Research Paper On Graffiti

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 were to go open a dictionary and look up the definition of art, you would see that it has art as “The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination…” (“Art” 2017) and “Works produced by human creative skill and imagination.” (“Art” 2017). From these definitions, graffiti is art, yet in most cases, it’s considered vandalism because it is done without permission of the property. When graffiti is done in a designated place or with the permission of the property owner, then it can truly be considered art. But even if these circumstances are not met, if the graffiti goes beyond a simple tag, it is art.

By definition, graffiti is illegal. It is also considered vandalism because public or private property is intentionally destroyed, but in Alex Boyd’s blog “In Defense of Graffiti”, he clearly conveys his argument about how graffiti shows qualities of value and shouldn’t be criticized on impulse. Even though many people have seen graffiti as something to be condoned, punishable, and terrorizing, it is actually just another form of expression, communication, art, and point of view.

Generally most people look and take graffiti as a form of destruction and wanting to cause violence, but in the artist’s mind they want to be creative and help the people around them by making art to cheer someone up or create a sense of creativity in others. They don’t do it to go to jail or because they want to pay a fine they do it because they are open minded and creative. For instance, “A lot of attention is given to the ‘broken window’ theory, which says that signs of disorder like petty vandalism, fare jumping … and yes, graffiti, open the window to larger crimes,” Verel told The Huffington Post. “But little is paid to the ways graffiti is harnessed for good in a form that’s both constructive and authentic”(Patrick Verel). They are taking this broken windows theory too far and only saying it can cause bigger crimes. Some graffiti artists are trying to uplift the neighborhoods and the people they live around with creative art. Also not all graffiti is bad enough to want artists to commit a crime. While making this art or graffiti I don’t think that these artist are trying to harm the buildings in any way, but they should ask for permission if they aren’t allowed to be painting on these buildings. This is to let the owner of the building know that they mean no harm to the environment or their workplace. For example, “Adam Cooper, cultural strategy officer for the mayor of London, thinks

For the most part the writers can agree that graffiti is vandalism. Some of the writers explicitly say that graffiti is vandalism whereas others allude to it. (Pink par. 4; Olivero par. 1; Wigdahl par. 15; MacDonald par. 3; “Graffiti” par. 2). Wigdahl, MacDonald, Witt and “Graffiti” are supporters of vandalism as the sole definition of graffiti. Witt’s absence of graffiti when positively mentioning public art implies that he does not view graffiti as art but as crime. Whereas the other three actually verbalize their dissent for graffiti. For instance, one article states, “graffiti is property damage plain and simple” (“Graffiti par. 2). Wigdahl and MacDonald make similar accusations.

However, even though graffiti is portrayed as art by many people, some people think that all kinds of graffiti is vandalism. They think that it is a dirty way to destroy a city, and a bad influence to young adults and children growing up. In the article “Vandals hit 18 statues in Grant Park with graffiti” by Carlos Sadovi, public buildings had been covered and nearly destroyed with tags by young teenages. When Sandovi says, “People, especially children, like to go up to the statues and pose with them for pictures and touch them. He said this is the first time they have been vandalized here.” In this case, the children of the city will have to suffer through. People can also argue that the graffiti is a bad influence for the children. However, even though some young teenages decided to vandalize a building, doesn't make graffiti vandalism. There are graffiti artists that even make their paints out of wheat, so that if they

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.

Graffiti can be found everywhere and anywhere. It is a way for people to express themselves and be creative in a public manner. It shows how passionate and talented they can be when it comes to drawing or tagging and have it displayed as a piece of art for everyone to see. Graffiti goes way back to the ancient times and is now very well known in the modern days which makes more and more people interested and fascinated by them. It can be used in different types of ways. Many artists can either spray paint, carve, paste, or stencil them on a surface. From how we see them today they are usually images of random cartoons, big bubbly letters, vintage black and whites or inspirational quotes. Virtually anything colorful or not and big that can be easily spotted. Graffiti is more superior to be known as art than vandalism because it is a self expressing act. People need to be open minded about the images they see and look at the message behind it or else they will immediately criticize and say it is vandalizing property.

I think graffiti is vandalism because putting things where your not allowed or you don’t it it is vandalism. Putting drawings and tags in bathrooms or on other peoples property isn't right. That takes time out of other peoples lives to clean it up. If you don’t have permission to paint on something even if it’s a amazing piece of art its vandalism.

”Imagine a city where graffiti wasn't illegal, a city where everybody could draw whatever they liked. Where every street was awash with a million colours and little phrases.’’ By: Banksy‘’Graffiti first began in Philadelphia in the 1960s.’’ ’’ Since then, city leaders have tended to condemn it as mindless vandalism. The U.K. spends $1.3 billion on cleaning up graffiti each year.’’: I believe that graffiti should be legal but only in certain parts of the world. Graffiti is people's feelings on walls and there will be no more plain brown walls. There will be beautiful art that people have talent to do.My reason is because many people have talent and I agree it should not be every like not in cities but in little countries i don't see anything

No matter what color or shape, as long as graffiti is in its purest form, untheorized on public and privet spaces, it is, by definition vandalism. this does not stop the movement from growing. Since the late 1980's and the "train car wars" graffiti culture has flourished, making its way into our society whether we like it or not. Artists put valid work into their artform, they add color that brightens up urban areas and un otherized art is still art, no matter what form. Graffiti is an art form and it is here to stay.

Graffiti still counts as vandalism although, it is a law. If you get caught in the act of vandalism, you get charged with vandalism, and must do community service. Even if the graffiti looked like it was done by a picasso, it would still have to be taken down by the authorities. Graffiti is usually taken down by the public and its fundraising. Before graffiti became a better influenced art form, people became afraid of abandoned vandalized subways. Graffiti may be a count of vandalism, but if the artists ask to use the property and own the property, they can use it for their beautiful art. Which I stand with.

Art: the ultimate form of self expression. But, what constitutes an art? And, who decides? These very questions plague society as it tries to decide and define the official status of graffiti--art or vandalism? Because it has found its way into art galleries and because of the community of artists who challenge and inspire each other, graffiti should be considered art and as a way to express oneself.

Graffiti has put a major impact on the way people look at their everyday life. It was not used so much here in the United States but was used overseas. Overseas, graffiti, or street art, was used or played as a sport, just like baseball is Americas sport. There are different laws that are put over there than what there are here. They can get away with some of the things that they paint or make over there. If we tried some of that type of work over here, we would get in trouble and possibly serve time for vandalizing someone else’s property. There are many biased outlooks on graffiti, but it should be considered art in all places because of all the time, effort, and design the artist put into their work.