The Case for Artistic Mien
While passing through Mohamed Mahmoud Street, it is hard to not notice the spectacular drawings on walls, these are an assortment of graffiti forms, some of them named: Wildstyle, Stencil, Heaven and Piece. It is not a novel case for Egyptians as for centuries ancient Egyptians have been decorating their temples and documenting their history through pharaonic drawings on walls, which can be considered one of the oldest forms of graffiti. The art of graffiti has developed a lot since then in terms of technique and tools. Instead of engraving walls, people now use a much easier method which is spraying on surfaces. Graffiti is a controversial issue since it is considered vandalism by some people because it may contain some offensive implications and as art by others as it beautifies the walls and improve the appearance of the buildings. However, it is a significant issue since it touches upon the fundamental right of freedom of expression. It is essential to shed light on why graffiti should be respected and considered as art rather than accusing it to be vandalism.
Opponents of graffiti argue that it is vandalism. Judge Hard claims, "the trouble [of graffiti] is that it is has been sprayed all over other people's property without their consent and that is simply vandalism” (Akbar). This argument is flawed. Firstly, while it is true for private properties owned by individuals, there’s a myriad of walls in the city that are public property belonging to all the citizens and thus, also the citizens should have a say in its appearance. If they want graffiti, then it should be accepted, for example: it should be considered vandalism if only the owner of the private place is not consulted beforehand. Secondly,...
... middle of paper ...
...rime?" The Independent. Independent Digital News and Media, 16 July 2008. Web. 21 May 2014. .
GraffitiHurts. Web. 20 May 2014. .
Fairey, Shepard. "The 2010 TIME 100." Time. Time Inc., 29 Apr. 2010. Web. 21 May 2014. .
Mock, Geoffrey. "The Egyptian Revolution, As Told Through Graffiti." Duke Today. 18 Sept. 2013. Web. 21 May 2014. .
Rabine, Leslie W. "These Walls Belong To Everybody" The Graffiti Art Movement In Dakar." African Studies Quarterly 14.3 (2014): 89-112. Academic Search Complete. Web. 5 May 2014.
Rahn, Janice. Painting without permission hip-hop graffiti subculture. Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey, 2002. Print.
Building owners give permission to draw a graffiti art on walls because, it makes buildings meaningful, attractive and colorful such as the “Five Pointz” and “Top to Bottom” buildings. From my personal experience, during in our trip “Top to Bottom”, I observed that the building was covered by different type of colorful paintings, pictures and, writings. That pictures inspired and amazed me. Every picture has a different meaning and artist wants to show people by his graffiti art. Also, People use the building wall to raise their voice against of any unlawful work and show their ideas. For example, in 1971, Bangladesh fought with Pakistan to get the freedom. Bangladeshi graffiti artist wrote the slogan on the building wall to inspire people to fight with Pakistani army. Also, they wrote what they wanted from Pakistani government and it was the easiest to express people’s voice against of Pakistani government. So, I think graffiti art should belong the building
The identity of a graffiti artist is hardly ever known unless they want to tag their art with their name or a nickname. Graffiti writers as a subculture are trying to express their political views through civil disobedience by painting pictures that speak out against the government. This subculture developed because they were tired of being oppressed by the government. Graffiti is one of the most enduring acts of protest. It is an important tool for the resistance movement as a way to publicize their protest. It is a visible and powerful form of protest that is going to promote change in the social justice by allowing oppressed groups of people express their viewpoints without being penalized by the
Although many people believe that graffiti is vandalism, it is in fact art because many museums display graffiti, people are interested in it, and it displays beauty and emotional power. Many people have learned to appreciate graffiti as an art form and have opened their eyes to the beauty and emotional power it holds. From the video on CBS News, “Is Graffiti Art or Vandalism,” Laura Fanning (museum visitor) explains at 1:42 “. now I see it as more of a commentary and a statement of ‘I’m leaving my mark’.” This quote exhibits a museum visitor whose perception of graffiti changed when she went to a museum that displayed graffiti.
Graffiti has been around for centuries. It can be seen on buildings, cars, and anything that can be painted with a spray can. Since graffiti came to exist, there has been much debate on whether it is an art form or an illegal activity. While it has been banned and deemed illegal all over the world, it still persists in today’s society. Along with the controversy that comes with graffiti, many commonly known stereotypes are apparent within the act of graffiti. Stereotypically, graffiti is seen as an urban act done by younger people. Typically, since this act is considered illegal, it is mostly done in the middle of the night, and the people partaking are usually wearing dark or black clothes. The picture, “LATA 65 IS A CREATIVE
Even though there is a fear of getting caught, this is what artist usually consider the very core of graffiti culture. Many critics have argued that graffiti is vandalism and should be removed. However, “someone painted over your house and, of course, you’re not too happy about it. No one has the right to do that without your permission and, without even looking at it, you can pronounce it vandalism. But would you feel the same way if you saw a really breathtaking piece of graffiti art on an otherwise dull wall in the city?” (Kordic). Yes, by definition, graffiti is “an action involving deliberate destruction of or damage to public or private property”, And we can not really argue that graffiti often ends up someone’s walls, we do have to think about if it really is “destruction”, and if, perhaps, we have been asking the wrong question the whole
Graffiti can be traced back to the beginning of time with the cavemen. Many caves have drawings done by cavemen. The cavemen used what they had available, whether it was a rock, a stick, or a bone to crave or draw on the inside of the caves to communicate. The drawings were a way to communicate or to express themselves. When discoveries of the drawings were made, no Archaeologist, I believe, thought these drawings were a form of vandalism. Now let’s, fast forward to modern day today, graffiti artist uses spray cans to display communicate versus the traditional artist who uses a paint brush. But, does this make a graffiti artist less of an artist just because he/she uses a spray can and a building to express inner thoughts? I think not.
Within the last few years, graffiti has been deemed an acceptable and tasteful genre of art. Long gone are the days where the spray can belonged exclusively to the local delinquent. From the past to present, there has been a shift in how street art is recognized by the general public and the government. Laws and policies are being put into place that both defend and threaten the promulgation of this creative medium. By both protecting and prohibiting, the government displays an inconsistent and confusing relationship with street art. When art is so subjective, it can become challenging to delineate the fine line between vandalism and creativity. This essay will discuss the changing public perception of graffiti, the trademark and copyright battles between graffiti artists and property owners, the categorization of street art as an artform, and the beneficial aspects of commissioned street murals.
The Graffiti community is, although they will not admit, a bunch of aesthetic filled souls. Everyone gathers recognition in this community. “Graffiti isn't something a normal person does, I have been through a lot of situations just cus I do what I do,” my subject explains. These artist ARE outcasts, for a good. They express culture and it is something they get a feel for. It is brilliant, even with the trouble.
On the contrary, many argue that since unauthorized graffiti is illegal, it is not art, instead it is vandalism. The New York Times insisted that graffiti’s most important quality is the fact it is illegal. However, regardless of its legality, graffiti is art. A flower growing in the “wrong” place is still a flower. Likewise, art in the “wrong” place is still art.
Graffiti is a form of art that people use to express themselves and to convey various messages to people in a particular community. In the movie "Graffiti Verite':. One of the graffiti artist explained that his purpose in doing graffiti is that it allows him to "express his anger' on the wall. Another kid by the name of "Jipsie" said that graffiti is a "form of growth". There were several different explanations that artists shared as well as several different reasons why they like graffiti. The common theme among the graffiti artist and taggers was that graffiti is simply a form of self-expression (Bryan). At the end of the film one tagger made a comment and said, "graffiti is not vandalism, but it is a beautiful crime". This comment did not make sense to me. Committing a crime, a hideous act, is not a beautiful thing to do by any means. Graffiti does not mean people can go around and draw and spray paint on other peoples property. Regardless of what types of graffiti are being expressed by the tagger, this type of self expression is considered vandalism when people decide to draw, destroy, or violate any persons property without consent. As a result of taggers committing the crime of vandalism, property owners, concerned citizens, and law enforcement officers spend too much time, money, and energy trying to put an end to the unlawful act of vandalism.
Ronald, Kramer helps to understand if graffiti is considered as illegal or legal, this article will support my essay because Ronald stress the issues that every graffiti art should be recognized for their work and should be considered as art. I will be using this source to support my idea for my main paragraph Graffiti is also introduced several cultures so they provide a place for graffiti writers to learn and grow their talents.
Although street art and graffiti art seem very similar, upon closer examination the differences in technique, function, culture, and intent are revealed (Weisburg.) ‘“Graffiti (sgraffiti), meaning drawings or scribblings on a flat surface and deriving from the Italian sgraffio (‘scratch’), with a nod to the Greek graphein (‘to write’), originally referred to those marks found on ancient Roman architecture”’(Weisburg). Though, it is unknown when or where graffiti first made an appearance; modern graffiti did not come around until the late 1960’s to early 1970’s in New York. The term “tagging” is the modern form of scratching (Weisburg). It also is considered the origin of all modern graffiti, including street art.
Mention the word graffiti and what typically comes to mind is something unpleasant and distasteful like indecent language scribbled on a wall of a store or crude pictures. Most graffiti is characterized as vandalism on property that does not belong to the culprit. Graffiti also displays negative graphics that promote some type of vulgar message such as violence, sex, drugs, gangs, and racism. On the other hand, when the terms “street” and “art” come together, a blast of colorful creations upon blank slates on the street comes to mind. Although street art is technically considered graffiti, it is a type of graffiti with positive qualities, but certain figures in society find street art to be, in some way, disruptive. If used properly, street art can be appreciated artistically and socially. Despite the negative stigma attached to graffiti, street art has emerged as a progressive valuable art form whose vast history, surge in popularity, and urge for social change warrant its classification as a fine art.
It is a ridiculous belief that just because graffiti is done somewhere without consent, it throws out the notion that it is still art. Sure, the piece of work was done illegally but why can’t the work still be appreciated and enjoyed. Art is art wherever it is found. The location of the piece does not change that. In fact, graffiti can kill two birds with one stone. First, at the foundation it is a form of art. Second, on top of that foundation a message can be erected and directed. But as the saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.