Is Graffiti Art?

[kentuck]

Personally, I think graffiti is more art than vandalism. I see some really good work on dull, gray concrete walls. Without the colors and the curves and the artistry of the graffiti artist, it would be meaningless. Walls and fences, void of color and meaning, add nothing to our lives. However, I would agree that there are some places where graffiti would not look good. Hopefully, we can leave it to the good judgement of the graffiti artists whether or not to put their artistry on display for all to see. We should not wish to interfere with the right of anyone to express themselves with the color of their choice.

[Ohio Joe]

1. Some is... Some is not

I don't think it all fits into a single definition.

[cbayer]

2. Some is, some not so much.

Have you seen "Exit Through the Gift Shop."?

Great documentary on graffiti art.

[liberal_at_heart]

3. I've seen some very beautiful graffiti in the city. Not all of it is beautiful but some of it is

very artistic and beautiful.

[hootinholler]

4. Define Art

Personally I think the objectives of graffiti are well aligned with art. Some of it is expressed pleasingly, some not so much, but it is art.

[kentuck]

5. I agree.

It is art.

[oldhippie]

6. What if they applied their artistry to ....

... your dull, gray, meaningless (to them) car? Would a little color and curves spice it up nicely?

[kentuck]

7. My car, probably would spice it up?

Your car, I don't know?

[ManiacJoe]

8. The OP seems to be targeting a very limited range of graffiti.

Some graffiti is art, resembling murals.

Gang taggings are also graffiti and certainly not art.

[reddread]

9. there is an art to

graffiti removal contractors making work for themselves.
very short term life span works of con artistry.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. Much like theft is charity.

"Graffiti" is "public art" if the owner of the structure to which it is applied consents to it.

Not sure if serious.

[liberal_at_heart]

13. There are lots of artists that partner up with building owners in the city.

And maybe the people that do it without permission wouldn't feel the need to do so if they felt more like they had a say in their community and had a brighter future. When you own nothing, you look at those who do with contempt, much like how we look upon the very wealthy.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. You can't have it both ways

Is it an expression of art, improving the value of the property to which it's applied, or is it a manifestation of "contempt"?

Public art requires the consent of the owner of the structure. Anything else is vandalism.

[Puzzledtraveller]

11. As most is, no.

[ScreamingMeemie]

12. It is, but I don't care for most of it and that does not make

Me old or grouchy or whatnot. It's my opinion.

[etherealtruth]

14. sometimes

There are some excellent street artists ... their intent and their focus is expression through art.

Others, use graffiti to deface or terrorize

[Llewlladdwr]

15. I don't think I could trust a wall...

that had had itself graffitied.

[Stinky The Clown]

16. Ask any DC Metro rider about Cool Disco Dan of a few years back

That wasn't art, it was graffiti spam. His name was spray painted everywhere along the Red Line, among other places.

[JonLP24]

17. Yes

Even gang taggings.

However, the definition of art as I understand it is very basic. Putting a basket of fruit in a center of a table for decoration is considered art to me. Even if it looks bad it is art to me. Britney Spears songs are art. Etc.

[Goalie49009]

19. Here is a pic of a firend of mine

Standing at the side of a building where owner gave permission for it to be done..Not sure where it was taken at though.