graffiti - art or crime ?

interesting and enjoyable web site http://www.fafi.net/accueil.html

Many cities and towns have community art projects, where graffiti is sanctioned on certain buildings, etc. So in that case, art, definately. However, if you spraypaint someone's house without their permission, that's vandalism, community service at minimum for that type of stuff.

so please vote! :)

Just asking; I'd call it a mural instead if it was requested by the city.

Redstone

even if it's in a legal place, doesn't strike me as something I'd want to look at every day.

Though I will say it shows a hell of a lot of talent; that person should look for a job doing show cars or motorcycles.

I've seen some spray-paint people do some stunning work in New Haven where the city's asked them to...stuff I would indeed be happy to look at every day.

Redstone

I work at a public library and have a very good idea how much grafitti costs the taxpayers.

Our city has community art projects, both publicly and privately funded, that are just wonderful grafitti art, though.

:hi:

But that's just me.....Unable to really make up my mind....

Some I've seen is truly beautiful......

But mostly it's just dreck.....:puke:

I guess I'd have to go with crime......because it is against the law to deface other people's property...... :shrug:

It is an interesting question, though....and there's plenty of room for debate here!

:hi:

:hi:

As long as you don't wake up to find it on your house or car, so I vote art (as long as it is done on something that the artist owns.)

HUGH11 SERIOUS11

That's a false dichotomy, and I refuse to participate! Give me my vote back right now...I'm going home! :sarcasm:


If it's on someone else's property, then it's art that deserves to be painted over. After all, everyone doesn't have the same taste. :shrug:

Look at the nazi films. Look at the GOP Sore - Loserman political signs from Dade County Florida. I once heard that a surgeon that would stitch his initials in to a patients wounds.

When a kid takes a marker to the kitchen wall, it is art.
When a thug tags a building with a gang marker, it is art.
Even when a DU punches a freeper in the eye, that is an act of art.

I was interested in seeing if DU, when forced, would choose art or crime, to describe graffiti.

Through my pseudo-emotional outburst came enlightenment. ;)

http://www.fresatees.com/
:yourock::patriot:

Now you are just being silly. :)

:silly:

:patriot:

Vandalism is illegal. Period.

Redstone

this graffiti artist had an interesting experience. She was commissioned by several commercial property owners to create murals. These murals were deemed illegal via town codes and were painted over.

I think that this is the very first poll to ask if graffiti is HUGH11 or SERIOUS11.

(before and after)

it was wrong that they just painted over it because they thought spray-can art =s ghetto, or some such thing. I think that this is a valid art form that has a message to deliver relevant to the time and place where it evolved.

And I agree, some it is quite beautiful. :hi:

thank you for all of your posts today! :)

If it is on somebody's property without their permission it is a crime.

crime can be art, art can be crime. It can be HUGH!!111 and SERIOUS!!!11

Most of the tags are a stupid eyesore, but there is some awesome work being done. Provided it's done on a wall with the owner's permission, I'm cool with it.

but I voted crime. I understand the artistic nature of some graffiti, but it's still vandalism, like it or not

property it is a crime.

Grafitti on someone's personal property against their will would be wrong, but some of the graffiti artists are really artists. The cities should commission them to paint beautiful murals on walls, overpasses, underpasses, and other gray, bland, boring areas, especially crime ridden areas, to beautify the city. Tagging, on the other hand, is no better than territorial pissing and is usually done by gangs, which serve no purpose other than to sit around refusing to evolve. They should be taken off the streets for their violence and bullshit. I guess it really does depend on the circumstances.

I feel sick to my stomach when I'm driving along a beautiful country road, then suddenly I see crap sprayed all over what was once a lovely boulder. Or somebody's barn.

If it's well-done, I don't mind it so much on the dumpsters of the trash train that passes through the neighborhood every day.

I look at graffiti as... not art. Most of the stuff I see is too stylized and not challenging, not at all what I think art can be.

lot of it is really amazing. It perks up the otherwise mundane surfaces of our cities!

99.9% of it is nothing more than tagging. tagging means gangs. gangs mean fear of walking down the street, or "looking wrong" at someone, for fear of getting assaulted.

my neighborhood in nyc (washington heights) looks like total trash.

this so-called street art does nothing but create neighborhoods where people don't want to live, which means businesses don't want to locate there, which means there is nothing but 99cent stores and thrift shops.

but the streets aren't enough. they have to tag inside the apartment buildings. they throw trash everywhere, INCLUDING OUT THE WINDOW.

sorry, but i don't want to live in the third world, but unfortunately i am STILL paying 1500 a month, to live where most speak no english, and throw their trash on the sidewalk RIGHT NEXT TO THE GARBABE CAN.

trash is trash. you want to look at that crap, paint your own damn living room wall.

:grr:

this is HUGH111! and SERIOUS11!!