One man’s art is another’s ...

I just read the article about graffiti, in which Cynthia Dea states that the impact of graffiti on our local communities is “not really what we’re after this afternoon” [“Alfresco,” Jan. 18].

As someone who lives in a community with a lot of graffiti (the Melrose neighborhood), I found that comment, and the entire article, to be condescending and offensive.

My partner and I belong to several local museums, and we certainly appreciate art. If someone wants to put up outdoor art of any kind on their own building, that’s up to them. But you have decided to simultaneously justify vandalism graffiti while looking down on Los Angelenos who want to take care of their communities. Graffiti “artists” don’t create anything, they destroy the work of others. We don’t want them.

PAUL LERNER

Los Angeles

*

I was amazed to notice a photograph of mine prominently featured in a mural by Shepard Fairey. My photograph, which appeared in the New York Times and around the world in 1989, is a copyrighted work. While I’m thrilled to see my work “out there,” I find it rather offensive to have it appropriated outright. It was taken while I was Reuters chief photographer in China.

You may be interested to know that this is not a propaganda photo but a news picture. Beijing residents, using buses and their bodies, had blocked a convoy of soldiers attempting to enter the city. This was the first appearance of lethal weapons on the streets of the city and was a precursor of what was to come. I’m sure the reality of the picture is not relevant to the artist ... but it is to its creator -- me.

EDWARD NACHTRIEB

Los Angeles