hi, i hope its ok to post this on your forums and i apologise if this isnt alowed, ive put it in the wrong forum etc... im a first year degree student from sout east essex college in essex in the UK. im currently working on an essay looking at people opinions weather graffiti is an art form or if its vandalism. obviously i relise most of your opinions will be slightly bias but i would really like to hear what you have to say about the subject either way. thanks alot for reading this, hope to hear your replys soon! cheers Dom
Good Afternoon This topic has been brought up many times before. Although there is no specific thread it's best to ask in there.
Both. When you see Graffiti / Art on trains, cars, tunnels, etc.. To the city that called "vandalisim" hence the name "vandals" But when you see Graffiti such as pices were there are like millions of arrows coming out and such.. that more considerd of Art (legale), not vandalisim..
I consider graffiti an art as long as it looks good to the eye....if its just a shitty peice that isnt even remotly readable i consider it more vandalism....but i still respect it
When used in a non-legal sense it is called "vandalism", when it is used in a legal sense it is called what ever you want to call it (eg. Art, etc.). Plain and Simple... but many people don't tend to think so.. many people think it is all considered vandalism. :wacko:
graffiti is vandalism. the definition is writing on walls without permission. . it is only art when you do it like a business. like people call you and ask for something to be painted.
cool, thanks for the replys everyone, i was expecting most people to just say yeah its art etc because your grafiti artists yourself, ( it has on other graffiti forums) i realy apreciate you replying honestly, thanks again Dom
well..i was talkin to some1 bout this the other day and the thing is, most graffiti artists lol@graffiti and artists" do graffiti because its art, and becuase its illegal..my personal opinion neways..but alos..things like billboards, used by media companies without licences..is exactly the saem as "graffiti" as defined by law, we just dont recognize it becuase weve come to accept it as normal. Peace
my opinion: its both. yes, it IS vandalism, obviously. but simply because it is done illegally doesn not mean it has no artistic value. art is expression. When you paint a piece, you are doing more than trying to vandalize the wall, you are trying to create something that looks good to you. when you bomb, you are still expressing yourself. art does not HAVE to be pretty, and lots of great art isn't. Paublo Piccaso's painting "the aficionado" (<- i hope i spelt that right) is a fairly ugly painting in my opinion. yet no one would say its not art. art does not have to be created legally nor does it have to be pretty.
marcel duchamp (again, i'm bad with spellings) hung a urinal in an art gallery years ago and called it art. He also took a print of the Mona Lisa and penciled in a mustache, and put THAT in a gallery. who has the right to say it is or isn't art? that's what is great about art. its in the eyes of the beholder.
Graffiti is vandilism, unless it is done on a legal wall, then it isn't vandilism howevre it may also not be art....Depends on how you look at it I guess.
you guys are idiots, its both. it being art has nothing to do with it being vandalism. i could sketch on peoples property and its still art but its also vandalism.