picture...i wrote the "blunt that never ends" song directly above the 1st person on the rafter facing the bleachers there... specifically cause of what is happening in this picture...who knows i could be in it ;)

I didn't know the Aflac duck knew how to hold a can of Krylon.