Is Graffiti an Art or Crime?
This is a debate that will probably go on forever. Sure, it’s a crime on the books and basically could be considered defacing public or private property. However you want to look at it, I find graffiti to be an interesting cultural event that will never go away. In a way, it’s a form of personal expression that forces people to take a look. Graffiti is nothing new either. It has been around since ancient civilizations. The area I currently live in doesn’t have too much in the way of graffiti art, but it’s starting to pop up a little more often. I dropped in a graffiti definition from Wikipedia at the bottom of this article. Feel free to comment and let me know what you think about the subject.
Here are some photos I took the other day near the New River in Radford, Virginia which is roughly 15 minutes away from where I live:
Graffiti (strictly, as singular, “graffito,” from the Italian — “graffiti” being the plural) are images or letters applied without permission to publicly viewable surfaces such as walls or bridges. Graffiti has existed at least since the days of ancient civilizations such as Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire.[1] Graffiti has changed over time into what are known as “modern graffiti”: the public defacing of a surface using spray paint, markers, or other materials. When graffiti painting is done without the property owner’s consent, it can be considered vandalism, which is punishable by law in most countries.
Graffiti can be used to communicate social and political messages, and as a form of advertising. It is also considered a modern art form, and can be seen in galleries around the world.
I would like to thank Lyndsey over at ‘Lez Keep It Real‘ for suggesting I mention the art of graffiti more on the site.
There’s no reason to beat around the bush, so to speak. Let’s get it all out in the open, basically - Lez keep it real. Real opinions, real discussion, real stories. Writer and professional people watcher, Lyndsey D’Arcangelo, will keep you up to speed with information and educated opinions on current news, politics, sports, entertainment, gossip, lifestyle, coming out and everything else concerning the gay and lesbian population five, fun-filled days a week!
May 27th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
In my opinion, and it’s of high authority, is this:
Anything that you do that you would not want don’t to your own property is considered a violation. I’m so sick of hearing people calling graffiti and ‘art form of expression’ as an excuse to ‘tag’ public property; and then turn around and be completely pissed off that someone ‘tagged’ their own property- say, their car. Now, don’t get me wrong, there are some really talented artist out there doing their thing; but those cats [female and male] are doing it the right way. They’re not out there tagging public property- making it hard for business owners to keep their buildings free of ‘detritus’- they are using abandoned buildings- or even, ‘Oh my God’ forbid, get a grant and get paid/permission for what they do- as their canvas. the other people ot that that just ‘deface’- not even worth calling graffiti- public property are a mockery to the real ‘graf’ artists. Think of people like Fab-5 Freddy [one of the Grandfather of Graf/Hip-Hop in New York] and Lee Quinones did it artistically; not vagrantly. This is one reason why J-M B [Jean-Michel Basquiat] did not consider himself a graffiti artist; because of the people out there that make the act of the ‘action’ fraudulent.
Am I talkin’ shit??!! I dont think so!!
Dune-Micheli
D-M CARPE
May 27th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
In my opinion, and it’s of high authority, is this:
Anything that you do that you would not want don’t to your own property is considered a violation- A CRIME!! I’m so sick of hearing people calling graffiti and ‘art form of expression’ as an excuse to ‘tag’ public property; and then turn around and be completely pissed off that someone ‘tagged’ their own property- say, their car. Now, don’t get me wrong, there are some really talented artist out there doing their thing; but those cats [female and male] are doing it the right way. They’re not out there tagging public property- making it hard for business owners to keep their buildings free of ‘detritus’- they are using abandoned buildings- or even, ‘Oh my God’ forbid, get a grant and get paid/permission for what they do- as their canvas. the other people ot that that just ‘deface’- not even worth calling graffiti- public property are a mockery to the real ‘graf’ artists. Think of people like Fab-5 Freddy [one of the Grandfather of Graf/Hip-Hop in New York] and Lee Quinones did it artistically; not vagrantly. This is one reason why J-M B [Jean-Michel Basquiat] did not consider himself a graffiti artist; because of the people out there that make the act of the ‘action’ fraudulent.
Am I talkin’ shit??!! I dont think so!!
Dune-Micheli
D-M CARPE
May 27th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
I definitely see your point here. There probably are enough places that would allow you to paint on a building. I recall a local Roanoke “artist” who went to NYC and threw buckets of paint off the top of a building claiming it was art. He basically damaged a lot of property and even injured a NYPD police officer in the process.
There are definitely the right ways to go about things. Some people do give art a bad name.
May 28th, 2007 at 2:22 am
Yeah, see the whole issue here is ‘integrity’ for your art; as well as being a representative of ‘the arts.’ Many people who ‘become’ ‘people who make things’ [I do not call them artists because of what these type of people truly represent] are only looking out for their own interests in expression. Most do not even consider themselves ‘embassadors’ to not just their own expression, but to the expression of art on a larger scale. People who are minute in their thinking are the onse who ‘make’ mediocre art.
May 28th, 2007 at 2:23 am
Yeah, see the whole issue here is ‘integrity’ for your art; as well as being a representative of ‘the arts.’ Many people who ‘become’ ‘people who make things’ [I do not call them artists because of what these type of people truly represent] are only looking out for their own interests in expression. Most do not even consider themselves ‘embassadors’ to not just their own expression, but to the expression of art on a larger scale. People who are minute in their thinking are the ones who ‘make’ mediocre art.
May 28th, 2007 at 2:23 am
Yeah, see the whole issue here is ‘integrity’ for your art; as well as being a representative of ‘the arts.’ Many people who ‘become’ ‘people who make things’ [I do not call them artists because of what these type of people truly represent] are only looking out for their own interests in expression. Most do not even consider themselves ‘ambassadors’ to not just their own expression, but to the expression of art on a larger scale. People who are minute in their thinking are the ones who ‘make’ mediocre art.