Category: Vandalism

Introduction

Graffiti is a true art form and allows people to express themselves in cumulative ways. One of the biggest questions in modern age is whether graffiti is considered vandalism. Graffiti artists use graffiti to address problems in their communities (send a message). Graffiti shouldn’t be considered vandalism because it allows youth in low income communities to have an opportunity to be known for. Graffiti is an art that allows individuals to express themselves , their talents and create jobs for artists who aren’t as mainstream. Most people argue that graffiti is vandalism because of the money it takes to cleanup, but graffiti is a truly a form of art.

Graffiti artists use graffiti to address problems in their communities (send a message). For example, ​Graffiti took a tow on New York areas when the city was headed to bankruptcy in the mid 70s. A lot of New Yorkers were left in fear and hopelessness which later led to graffiti as a way of protest to the federal government. This inspired many revolutionary artists such as Yazan Halwani who grew up in Beirut tagging walls then later became the voice of the public. His work was based on helping those less fortunate around his neighborhood. Angela Reichers mentions “The artist donated the proceeds from the sale of his Guinness World Record-holding “The Legend Of Bliss Street” was meant to call attention to the suffering of people living on the street.” as mentioned in “The Writing on the Wall”. This shows how passionate a graffiti artist is of their work and for a better future for their environment. They are an activist of peace, they protest with colors filled with hidden messages, instead of the typical violent protest we are used to seeing .

Should Graffiti be Protected?

​Nowadays, the youth have the luxury of social media to get the recognition they would need to start a career in the art field. Graffiti shouldn’t be considered vandalism because it allows youth in low income communities to have an opportunity to be known for. For instance, it took Lady Pink six years of expressing her talent in ways that were deemed illegal. In an interview with Lady Pink, she states that she “ would travel across New York late at night by Subway dressed as a boy… so that men didn’t mess with me.” It shows that it was a big deal to protect herself and still remain diligent. On the other hand, It took Banksy approximately five years to begin receiving attention in the right light. Not only were their careers dependent on not being reprimanded with legal consequences, but also the masses perceiving their art as art. But once the masses perceive it as art, it becomes a safe heaven and places that were once considered “vandalism” become landmarks.

Furthermore, graffiti is an art that allows individuals to express themselves , their talents and create jobs for artists who aren’t as mainstream. ​ In the article “ An Unselfish Act: Graffiti In Art Education”, Sentrock mentions how “ use it [graffiti art] as a platform to do things in life; don’t do things [such as vandalism or living illicit graffiti lifestyle] that will hold you back or condone you.” He wants us as a community to start using graffiti as an expression of art instead of the typical graffiti that is used for tagging or gang related. This way, graffiti creates a deeper meaning for itself. People can look at a wall and admire it’s beautiful structures while also understanding the artist’s meaning behind the art. We have to take a different approach in educating the youth the differences in graffiti and graffiti art. The style of graffiti is cherished among those who want to express themselves and their talents, but many of these people become discouraged knowing that graffiti can lead to trouble. By educating our youth, they become influenced into viewing the art aspect of graffiti.

The main concern of the opposing side is whether graffiti would be considered vandalism if done on one’s property. To eradicate this concern, Communities can be funded private areas for graffiti artists to express their art. This private area would significantly decrease the amount of graffiti on private properties. In addition schools can be funded to properly train a graffiti artist willing to comply with regulations. Critics say graffiti is a threat and indicator of violent communities, in conclusion, graffiti should be decriminalised, as it is a form of not only cultural expression, but art.

“Graffiti art”—is it truly an art form, or simply childish vandalism? This essay will explore the meaning of graffiti, a brief background history of the evolution in society, as well as the the different motives of artists who uses graffiti in spiritual and social practices. From the start, society has had a general distaste with graffiti, however, this form of expression has strong evidence to propose that it can be a catalyst for the everyday person. What does the future hold for graffiti?

When it comes to the physical aspects of graffiti, Gach states that each graffiti expresses a thought, wish, or attitude. The word graffiti comes from the Italian verb graffiare, meaning “to scratch.” Graffiti is described as by the Oxford Dictionary as an often overlooked form of communication consisting of writing or drawings made on a public surface, usually as a form of artistic expression, without permission and within public view. Through graffiti, the everyday person is able to communicate attitudes and feelings that would usually be suppressed due to societal pressures. Unlike spoken thoughts, graffiti provide safety from the rebuttal of different opinions, as well as having an indirect lasting-impression while simultaneously reaching a larger audience over-time. (Gach 285) Graffiti can be used an an obtrusive measure to reveal patterns of customs and attitudes of a society. (Stocker 356) However, as discussed in Social Analysis of Graffiti, the patterns are not specific to a general conscious consensus, rather the beliefs of certain individuals in that social climate. They concluded that graffiti collected did not reflect important social issues directly. (Collins 733)

Pin-pointing a direct period in time as to when graffiti started can be quite difficult as there are many various embodiments and of the art style. One of the earliest contested pieces is found at a UNESCO World Heritage site, Cueva de las Manos, Río Pinturas located in the caves of Santa Cruz, Argentina. This work is dated between 9,300 and 1,300 years ago, showcasing the stenciled outlines of human hands, which some speculate to be the hands of the communities of Patagonia. (UNESCO) On the other hand, this piece can be argued along the lines of a mural as it focuses on community rather than graffitic practices. This work is not a form of vandalism nor does it express an anonymous thought. Modern-day graffiti uses the anonymous expression as a form of communication. (Gach 285) The earliest form of graffiti that follows along the lines of modern-day practices is dated around Roman 200 A.D. and is simultaneously the earliest known depiction as well as pictorial representation of the crucification of Jesus Christ. The graffiti showcases a person praying to a crucified, donkey-headed figure with a translation stating “Alexamenos worships [his] god,” indicating mockery as Christinatnity was looked down upon in first-century Rome.

Yet, the adaptation of graffiti that most people have seen, the kind that uses arsonal paint cans, seems to have appeared in Philadelphia in the early 1960s, and the latter part of the decade, it had reached New York and has made history ever since. Darryl “Cornbread” McCray is considered to be the first modern graffiti artist. (Montana) As reported on by Montana Colors, rather than take part in the ever-growing drug and gang epidemic in Philadelphia, Cornbread took to the streets adding his unique signature to the public spaces he frequented. His work was raw, and simply himself, he did not have any specific style in mind. During this time the graffiti that took to the streets was simply gang names and symbols, none of it being a personal moniker such as “Cornbread”. His biggest rise to fame happened when a local newspaper mistakenly reported that he had passed. However, Cornbread, alive and well, stated “I knew it was up to me to bring my name back to life,” (Montana) and with this he snuck into the Philadelphia Zoo and pained “Cornbread lives” on both sides of an elephant. This in-turn led him to a jail sentence, but that did not phase a single soul in the graffiti scene, he was considered a legend. His motives during this time was to get his name everywhere and anywhere he could, higher traffic areas such as tourist areas were target rather than poorer neighborhoods. Due to the fact of looking for an outlet of expression in a drug-infested community, Cornbread was able to pioneer a huge movement for art in general, even outside of the confines of the graffiti world: raw expression.

After the insurgence of the new style and motives of graffiti, the United States was hit hard. Cornbread and other pioneers such as TAKI-183 was able to show the youth that the world truly is a canvas. For awhile, the youth owned the city, not the officials. In mid-1970’s New York each and every train car, inside and out, was completely drenched in personal tags all working with each other to make a spontaneous collaborative art piece. However, some people do not see graffiti as a communal art. Instead, clumping it as part of a crime called vandalism. With these polarities, graffiti became a political target. City officials decided to crack down on this issue considering it as part of the ever-growing urban issue, reluctant to focus the blame on the homeless and drug issues that were more apparent. They wanted to take control back of the city in the only way they could think of, focusing on the subway trains. However, the youth was not going to go down without a fight, for this was their only outlet. Protest graffiti was all over the city, using inscriptions to warn each other of hot spots. As such, the circumstances that prevailed allowed graffiti artists just started focusing on new, clean canvases all over the city. The retaliation of the city officials worked against their favor as it fostered new and bigger graffiti styles, such as the use of stencils and multiple color throw-ups. More elaborate pieces were popping up every morning, in the most obscure places. Artistic expression and style soon took over the motives of graffiti over legibility of the monikers. The war on graffiti was not won, and today the youth still holds power over the city. Sociologist Gregory Snyder reports in his book, Graffiti Lives: Beyond the Tag in New York’s Urban Underground, tagging allowed these young men and women the opportunity “to get fame and respect,” which in any other aspect of their life, were fleeting. In this sense, Snyder argues that “in its purest form, graffiti is an art form that revels in the American Dream.”

In The Guardian article, “Is Graffiti a Force for Good or Evil?” by Athlyn Cathcart-Keays, reader learn that some artists get positive attention for their graffiti, while others get penalized with fines and prison sentences for doing the same thing.

In 2008 there was a major public museum called “Tate Modern” which displayed graffiti and street art. Six international artist were invited to decorate the museum with enormous, eye-catching murals. Meanwhile, across town eight members of London’s well-known DPM crew had to cough up $1.3 million dollars in graffiti-related damages which also led to 11 years in prison.

There are double standards in the way graffiti is perceived, and the law creates pockets of permission for some artists while penalizing others.

Adam Cooper, cultural strategy officer in London, sees graffiti as a positive thing and he compares graffiti artists to buskers, which are people who perform on the subway or streets for their own good and for entertainment for others. He believes that graffiti deserves more space just like the buskers were provided. He mentions the recent success of preserving a skating park in London, and says that graffiti adds a “social communal value” to the city.

Graffiti can be seen a cultural experience that tourists can explore and see and this brings money to the local economy. Buenos Aires is an example of a city where people from all over come to see graffiti art that tells the story of the city’s history.

There are those who see graffiti as a petty crime and believes that it may lead to more serious crimes. However, there are other who appreciate the graffiti that is done because it brings the community together and potential route out of crime for inner-city kids.

From its roots as a method of communication for voteless youth to each hide and be seen, graffiti has developed into a valid variety, a legitimate force for economic, cultural and social smart and, as we tend to still shift towards more and modify urban environments, one amongst the few remaining ways that we’ve got to retort to our surroundings in Associate in Nursing communicatory, public way. “Good” v “bad”,Some may see graffiti as vandalism and people have been penalized for showing off their talent. As a human if you have talent then you should abuse it and show it off because it may inspire others or it can be a way for others to communicate with each other.

In the article “Arts, Outdoor enthusiasts infuriated by national park graffiti” by Los Angeles Times, adapted by Newsela staff we see that people find national parks a good place to express their artwork. People are infuriated about an artist named “Saraiva” who has done his graffiti work in a nat

Background:Andre Saariva is an artist known for painting a cartoon character called “Mr. A..” Recently a photo someone posted of a boulder he painted in California’s Joshua Tree National Park showed up on the website of Modern Hiker magazine. Since then, American nature lovers were infuriated with what he had done in the park.

A new generation of graffiti artists are painting out in the open on things in nature that are public property and this is making lovers of public nature very angry. Graffiti vandalism knowingly affects people and the public. The removal and anticipation of graffiti vandalism is very expensive to the public.In the article is says “Tens of millions of tax payer dollars are being spent annually on cleaning up graffiti and repairing the damage that it causes”(http://www.crimeprevention.nsw.gov.au/Pages/cpd/protectcommunity/graffitivandalism/graffitivandalism.aspx). Spending this public money on cleaning graffiti means that money is not being spent on things that can benefit the community.

*Most people may say graffiti is the only thing that they can do, and if it wasn’t for graffiti they would go into crime. In addition graffiti is another way to express ones feelings and a way to spread a message. Back to the it is the only thing that they can do, for some teenagers they aren’t good at their studies so they don’t really have a good future but graffiti is another way to earn money and get a viewer’s eye. Graffiti is an issue that generates widespread community concern. It impacts on state and territory governments, local government, police, public transport and utility providers, local communities and young people in a variety of ways. Although an issue of concern, there has been limited criminological research exploring the characteristics of graffiti offences and offenders and the impact that graffiti has on communities. This poses a challenge for policymakers and practitioners.

One of the city’s know graffiti artist generally perceived by the label Live Evil, has an astonishing and even confident supposition on the issue, as he guarantees the wall painting is an extraordinary thought and a positive development towards achieving their objective. He does, in any case, proceed to state that this activity plan has far to proceed to should be completed on an a lot bigger scale than a couple of dividers around the city. He guarantees ‘spray painting is the snappiest method for getting workmanship from your brain to the media’ and is doubtful that the wall paintings will be excessively far and few between to satisfy a similar impact, as owning the correct expression or making an incredible gem is to a great extent a matter of area. He has additionally voiced his worries with regards to the choice procedure and oversight of the workmanship on the wall painting, and is stressed his specialty will be ‘too watered down before it contacts the people’.Overall, he is satisfied to see the city is making a stride towards seeing spray painting in a constructive light and is eager to perceive how this turns out. Be it a disfigurement of open property or basically a helpful and expressive work of art, it is winding up progressively normal and obviously certain that rates including spray painting are on the ascent, and that its very nature will keep on changing later on.

It brings down property estimations and expands wrongdoing as indicated by a Neighborhood Voices composed by Tim H in the Imperial Oak Fix. The creator composed his piece on April 1, 2013 approaching city lobby to accomplish something. Intriguing is that right around two years sooner, June 2, 2011, Lynn Cobb composed a supposition piece about the equivalent. Open spray painting is a subject that has entered my thoughts regularly and offered ascend to numerous get-together discussions throughout the years. My present home is in a city where on the off chance that you stop too long somebody may label you with paint. Already I lived in a zero resilience for spray painting city. In heading out to various regions of this World my mind registers likenesses and contrasts where this open showcase of articulation exists and where it doesn’t.

Graffiti art is an uncommissioned urban art revolution by any sense of movement and cultural heritage and a radical contemporary art movement that artists used as a social expression of protest that illustrates ideas from an environmental perspective to convey political or social opinions. It involves the unauthorized spraying, painting or scratching of words and images on buildings, bridges, streets or any other surfaces usually in public places. It is regarded as a form of rebellious art form. It is an evolutionary art movement that arose in New York, Berlin or London, since the mid-1970s to 1980s, that is closely linked with hip-hop culture and the production of elaborately designed as an expression of discontent that associate their selves that often use specific symbols, signatures or ‘tags’ in their graffiti to adopt a particular style that connects an internal language within the culture interacting with the people to convey their relevant messages. Graffiti can be a springboard for the examination of personal identity, commercial design, social history, and community conflict. (Whitehead, J. L., 2015) Within the street art world, graffiti artists do not consider their art work to be defacing public or private property, but rather see it as bringing a voice to the disempowered (Howze, 2008), beauty to an unsightly locale, or developing one’s identity through a pseudonym (Othen, P., 2006). They seek to retain the exciting, outsider, rebellious spirit that originally helped define the graffiti art revolution throughout the years. As it was a “visual representation with a unique and holistic aesthetic” (Kan, 2001, p. 21). Graffiti art is an experiment in identity, working to develop a sense of “self” as the artist progresses artistically and developmentally to express their personal visions, values, and opinions on a daily basis on the streets as their explosive platform as a graffiti artist.

Graffiti art has historically been viewed as a form of vandalism, a curious enigma, and a menace to society. Graffiti art continue to slowly gain notoriety within the walls of famous galleries and museum spaces, yet still take a back seat to that of traditional, mainstream accepted art forms. Although it can be considered as an art, it happens that some of the graffiti artists willfully destruct or damage of a property that adds diminishes of one’s property value. To some particular viewers, they find any given piece of graffiti artistically irrelevant. The world of graffiti, Manco (2002), suggests that, “Graffiti art, as an idea, has always existed alongside other artist endeavors, the difference being that it is a mode of self-expression using methods that are seen as criminal, or outside the conventional art world, rather that specifically sanctioned or commissioned art” (p. 9). In our world today, graffiti artists receive negative public perception. Majority of the complaints are legality of work, diminishing public property, and the expense to remove their artworks.

Graffiti is not a type of vandalism that needs to be countered by artistic arguments. Rather, the people should focus on the evolution of the perception and acceptance of graffiti as a mainstream art form that come from established artistic concepts within our society. People tend to discriminate everything that they view as an inappropriate act but tend to not deeply think on what they discriminate instead of understanding an art. As most of the works expose socio expose socio-political issues and national identity. According to Christiane Della Paz, educating people through the use of visual display or designs in public is not a wrong doing. It is a different way of doing his or her role as an artist and prove to anyone how an art can affect or interact the viewers for them to showcase the appreciation of its beauty. Some artist creates graffiti to express their emotion and feelings in public. Only few can see and understand artworks inside the gallery or home while many can appreciate street art in public area. They like to share their styles, creations, feelings, and learnings to all their viewers. Graffiti artists are very much willing to appreciate public reactions and criticisms to learn and be recognized by others and widen people’s horizon in comprehending the beauty of this type of art genre. Graffiti art is self-aware and projecting its repressed issues in our world onto walls and vertical architecture providing a daily instruction manual for the visual codes and semiotic systems in which we live and move.

On a perspective of a graffiti artist, this form of art is an artistic process of establishing one’s sense of identity. Yet, this is even more so with graffiti than any other form of artistic practice because graffiti is a youth-based art form. Graffiti artists range in age from of 12 to 30, with the vast majority under the age of 18. Graffiti artists create their works during the period of their lives when they are establishing themselves as separate individuals seeking autonomy. By seeking of it, often through acts of rebellion, youth begin the process of establishing their own identity. It motives them artistically that discusses current events, addresses controversy and revolution, makes a statement about society as it speaks actions and illustrates an important discussion that needs to be known. It allows them visually stimulates their mind in the complex world. They view graffiti as a demanded change of our society as well as developing their selves as an artist in our community.

Many artists associated with the “urban art movement” don’t consider themselves “street” or “graffiti” artists, but as artists who consider the city their necessary working environment. It’s a community of practice with its own learned codes, rules, hierarchies of prestige, and means of communication. Graffiti art began as an underground, an archaic public visual surface, and has now become a major part of visual space in many cities and a recognized art movement crossing over into the museum and gallery system.

Graffiti artist express street art contests into two main regimes of visibility—legal and governmental on one side, and artworld or social aesthetic on the other—which creates the conditions within which it must compete for visibility. Graffiti art works against the regimes of government, law, and aesthetics as accepted, self-evident systems that normalize a common world by unconscious rules of visibility and recognition. In each regime, there are rules and codes for what can be made visible or perceptible, who has the legitimacy to be seen and heard where, and who can be rendered invisible as merely the background noise of urban life. Jacques Rancière has noted how politics is enacted by “the partition of the perceptible” (French, partage du sensible), how the regulation, division, or distribution of visibility itself distributes power: “Politics is first of all a way of framing, among sensory data, a specific sphere of experience. It is a partition of the sensible, of the visible and the sayable, which allows (or does not allow) some specific data to appear; which allows or does not allow some specific subjects to designate them and speak about them.” Advertising and commercial messaging space are made to appear as a guaranteed, normalized partition of the visible in the legal regime. Graffiti artists intuitively contest this rationing or apportioning out of visibility by intervening in a publically visible way. Graffiti art thus appears at the intersection of two regimes, two ways of distributing visibility—the governmental regime (politics, law, property) and the aesthetic regime (the artworld and the boundary maintenance between art and non-art).

By subverting the cultural wall system and championing the ephemeral act of art, graffiti art reveals internal contradictions and crises in the parallel universe of the artworld. In the institutional artworld, we only find unity in a consensual disunity about the state of contemporary art, the institutional response to popular visual culture, and the ongoing dissatisfaction. The aesthetic value of street and graffiti art is not always appreciated by the indiscriminate eye of mainstream society as it is often placed under the blanket categorization of vandalism. While some graffiti artists view their work as blatant acts of vandalism, not all of them do.

Street art reveals a new kind of attention to the phenomenology of the city, the experience of material spaces and places in daily life, and has re-introduced play and the gift in public exchange. Well-executed and well-placed graffiti art re-anchors us in the here and now, countering the forces of disappearance in the city as a frictionless commerce machine neutralizing time and presence and claiming all zones of visuality for itself. Graffiti art rematerializes the visual, an aesthetics of reappearance in an era of continual re-mediation and disappearance. It is an art form that doesn’t restrict any artistic expression, but rather creates a sense of pride and recognition not only within the subculture but also within the mainstream society. Graffiti art can be very varied and are closely related to different techniques used and the contexts within which graffiti is presented and interpreted. The line between ‘art’ and ‘vandalism’ in interpretations of illicit graffiti can be very thin and very much depends on the background and point of view of the spectator and on the context within which it is displayed. Through the eyes of every graffiti artist, their artworks enable people to think critically for their selves as they deeply engaged in constructing meaning by looking at every graffiti art, discussing or constructing it the underlying message on our world’s current issues.

Abstract

The intended purpose of this investigation paper is to educate the reader or readers about the culture, pros, cons, stereotypes and matter, both artistic and legal regarding Graffiti. As an artist myself, I thought it may be interesting to dig into a world of art that I am not all to familiar with. Throughout this paper, I will be giving some information regarding what graffiti is as well as addressing the issue as to whether it should be considered a form of art or not.

Should Graffiti Be Considered Art?

In researching this topic, my first mission was to find a direct definition of graffiti. According to the Guardian News website, in an article titled “Is Urban Graffiti a Force for Good or Evil?”, the Anti-Social Behavior Act of 2003 defines graffiti as “painting, writing, soiling, marking or other defacing by whatever means” (See paragraph three). This definition overall marks graffiti as an illegal act rather than a style of art, though we use the term “graffiti” within our culture and society more or less as a description of a specific style. We tend to use this term as a way to describe gang tags, street art, murals and essentially any piece of art or writing that dons a piece of public property. So, what does the law say graffiti is? What does it say it is not? We will start by breaking down the different types of graffiti and street art. Our next step in this process will be to discuss the controversial issues regarding graffiti as well as the laws that have been put in place to delude them.

Graffiti serves several purposes in urban culture. Tagging, for instance, is a way that gang members communicate to each other through symbols which they mark on objects such as trains and buildings to orchestrate heists, turf protection and other various tasks and ventures. (See New York Times’ “Graffiti as Art. As a Gang Tag. As a Mess.”) Other forms of ‘graffiti’, such as street art and murals are commissioned pieces of work, done by street artists who are paid by a company or individual to paint on the side of a building or other surface. According to the Temple News’ “Graffiti is Art, Not Vandalism”, a mural artist named Jane Gold launched the Mural Arts Program in the 1980s to support other graffiti artists and to give them the opportunity to work on “Constructive Art Projects”. Our final form of graffiti is quite possibly the most common. This is simply vandalism; the technical term that we discussed earlier as “painting, writing, soiling, marking or other defacing by whatever means”. This will be my main focus for this paper as it is technically illegal, but can be just as artistic and creative as a mural or piece of street art.

There are several issues surrounding graffiti, both for the artists and the general public. Where an artist may view their work as a simple form of self-expression or as a beautiful masterpiece, the vandalized property owner becomes the victim of a possession being marked against their will by a total stranger. Some onlookers may also be disturbed as certain pieces may depict profanity of pornographic imagery. In 1984, according to the Temple News as well as the Government Innovators Network at Harvard.edu, Philadelphia launched and Anti-Graffiti Network. Thus, protecting the public of Philadelphia from such vandalism. Stating in the Harvard article that “The efforts of the Network range from crime and grime fighting, to public art producing and community beautification.” (See p. 2). This program’s first steps were to simply make stricter laws, rules and regulations regarding Graffiti. Doing things like limiting the sale of spray paints to minors and intensifying law enforcement. Next, the convicted graffitists were assigned to city cleanup and scrubbings. The juvenile vandals with artistic abilities were encouraged to take advantage of apprenticeships, being offered experiences such as attending art museums and learning trades. The primary focus of this program was to refocus the youth of Philadelphia and teach them to redirect their creativity, focusing of murals and art rather than vandalism.

Now, what about those who have not been exposed to a program such as this? What of self-proclaimed artists who paint on buildings and vandalize without commission? According to the Guardian’s “Is urban graffiti a force for good or evil?” In 2008, the Tate Modern opened the world’s very first major display of urban graffiti. Later, that very same year, were tried and fined one million pounds. (about $1,248,990 in the U.S) The vandals were then sentenced to eleven years in prison for various vandalism and graffiti charges. This same article states that in December of 2013, a magistrate used a term “The next Banksy” to defend a man from Manchester who had been charged with vandalism for various acts of graffiti. This man did ultimately avoid a jail sentence. However, when trying another man, a tagger from London, this same magistrate said “He is no Banksy. He doesn’t have the artistic skills.”. So, where is the line?

My hope now, dear reader, is that I have instilled a better understanding of what graffiti actually is. I hope that I have clearly defined this topic by offering familiarity to a subject that is so well known, yet still so in the dark. We have addressed several pros and cons as well as cross referenced multiple articles from different perspectives and points of view. This paper was meant to inform and to educate. It was not intended to sway one’s opinion towards either side of an argument, but rather to give information… to paint a picture if you will.

REFERENCES

1. Burach, R. 2018, January 16. Graffiti is art, not vandalism. The Temple News. https://temple-news.com/graffiti-is-art-not-vandalism/
2. The Guardian. Is urban graffiti a force for good or evil?. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jan/07/urban-graffiti-force-good-evil
3. Ferris, M. 2002, September 8. Graffiti as art. As a gang tag. As a mess. The New York Times. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jan/07/urban-graffiti-force-good-evil
4. Government Innovators Network. 1991. Philadelphia anti-graffiti network. Government Innovators Network. https://www.innovations.harvard.edu/philadelphia-anti-graffiti-network-documentary
5. H. G. Legal Resources. Laws regarding graffiti and art. HG.org. https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/laws-regarding-graffiti-and-art-31311

Anyone living in a big city knows that graffiti is becoming more and more popular. When it comes to graffiti themes, most of us will readily agree that this is an emerging art. However, the argument usually ends with graffiti art. Some people think it is vandalism, others think it is a crime. Most people agree that graffiti is a way for artists to express emotions that can attract the attention of contemporary people and be used by the public.

In 2011, Toronto Mayor Rob Ford launched the ‘Graffiti Elimination Operation’ to end all vandalism in Toronto. Ford believes that graffiti can damage the health, safety and security of the community. Ford said: ‘This is not art, it’s rubbish, it’s graffiti, it’s bullshit.’ (2011, Pat). In other words, Ford believes that graffiti is not art. Ford does not agree that you must treat graffiti as art because art is defined as the expression or application of human creativity and imagination. Graffiti is art. Painting is art. Most people agree that graffiti is an art, artists can express their feelings, inspire young people today, and apply it to the public.

Artists view art as a form of self-expression. Art can show the artist’s feelings and also bring emotions to the audience. Usually people regard art as a picture and use it as decoration, but there are many different ways to explain the beauty of art. Artists use different techniques to express their feelings. In painting, the most expressive form is color. Dark colors are used to express depression, sadness, depression and more negative emotions. On the contrary, bright colors show joy, softness, joy and a more positive feeling. Bridget Riley ’s point of view is: “In the end, all paintings are about the relationship between color, shape and line, whether abstract or figurative.” (Higgins, 2012) . Bridget is correct about the relationship between color, shape and line between paintings, because people may not know that graffiti allows artists to express themselves in unconventional ways.

Graffiti provides a way for modern people to express themselves without following traditional art. Graffiti artists can use this modern art form and help express the feeling they want to show to the public. Usually, art is bright, rigorous and colorful to attract the attention of others. However, other graffiti artists express themselves by creating political declarations, ideas, or opinions that convey information or have an impact on society.

Art has a powerful way of imparting skills that other skills cannot teach. Art can enhance creativity, which is an important skill that the school takes away. For some students, it helps improve self-esteem, motivation, and ability to succeed in the program. Art can help you open your imagination and change your worldview.

People who succeed in art may disagree with traditional methods of artistic creation. However, they may graffiti in other ways. Graffiti helps promote individualism, rather than putting other people’s ideas into practice. The canvas is a wall, which means they can use their imagination to create. Since prehistoric times, graffiti has become an art. At the time, cavemen marked stories on the walls of the cave. It is now considered a modern crime. If graffiti is taught in art education, it may inspire more people to learn art and transform it into a traditional art form. If children grow up in art, then there is no doubt that they will be affected. Graffiti artist Atek84 said: ‘If the art of your age is still very young, then you will grow up and want to play art. I eventually tried graffiti, which I really like.’ Atek84’s point of view is that if you grow up, you will be inspired Try various arts. Although some people do not like artwork, it is publicly available.

The public can enter many art venues. From your leisure park to the nearest art gallery. The purpose of the public to obtain artwork is to face the public and place it in an accessible location. For example, the museum focuses on collecting and displaying the art history of artists around the world. It can also help collude with artists and the public.

However, this generation of young people is not interested in visiting art galleries, so they will not be exposed to art. The artist brings graffiti directly to the public, making it a city decoration, and can make this artistic method arouse people’s interest. The carefully crafted graffiti works are creative, colorful and rare. It turned boring buildings and plain walls into masterpieces, attracting the attention of others. Usually this is positive because graffiti attracts tourists