English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-12 00:46:38 · 22 answers · asked by damn 2 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

22 answers

Yes- but not when it destroys public property or when it is vulgar or ruins something already decent.

2007-01-12 00:52:08 · answer #1 · answered by Cora 2 · 0 1

According to this, I would have to say that it is a form of art, which is a means of cultural expression. There are times and places where it is not appropriate, but it is still an expression of the person doing it.

Graffiti is considered one of the four elements of hip hop, along with emceeing (rapping), DJing, and b-boying (breakdancing). Graffiti, like the other three elements, is an artform, a means of cultural expression. Like the other forms of hip hip, it also expresses resistance. Graffiti challenges, for example, mainstream notions of what counts as art, what counts as public space, and what counts as property, just as emceeing/DJing challenges what counts as music, and bboying challenges what counts as dance.

Graffiti, unlike the other forms of hip hop, is more easily misunderstood because it is often done illegally and the artists are often secretive about their real identities. As such, it has not received the kind of positive mainstream recognition afforded to rappers, DJ's, and dancers. Some professionals in the art world have embraced graffiti, but that doesn't mean that the public at large understands and appreciates what graffiti is all about.

2007-01-12 01:15:19 · answer #2 · answered by hulahoops 3 · 1 0

Yes, and the aesethic value of a piece of graffiti is only limited by the artist's skill.

Art is art irrespective of location/skill of the artist. If Leonardo Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa on the walls of a building without permission, then that would be considered defacing the building.

Many graffiti artists are indeed artists, but due to the value (or non-value!) attached to graffiti, they are deemed visual pollution.

It depends on the piece of graffiti in question. If you mean ugly pieces of graffiti like "Mary Jane woz here" or other similiar unimaginative scrawlings, then, no it's not art in my opinion.

If you are talking about people who use spray paint and use contrasting colours, various styles of writing, illustrations, which comes up attractively, then it is art.

They should be given a space in which to exercise their artistic skills. If they do not have space, then no wonder they use any surface they can use.

Graffiti, per se, properly done, is art.

2007-01-12 01:01:43 · answer #3 · answered by Balaboo 5 · 0 0

No.

Exception, when owner of the place request or gives permision to a person to paint, then it is a valid decoration and it is an art form.

Initialy what was known as graffiti has become an art form in some places, you see it on roll down metal doors of the shops and you see it on side of a tourist bus, on a front of a building or on the sides.

2007-01-12 01:03:08 · answer #4 · answered by minootoo 7 · 0 0

Hi, my name is philip.
I just moved from europe and now I live in michigan...
I grew up with graffiti, heres the thing I started art when I was about 4 and by the age of 10 I started sketching and by the age of 12 I started graffiti.

Hell yeah, A "crew" is just like a group, like a film crew, camera crew, art crew ....
You have 3 types of graffiti artists:

1- Writers who really are in to grafftiti, who maybe do some illegal stuff but only on old buildings or mostly on authorized buildings, people who demand it... And nowadays I would call it spray can art, or fine photorealistic graffiti, where you will not see as much names on a wall... just graphics and ART

2- Vandals, members of gangs like MS13 ones who just mark their turf or graffiti artists who want their name to be out there and sometimes people who just have money to bail out.

3- "Flase" graffiti writers: Artists who are great in fine arts and try out graffiti but dont have the feeling and *thing* to be a graffiti artist.

All 3 are ART related they are not, NOT ART... its like a carpenter its ART not wood carver, or musician its artistic

IT IS DEFINITELY A GOOD THING ( besides vandalism )
But hey vandals can see it as art in their eyes, like I did a photorealistic mocking bird on a wall,... or when you want people to know things like how many people die from tobacco each year yo uhave Graffiti artists / vinylists who stick and spray Facts about tobacco.

2007-01-13 14:06:59 · answer #5 · answered by philip han 2 · 1 0

yes ! If meaning of art lies in creating a new beautiful idea that presents a food for thought to be shared with the viewer .Among other things a piece of art needs to offer some attractive characteristics. They have to have subtle gifts to enjoy or rediscover the beauty in it. The viewer or audience must be captured buying in to the soothening concept there in. It has to leave him to wonder with sufficient interest in the subject conveyed through the piece of art demanding his appreciation and decisive subjective perception for its distinct ways of expression..Graffitis can and often do carry messages to sparkle the viewer's consciousness. So they can be effective examples of arts.Not just for the sake of it. To me it makes sense enough when it really does.

2007-01-12 02:09:57 · answer #6 · answered by akshay s 3 · 1 0

Although I've meet many people who graffiti to be very artistic in other aspects, graffiti is just another form of vandalism.

2007-01-12 00:57:15 · answer #7 · answered by BAnne 7 · 0 0

Yes because it is a creative expression showing others something from the graffitior/ graffiti artist.

2007-01-14 01:50:00 · answer #8 · answered by funcplinvic 2 · 0 0

If art is expression, then graffiti is a form of art.
Besides, art itself cannot really be defined.

2007-01-12 03:16:27 · answer #9 · answered by Saffren 7 · 1 0

Murals have been an art form for generations, but graffiti generally depicts some sort of violence and or gang affiliation, so sorry I have to say no.

2007-01-12 00:55:57 · answer #10 · answered by whateverhohum 3 · 0 0

it takes a talented artist to do a good graffiti. he has to hav an imagination and the know how. but graffiti itself is an anti social act.. and i think it a vandalism of public property..

2007-01-12 04:00:59 · answer #11 · answered by menakshistar 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers