Spinoff thread: Graffiti

[Domo]

So... Graffiti. Potential art form or mindless vandalism? IMO, sometimes it can be a work of art and can be appreciated, especially when the landlord permits or encourages it. Similarly, it can be disgusting and a nuisance, especially when an "artist" just tags their name with no flair or effort.

What do you guys think?

 

[sam_gordon]

What is this a spinoff of?

 

[Domo]

What is this a spinoff of?

Sorry, I should have specified; it's in relation to the Banksy thread and his graffiti art.

 

[Micca]

I don't think it's "mindless vandalism" because they put some thought into it, it's just vandalism.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

It depends on the graffiti. Tagging a random sign on a street? Vandalism. Painstakingly created mural on the side of an abandoned building or old rusty boxcar? Art.

 

[wilkeliza]

It really depends. This was a hot topic in my Art in NYC course in college. I think when it is thought out and done with landlord permission it is not vandalism and is art. Also if it is not done with permission but the artist pays to clean it up (some do after their "instillation" is done) then it also has the potential to be art. I also think abandoned building and similar structures are up for grabs for these pieces as well.

On the other hand Tagging is just stupid and vandalism. There is no art involved when someone decides to grab a spray can and write his name or some quote on something with no skill what so ever. I think Tagging along with other graffiti styles can become art but on its own it is just vandalism.

At the end of the day though art is merely opinion and as one person told me long ago if it has a large amount of people talking then it is most likely art.

 

[Rhombus]

An approved mural or design on a wall? Art.

Unapproved? Mindless vandalism, no matter how talented the "artist" may be.

 

[PollyannaMom]

I agree that it all boils down to permission. Mural in approved spot = art. Random tagging = vandalism.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

It depends on the graffiti. Tagging a random sign on a street? Vandalism. Painstakingly created mural on the side of an abandoned building or old rusty boxcar? Art.

Here they say why tag a random sign when you can use it for target practice?

I can't believe how many stop signs have holes in them.

 

[BostonJP]

I don't think it's unfair to dismiss what somebody considers art, just because it was put there illegally. It's a nuisance for sure but if the artist took the time to conceive and create something it is still art.

 

[lizabu]

Sometimes artwork. Sometimes entertaining. I remember a couple years ago we were driving home from Niagara Falls and on each over pass there was some kind of positive message spray painted. Like one would say "looking good" and the next one would say "do you even lift?" And so on for like 2-3 hours of driving. I think they covered it over but I thought it was awesome and one of the most Canadian things I've ever seen.

 

[MickeySP]

Unfortunately a lot of graffiti in big cities are actually gang tags.

If done for art & not obscene or violent - no problem.

 

[Handbag Lady]

Vandalism.

 

[Adipoo]

I live in this neighborhood for a good part of the year...

http://www.melroseavela.com/art/

It brings me joy. It's vibrant and inspiring. To me.

Tagging is still generally considered vandalism, especially when morons tag actual street art.

 

[Colleen27]

Personally I don't think the "permission" line is entirely black and white... A lot of street art in Detroit was done without permission from the deadbeat owners of vacant properties, and those properties aren't damaged by the painting because they're so decrepit to begin with. I tend to think of art as something that beautifies, uplifts, or makes a constructive statement. Gang tags, no matter how elaborate, don't do that. Banksy and other street artists do, even when they don't have permission from the legal owners of the properties they're using as their canvas.