Graffiti - Vandalism or Art?
BriefTo write a 500 word subjective essay about whether I think graffiti is an art form or simply just vandalism. In this brief essay I will be putting points forward for both of the two and finishing with a brief conclusion.
Why I think that graffiti is an art form
Personally I think that graffiti can be a very ‘cool’ art form, popularly misconceived by the general public to be just scribbles and vandalism on walls, trains and other places. In fact there are many different types of graffiti ranging from simple tagging (bombing) on walls to posting murals, signs or sculptures. This all depends on the artist creating what I would like to call ‘the work’. These ‘artists’ create what they feel and usually, with obvious exceptions such as young teenagers with nothing to do, (although this is slightly stereotypical I believe it to be mostly true from my experience) have adequate reason for doing it, usually trying to get their message across to their intended audience, the public. This link or this one or this is what I believe to be ‘real’ graffiti art, which actually takes a lot of skill not to mention time to achieve. From what I can get from this image, the artist is trying to send the message “young hearts beat free”, which I can say probably means that young people are free to express themselves in anyway they feel necessary but obviously within reason. The artist, from my understanding of graffiti is called ‘Fear 1’.
Why I think that graffiti is vandalism
I think that graffiti becomes vandalism when it’s just simple ‘tagging’ on walls just for the sake of it in the middle of nowhere. It is a form of typography which is good in the right place and context, but when it’s simply scrolled over high street walls along with loads of other ‘tags’ it looks messy and unskilful, not to mention out of place. “In the spray-can world of graffiti, there are artists and there are ‘taggers’. There may be little difference in the eyes of the law, after all, defacing property, whether it's nice to look at or not, is still a form of vandalism. But for graffiti types, there's a distinction between "graffiti art" and "tagging," and it's fairly obvious.
Graffiti artists paint pictures, albeit with Krylon. Something associated with '80s New York subway cars, Keith Haring, and Run DMC. ‘Taggers’, on the other hand, paint only their names with an aerosol flourish the stuff of gang bangers and LA's mean streets”. Quote from www.airmassive.com/ whoisvery.html.
Conclusion
As stated early graffiti comes in many forms, not just simple ‘tags’. People need to open their minds to the world of graffiti rather than just slating it at a glance as with all things in life the other side of the hand should be considered before making a judgement. Graffiti is an art form in the right place, produced with the right materials and right intentions, although I say ‘right’, who’s to say what right actually is? I can only give you my opinion of what I believe right to be and that the graffiti is actually art rather than simple ‘tags’ and the right place being somewhere that doesn’t deface some decent architecture in the middle of the high street. I think that people should also try to work out the message that the artist is trying to get across to the public, (usually the intended audience) and consider what it could mean in what I believe to be the ‘grand scheme of things’. Finally i found this to be very true
