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

What are your thoughts on the subject??

2007-02-05 13:54:21 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Visual Arts Drawing & Illustration

I was a former graffiti writer that wrote on the NYC subways from 1980-1984..i had lots of "discussions" concerning the validity of the "art" form. Looking back, i know it was wrong to deface and all that. What does the yahoo community think?

2007-02-05 13:56:46 · update #1

18 answers

Interesting query...If you do it on a wall it's defacing property and called grafiti...do exactly the same thing on a canvas and it's art! You can show it in art galleries, take it around the world so more people can see it...not just subway riders and neighborhoods where the train goes, and the BEST part...sell it and make money!!!

2007-02-07 04:39:09 · answer #1 · answered by stop n'stare airbrush artist 2 · 0 1

That depends on the motivation of the writer, If a person is motivated by wanting to mark gang territories with tags, then that is not art. If a person makes a mural or sets out to make a picture of some kind, then this is more than mere vandalism. I think while scribbling on the side of buildings is not art, there is a lot of really impressive graffiti art out there. I think that we are conditioned to accept that our public spaces are carved up and made ugly with advertisements and I appreciate when people take come control back, I especially like it when people use billboards as a starting point for a graffiti project, I am sick of being told what to buy and people are too apathetic about commercialism, so if someone defaces an advertisement like a billboard in a clever way, I think it is an important exercise is being active and participating in our surroundings. I resent the way that companies are allowed to deface the streets with ads, I feel like graffiti is a way to have our say. That said, Graffiti art takes a great deal of skill, so I think the level of thought and time that goes into a project determines whether it is art, or just vandalism. Banksey! Harring! Basquiat (SAMO)!

2007-02-05 22:21:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Any form of self expression could be considered art. Good or bad art however is really up to the viewer. I've seen the graffiti tags of peoples names on trains, but at the same time I've seen very political pieces. Some good, some bad. Like any media practice is important. Unfortunately that means a lot of very bad work in the public eye on a daily basis.

2007-02-06 22:54:54 · answer #3 · answered by juxtaposedwithmadness 2 · 0 0

I think that graffiti can indeed be considered a form of modern art. If its done on canvas or an approved spot for a mural, it can be beautiful.

If it is done illegally on public places and without permission, its not art, just defacing public property. If it has profane language and is just people's names written and pointless things like that, its not really art, just a person scribbling with a spray paint

Graffiti art can be an amazing way of self expression, but most people frown on it because they immediately think of graffiti as a crime and defacement of public property. I think that if it is done controlled and in the proper places, it is a beautiful form of modern art.


Ruby Red Rose
@>-'-,--

2007-02-05 22:44:53 · answer #4 · answered by ruby red rose @>-'-,-- 3 · 0 0

Graffiti is a beautiful form of artwork. However illegal that has nothing to do with whether it is art or not. I live in a very small town and unfortunatly I do not get to see the beauty of the work, except when trains roll by. I think graffiti artists, should but sheet metal, and graffiti on that, then they could actually, sell and make money off it or even display it.

2007-02-05 22:08:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You bet it is! Some of the best modern art I've seen has been in graffiti. It's just not put in a place that's legal. I'd really like to see some graffiti artists do their work on canvas. I think it would sell and make a ton of bucks for the artist! Some of the art makes me just stand back in awe!

2007-02-05 21:56:31 · answer #6 · answered by Gary D 7 · 1 0

It is only art if the artist respects the canvas. It is most certainly not legit if you did not receive permission from the owner of the "canvas". If it was a subway car then it most definitely was wrong. Graffiti continues to be a problem and contributes to urban and suburban blight.

2007-02-05 22:01:42 · answer #7 · answered by Bullwinkle Moose 6 · 0 0

It is wrong to deface. Some graffiti is very artistic and beautifully done, but that doesn't mean that everyone wants to see it all over the place. Those "artists" should channel their talents someplace legitimate.

2007-02-05 21:58:29 · answer #8 · answered by Jess H 7 · 1 0

absolutly. Quality graffiti is not only beautiful but difficult. It is unforunate that graffiti is often done without consent on people's properties or buisnesses because it has given graffiti a bad reputation. As an artform I certainly respect it's difficulty though it is unfortunate that it and vandalism walk hand and hand.

2007-02-05 21:59:42 · answer #9 · answered by Rhuby 6 · 0 1

graffiti is art in the wrong place, art is ment to be in a museum or in a place where people go to look at it, unless your given permission to draw there its wrong, if someone has a picture to share with the world then share it legally.

2007-02-05 21:59:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers