i go to school one in providence, ri, and recently there's been a lot of tagging and other graffiti around the school. i think it should be left alone as art, because tags in different colors look really beautiful sometimes. but a lot of artists say it's not art if yo'e vandalizing something. what do you think?
I think it's all relative. Graffiti Artists like Banksy for example i believe is an artist his work is based on concepts and has depth to it and is trying to create a message etc to the viewer of the work. However I would also say that some idiot with a spray can putting swear words and there 'tag name' on every available bit of wall space is not art, just vandalism. Graffiti can be really great and make a dull place look more vibrant if artists are given the time to work, but a quick 20 second spray before the police catch up is never going to be a work of art, probbaly just rebellion against a system.
Graffiti absolutly can be legit art, look at Basquiat! However, I think it's best not to put paint on somebody else's stuff/ their property. Buy a big roll of paper and work your art in that way. That way you won't get a huge fine and can still do your thing.
Of course that Graffiti is art. But there are some people that use in a wrong wayy. But there are really good work in that
I agree to all of what you said. Atleast if you graffiti, make a picture or something fun for peoples eyes.
it can be. i think the main thing is whether it adds or subtracts. whether it says something to make you think, or is just some idiot infantily demanding attention. i don't thing the toughtlessness of obscuring what already has its own aesthetic or provides useful information is pleasing or desirable, and i don't see any desirable point in anything that isn't in some sense one or the other or both. i really don't think "is it art?" is really the litmus test of anything. not as long as art criticisms definician of art begins and ends with "is it emo enough?" =^^= .../\...
i think the fact that it is repressed makes it more of an art. where i live they have a pretty large graffiti removal budget. so if you're a tagger and you just walk up to a wall an write your name, that'll get covered op within a week. but that's where the art comes in, because in order to keep your artwork up, you need to paint somewhere hard to get to or a surface that/s hard to repaint. and in that aspect its really an art form because it requires finesse. the other way to keep your art up, is to tag a place that wont necessarily get noticed that easily. you basically want to tag something in a way that doesnt compel someone to cover it up. you want them to think "eh, that's nothing big, i dont wanna waste my time" or , make your art so big that they think "how could i possibly spend all the effort to clean this off???" for instance, i have this one friend who goes around graffitiing stuff, but he has no finesse. he will walk up to a wall and write his name in a way that will grab everyones attention, and then his graffiti gets covered up almost instantly, because he grabs peoples attention.
Absolutely. I also don't think that the vandalism argument holds much water. I think the fact that it can be so challenging of property rights is what gives it so much impact, as it can turn any wall into a canvass. I think there's power in it's anonymity, too. A graphiti artist does not "own" is work in the customary sense. Someone may own the property and the building, and may have the "right" to have it removed, but he cannot rightly claim it as his. It's public. I think all this sends strong messages. Obviously this only includes some kinds of graphiti, but I think pretty much all of it is legit.
it definatley can be. in parts of exeter where i used to live they have given graffiti artists the time to work and it looks incredible, covering whole buildings, but i agree with what another poster said that if its just a swear word or something, thats not art anyone could do that, but when its done properly and given time it can be breathtaking
it is art, however, without the owner of these buildings permission, its vandalism. usually the only grafitti i see is someones gang sign or gang name on a back door or on the side of buildings. and the same on the side of train cars.
graffiti is art. if someone created it and someone thinks it is beautiful, it is art. that's my philosophy anyway. i'm sure there's all kinds of things wrong with that, but my whole life is about finding and observing and portraying beauty. and i've seen some ridiculously beautiful graffiti
OF COURSE IT IS ART. There are many forms of artwork out there. Then again, a dog can piss on a wall, is that art?
well what if it was george bush sr.'s dog pissing on the berlin wall? and someone took a photo or made a painting of that. i would consider that art, once you give it a meaning and a background and a story.... maybe i'm just insane?
