Do you think graffiti is vandalisim or art?

Question

If it is beautiful and creative, should it be erased because it's defacing something? Why do you think so?

Answer 1

There was an article in our Sunday paper on this today. I think it is artistic & beautiful, but it is harmful if it is done on someone's garage or side of their house, ya know? I think there should be a place for graffiti - people do it anyway & a lot of it is very artistic & beautiful - why not set up a place that doesn't hurt anyone's property & the graffiti is shown in an artistic light? Just my opinion.

Answer 2

It depends on the intention. If it's just kids being stupid, then it's vandalism. If it's someone actually trying to create art, then it's art.

There's graffiti on the side of a building in my home city's downtown, and the city council tried to have it removed because they found it ugly and offensive (spray painted image of a naked woman). I thought it was absolutely beautiful. They eventually lost the battle, and she's still there. Except, at Christmas, the artist put her in a little Santa outfit. :D

EDIT: By the way, the graffiti art in my example was commissioned by the building's owner.

EDIT: So, all of you honestly feel that the images in the link below are vandalism? There's no artistic merit to any of it?! What a limiting definition of art.

Answer 3

A lot is very artful, but it is where it is that makes it vandalism. You paint your mural on your house, thats cool, Paint somebody else's and its not coolTattoos can be very beautiful, but if you sneak around tattooing other people while the slept (as if) they would be upset.

Graffiti is vandalism when it is on somebody's property who objects

Answer 4

Good question- it can be a form of art if it expressess an idea. The idea can be chaos, a way of leaving a trace, or simply saying I want to give something, this is my way of overcoming the mundane. Is it vulgar? Yes, is it defacing, possibly. Graffiti is an art-form if you analyze outside of its context, remove it from seeing it on subway trains, walls and look at it through a lense of meaning. But if you look at scribbles on a wall, they are honestly ugly, I prefer the subways in London.

Answer 5

depends on where it is and what it says. If it is discriminating it is certainly not art. But I have seen some lovely graffiti that was reasonable enough to not be removed.

Answer 6

graffiti is summed up in part by "writing on walls" by encarta dictionary. Vandalism is "the malicious or deliberate defacement..." of another's "property" (encarta dictionary). If you graffiti on your own property it is not vandalism. If on another person's then yes. Whether it should be erased or not is up to the owner.

Answer 7

It would be art if it were done with the permission of the owner of the wall and if much of it wasn't put up to threaten other gangs and create territory when nothing is owned.
There is a right of ownership in this country and there is a right of free speech but not a right of creation on my ownership.

Answer 8

I think it is art to a point. As long as they aren't tagging people's homes, businesses, or governement buildings I think it should be left or they should create a place for it to be done legally. Most of it is beautiful and adds culture to the area its on.
Lucke

Answer 9

I think it depends on what it is.
there are some very cool murals here that are grafiti, but also ppl write useless stuff on places that just look bad.
i think it can be both!

Answer 10

An artistic way of exspressing yourself, your feelings, or your anger. Not vandalism