Graffiti Research Paper

A perfect example of the presence of artworks available for viewing is in graffiti. Graffiti is often a derogative term used to describe writing, drawing, or images placed on the surfaces of public buildings or areas. Although not considered fine art by many, as an expression of creativity and imagination, it falls under the category of artworks. What separates this form of artwork from those found in galleries is the atmosphere and environment that is attached to graffiti that cannot be replicated or found in art galleries. The raw nature of graffiti makes it appealing for viewers, however, the fact it is abundant in the urban environment justifies the idea that it can be viewed without the need for an art gallery.

The history of the underground art movement known by many names, most commonly graffiti begins in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania during the mid to late 60's, and started with bombing. The writers who are credited with the first effort are CORNBREAD and COOL EARL. They wrote their names all over the city gaining attention from the community and the local press. Then the movement made way to New York City where the teenagers would write graffiti on the subways. It is unclear whether this concept made way to New York City on purpose or if it was an accident.

Graffiti has been around for more than half a decade and practiced worldwide. However there is debate between whether it is a form of art or vandalism. Graffiti artists’ debate that many do not understand the reason most graffiti artist take the risk of incarceration, fines, injuries, and in some cases death to paint a wall. A graffiti artist can have the simple desire to become recognized, or to create a piece that speaks to their audience as a form of self expression. Because graffiti is associated with gangs and acts of destruction to some many cannot see the history and importance graffiti can have on a worldwide scale. Due to the fact that graffiti is usually produced illegally, meaning it is

Most people can argue that there is a fine distinction between what is recognized as art and vandalism. The individual is often faced with uncertainty when the topic of graffiti arises. The public often portray graffiti as a destructive act towards his or her surroundings however; graffiti can also be considered a form of self-expression. Many questions can be made pertaining to the graffiti movement, but the main question is graffiti a crime or an art? The answers lie in the complex phrase of “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.

If you walk through almost any city, the buildings, bridges, and any other available spaces are seemingly filled with colors, picture, and words that are not part of the original architecture. This graffiti, which is a mix of tags, stencils, pieces, and freestyle, seems to have almost taken over cities across the world. Some of this graffiti, such as tags, are eyesores, but some pieces, such as the High Line “Love Is the Answer” and “Kiss” murals in New York City, are sites that have become iconic pieces of artwork. Unfortunately, pieces like these are also starting to be covered to a seemingly astronomical rate, which is causing outrage among those who visited to them.

According to Boyd, through Graffiti is essential to understand as a form of art that crosses the boundaries of location, method, and motivation. He acknowledges that graffiti might include “racist remarks, empty slogans and illegal signatures.”(Boyd 251) Boyd’s piece is also very informative because according to the author, there are two methods for creating this form of art: murals and tagging. The most popular one is tagging because it can be found almost everywhere from fence posts to trains, street walls to buses. The main goal of graffiti writers is to put their signature tags in places to be recognized by their

The roots of graffiti started about 1971 by a Greek American who tagged “TAKI-183” in all New York subway system, he declared that he “used graffiti to create an identity in which he is certain about” (Fortuna 3), then it emerged all around America and the world. (David 72)

Art has been around ever since the ancient city of Pompeii. The people of Pompeii used graffiti as a way to display their cleverness; from poetry contests to playful recombinations of the letters that form Roman Numerals. In the early ‘70s, graffiti was used as a way for young teens to mark their territory. During that time, many people – especially in New York City – saw graffiti as vandalism and prohibited it. Even though graffiti has been misused in some occasions, as long as the purpose is not to deliberately mischievous or malicious destruction, graffiti is art.

As stated by Taki, an influential graffiti artist when addressing the concern authorities held about his graffiti writing, “Why they go after the little guy? Why not campaign organizations that put stickers all over the subways at election time?” (Chronopoulos 2011, pg. 81). Though, graffiti is deemed as legitimate when it is used to generate profit, which is seen through the recent increased demand for graffiti with the purpose of beautification and gentrification. Evidently, the growing concern over graffiti in public spaces is driven by the conflict graffiti creates when obstructing advertisements, which generate increased consumption and profit. It also demonstrates the lack of tolerance the dominant class has for the promotion of dominance by the lower class. Moreover, constant “public proclamations” which urged people to see graffiti writing as a social safety issue, has certainly influenced the demand for anti-graffiti efforts and the attitudes upper and middle class whites had towards Blacks and Latinos (Chronopoulos 2011, pg. 87)

Most people think of graffiti as vandalism or the defacing of private property by wild teenagers with spray cans. I had never really thought about graffiti or art for that matter until I found myself defending something I didn’t know about because I liked what I saw on the sidewalk in Memphis, Tennessee. Now, that’s sounds crazy but I did my best to explain using simple words that I hoped they would understanding.

Since the late 1980s, various public and private-sector actors in the United States who do not write graffiti have practiced anonymity and sought fame to suppress and promote graffiti. Most non-writing public-sector actors have cracked down on graffiti as a criminal act that blights urban surfaces, while, in response, many non-writing private-sector actors have promoted graffiti as a profitable consumer good and art form. In the public sector, police officers and politicians in New York and then Chicago and Denver have prosecuted graffiti as the illegal vandalism of property walls and other surfaces; over time, police officers have learned to adapt plainclothes dress to patrol environments, capture writers, and destroy graffiti. In the private

If the Mona Lisa were painted on the wall of Da Vinci’s neighbor’s house instead of on his easel, or if any classical painting commonly admired as genius were made without permission of the owner of the property it was made on, would you look at it the same way you do right now, or would you spit on it for being illegal despite just as beautiful? Graffiti is seen as “vandalism” and it’s illegal, and for those who are caught can be charged with a fine, community service, probation or even jail time at extreme cases. Most communities do not stop think about what the artist is trying to display, but rather choose to ignore it because in their minds the people who have done them are seen as “thugs”, or more technical, “taggers”. Graffiti in fact displays the truth about our society behind a picture, and these artist, their key purpose is to get people to think in a new light.

Many cities view graffiti as dirty and worthless; for example, the city of San Antonio has arranged an anti-graffiti campaign in which the city boldly states “graffiti is ugly” (“Graffiti”). This attitude towards graffiti and the obsession with ridding cities of graffiti sparked the ever-present negative outlook on the craft, spoiling its artistic value.

This on a larger scale can relate to what Stephen Duncombe argues about in his Cultural Resistance Reader. He goes on to explain that, “…cultural resistance can provide a sort of "free space" for developing ideas and practices. Freed from the limits and constraints of the dominant culture, you can experiment with new ways of seeing and being and develop tools and resources for resistance” (5). This is accurate since the “free space” that Duncombe mentions, can refer to the wall, or “canvas” on the street that graffiti artists use to showcase their art. The artists are free from the opinions of others and can draw anything they want, and in most cases, it is pieces of art that describe who they are as a person. Graffiti is a form of resistance since it is technically an illegal act, but at the same time, it is a new and creative way to show one’s beliefs in a totally different way through the use of art. Also, in most instances, these artists are not being paid to showcase their talent and cultural beliefs, since they are being rewarded enough from the viewers of their

Graffiti: term applied to the arrangement of institutionally illicit marks in which there has been an attempt by an individual or group of individuals (usually not professional artists) to display upon a wall or surface that is usually visually accessible to the public. Even if one has never seen graffiti before, a negative image would probably