Essay Graffiti: Art or Vandalism?
1139 Words5 Pages
Art: the ultimate form of self expression. But, what constitutes an art? And, who decides? These very questions plague society as it tries to decide and define the official status of graffiti--art or vandalism? Because it has found its way into art galleries and because of the community of artists who challenge and inspire each other, graffiti should be considered art and as a way to express oneself.
The origin and history of graffiti is not what one might expect. Believed to have been created by a Philadelphia high school student named Cornbread in 1967, it was a bold effort to catch the attention of a girl (De Melker). In this same time period, graffiti sprung up in New York as well. It was “one among many forms of social protest” during…show more content…
Many cities view graffiti as dirty and worthless; for example, the city of San Antonio has arranged an anti-graffiti campaign in which the city boldly states “graffiti is ugly” (“Graffiti”). This attitude towards graffiti and the obsession with ridding cities of graffiti sparked the ever-present negative outlook on the craft, spoiling its artistic value.
This negative shadow on the art form of graffiti has caused the decline of the graffiti movement. As many have predicted, “graffiti may eventually disappear” (“The Writing's on the Wall; Graffiti”). Graffiti has already begun to dwindle from what was once a flourishing art movement, to an almost disesteemed hobby. However, a soiled reputation is not the only culprit in the murder of authentic graffiti. The occupation of the current generation with technology and social media has caused many artists to focus solely on selling their work and gaining attention through social networking platforms. Another, perhaps more common, reason for the decline is the improvement of police work and punishments for those indulging in the illegal form of graffiti (“The Writing's on the Wall; Graffiti”). Because of this decline in authentic and prohibited graffiti, artists have channeled their work into new forms and established their own artistic community. As graffiti recently transitioned to a more respectable art form, it developed a more respectable name: street art.
While I thought the matter had been settled by better people than I, a friend just asked me about graffiti, thus obligating me to write up a bit about it.
In regards to the question of whether or not graffiti is art, my stock response is to ask “is painting art?” This response is not intended to be flippant, rather it indicates my actual view on the matter which is a serious philosophical position.
Contemporary graffiti is, by its nature, a form of painting. After all, the person creating the graffiti (typically) uses the methods and material of painting (although the paint is typically spray paint). As such, specific examples of graffiti would be assessed as art or not art by the same standards by which a painting would be assessed. For example, a crude tagging involving a person spray painting his/her name on the hood of your car would no more be art than it would be for a person to sign his/her name on a canvas using a brush. As another example, if the ghost of da Vinci manifested and grabbed spray paint to create a work on par with Mona Lisa masterfully on the side of a business, then that would have the same status as the Mona Lisa, at least in terms of being art or not. Thus, given that graffiti is essentially painting it follows that it is as much art as painting is or is not. In fact, given that graffiti involves the very same techniques and mediums as “conventional” painting, the burden of proof would seem to be on those who would deny that graffiti is (or more accurately, can be) art while maintaining that painting is art.
One common objection is that graffiti is not art because it is vandalism and hence a criminal act. While it is true that it can be vandalism and a criminal act, these facts would not seem to have a bearing on its status of being art. The mere fact that something is illegal or classified as vandalism hardly seems sufficient to make something fall outside of the realm of art. After all, imagine a state in which music was a criminal act and labeled as a vandalism of the public sound space. It would hardly follow that music would thus cease to be art. As such, this objection fails.
Another common objection is that graffiti is crude or simplistic and hence cannot be considered art. The obvious reply, to steal from Aristotle, is that not all graffiti is to be condemned, just that which is crude or simplistic. After all, music would not be considered non-art simply because some musicians create crude or simplistic music. The same should hold for graffiti as well.
Thus, graffiti is as much art as painting is or is not.
[ viagra available in india | viagra in canada | viagra pill splitter | alternative viagra drug | purchase sildenafil citrate | viagra free trial pack | viagra order cheap | purchasing cialis | cialis profesional | viagra for sale | viagra without prescription | buy cheap generic viagra | free consultation viagra | viagra england | 5 mg original brand cialis | bruising on cialis | viagra patent | cialis soft | lowest price viagra | cialis samples | herbal viagra | brand viagra over the net | p2 pharmacy uk | buy discount viagra | buy viagra 50 mg | pfizer female viagra | cialis next day delivery | viagra online pharmacy | bad side effects of viagra | viagra wholesalers | cialis for sale | viagra vs cialis | viagra uk | cheap onlinecom order viagra | canadian viagra 50mg | generic viagra pay pal | 50mg generic viagra | viagra online pharmacy usa | female viagra pills | best viagra | cheapest prices for viagra | viagra information | cialis fast delivery usa | suppliers of viagra in uk | viagra pay after delivery | cialis canadian pharmacy | recreational viagra use | viagra use | purchasing viagra in canada | cialis testimonial | index | cialis 20 mg | cialis brand | purchase viagra online ]
PhilosophyAerosol paint, aristotle, Graffiti, Mona Lisa, Paint, Spray painting, Subcultures, Vandalism