My Parents Killed Santa and Nobody Cared vs. In Defense against Grafitti

Graffiti has been around for more than half a decade and practiced worldwide. However there is debate between whether it is a form of art or vandalism. Graffiti artists’ debate that many do not understand the reason most graffiti artist take the risk of incarceration, fines, injuries, and in some cases death to paint a wall. A graffiti artist can have the simple desire to become recognized, or to create a piece that speaks to their audience as a form of self expression. Because graffiti is associated with gangs and acts of destruction to some many cannot see the history and importance graffiti can have on a worldwide scale. Due to the fact that graffiti is usually produced illegally, meaning it is

Most people can argue that there is a fine distinction between what is recognized as art and vandalism. The individual is often faced with uncertainty when the topic of graffiti arises. The public often portray graffiti as a destructive act towards his or her surroundings however; graffiti can also be considered a form of self-expression. Many questions can be made pertaining to the graffiti movement, but the main question is graffiti a crime or an art? The answers lie in the complex phrase of “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.

If you walk through almost any city, the buildings, bridges, and any other available spaces are seemingly filled with colors, picture, and words that are not part of the original architecture. This graffiti, which is a mix of tags, stencils, pieces, and freestyle, seems to have almost taken over cities across the world. Some of this graffiti, such as tags, are eyesores, but some pieces, such as the High Line “Love Is the Answer” and “Kiss” murals in New York City, are sites that have become iconic pieces of artwork. Unfortunately, pieces like these are also starting to be covered to a seemingly astronomical rate, which is causing outrage among those who visited to them.

The roots of graffiti started about 1971 by a Greek American who tagged “TAKI-183” in all New York subway system, he declared that he “used graffiti to create an identity in which he is certain about” (Fortuna 3), then it emerged all around America and the world. (David 72)

As stated by Taki, an influential graffiti artist when addressing the concern authorities held about his graffiti writing, “Why they go after the little guy? Why not campaign organizations that put stickers all over the subways at election time?” (Chronopoulos 2011, pg. 81). Though, graffiti is deemed as legitimate when it is used to generate profit, which is seen through the recent increased demand for graffiti with the purpose of beautification and gentrification. Evidently, the growing concern over graffiti in public spaces is driven by the conflict graffiti creates when obstructing advertisements, which generate increased consumption and profit. It also demonstrates the lack of tolerance the dominant class has for the promotion of dominance by the lower class. Moreover, constant “public proclamations” which urged people to see graffiti writing as a social safety issue, has certainly influenced the demand for anti-graffiti efforts and the attitudes upper and middle class whites had towards Blacks and Latinos (Chronopoulos 2011, pg. 87)

The policy investigated throughout this project concerns graffiti. Graffiti is seen as a negative gesture towards communities as it signals the presence of gang activity and intimidation. The populace believes that graffiti causes neighborhoods to look unclean and disrespected, allowing others to think it is

This essay discusses whether we should accept graffiti as an art form or if it classes as vandalism, or if there is indeed a distinction between the two. I have decided to address this issue as I have been and am currently exploring graffiti visually in my project. Graffiti is sometimes regarded as an art form by those doing it or who observe it, yet some may see graffiti as a nuisance, and it is frequently associated with anti-social behaviour and gang culture. It is also expensive to remove, estimated in the UK at more than £1billion to remove unwanted graffiti. Therefore, there seems to be a lot of stigma around what graffiti should be classed as and in my essay, I want to explore why graffiti is can always a bad thing, and overall express my opinion of how to a certain extent graffiti can be classed as art. This is demonstrated through identifying and analysing different types of graffiti including tagging, and street art.

Graffiti is a form of art involving writing or drawings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on a wall in public places. Graffiti has also existed back in the Roman Empire and Ancient Greek. During the time of the Catacombs of Rome, graffiti was known as inscriptions, figure drawing that were found on the walls of ancient sepulchers or ruins. The earliest forms of graffiti dated back to 30,000 BCE in the form of prehistoric cave paintings and pictographs using tools such as animal bones and pigments. These illustrations were often placed in ceremonial and sacred locations inside of the caves. In today’s society graffiti is a form of art that expresses underlying social and political messages and a whole

Graffiti is an extremely influential form of “art”, but people all over the world are still trying to decide if it is a crime or an art form.The laws around graffiti are not black and white, they are extremely gray. There are lots of inequalities around the laws of graffiti, and a few world leaders have made some compromises to make graffiti more legal. Graffiti is like a gateway drug, but for crime, there are gangs and crude images, but there are also beautiful murals, inspiring images, not only that, but it is a very creative form of art. Graffiti art is seen differently by everyone, and in addition it can be seen in a positive way as well as a negative one.

Or why would someone draw that. For example, “ [f]or many who catch sight of a tag or a mural on a wall, their glance leads quickly to speculation as to why someone wrote that word or drew an image in such a place” (Halsey & Young, 2006, p.3). Many questions asked and are only answered by, “ [t]he sociality of shared peer activity is another important reason why writers are attracted to graffiti culture” ( Halsey & Young, 2006, p.4). “Academic writing on graffiti has approached it in a number of ways, encompassing its analysis as sociological subculture, as juvenile delinquency, as a historical phenomenon and as a regulatory problem” (Halsey & Young, 2006, p.2). There is said that many young adults like to do graffiti art because it causes a rush through there body they get. A reaction that feels good enough for them to express themselves over graffiti. A theory was shared, “[b]roken windows theory,” which holds that low-level and petty crimes, if not addressed, create an atmosphere conductive to more serious and violent crimes” (Chan, 2009, p.2). Many believe if they do not stop crimes young or discipline kids at a young age it cause more violent people in the future. Graffiti is not just a crime in many ways it is more than people see it as just like shared, “ I'm not trying to make an argument that graffiti is art and not vandalism,” Professor snyder said in a phone interview, “I hope I’ve made it clear that it’s both” (Chan, 2009, p.2). “[t]he shifting threshold between ‘art’ and ‘vandalism’: writers’ reactions to ‘blank’ surfaces and ‘clean’ spaces, with other criminal activities” (Halsey & Young, 2006, p.2). Every empty place is a new canvas for an artist for someone who looks to

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.

There is a common misconception amongst individuals in society pertaining to the origin of graffiti. Many people assume that the first tag was developed along with the hip-hop movement in Bronx, New York, though it actually derived in the city of brotherly love, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Although, the concept of graffiti was first established by street gangs and political activists, both who used graffiti as a form of expression portraying their views and their property (Reichert). It wasn’t until the late 1960’s that the initial wave of this underground art movement emerged in Philadelphia. The graffitists credited with the first conscious tags were “Cornbread” and “Cool Earl”. These writers covered the city with their names, gaining popularity among the community and local press. It’s uncertain whether this concept traveled to New York City intentionally or if it simply was a spontaneous occurrence, but shortly after “Cornbread” within the Washington Heights section of Manhattan graffiti enthusiasts emerged on the scene (Reichert).

In modern societies, there are ongoing debates among multiple stakeholders regarding the nature and acceptability of graffiti as a sustainable and decent art form. Having gained immense popularity in urban environments, graffiti has always been on the verge between art and vandalism. The reason for such controversial perceptions lies in the definition of graffiti and its origins. As Campos defines it, “graffiti and street art could be considered a practice through which individuals appropriate the city” and whose nature “is consistently described as subversive” (Campos, 2015, p. 17) and illicit. That is, the subculture of graffiti implies the element of illicit artistic expression placed in public view. While the original purpose of graffiti – as the practice was born in Philadelphia of the 1960s – was tagging through specific styles of writing and lettering, further development of the culture (Mettler, 2012, p. 252). At the same time, development of graffiti form lettering focused on the writer’s name to more elaborate forms including imagery and – as street art – making it the focus have raised even more debate regarding graffiti. This essay will argue that graffiti is a decent form of visual art involving skills, artistic vision and sociocultural context: that is, not all graffiti works are vandalism, for many of them occupy public spaces with the purpose of decoration or communication of socially significant messages. As an example, the graffiti created by Futura

Graffiti used as means to express opinion and to send messages about social, economic and political issues.

There is an argument for the status of graffiti as an art form. In the point of view, graffiti has nothing to do with the destruction of property or willingness to commit crimes, but with the want and the need to create something new that everyone can see. Those who take this view regard graffiti as “an attempt to beautify or improve public spaces without first obtaining public approval” (Abel). Whilst it is true that graffiti is considered art, by nature of painting and creating, it is also vandalism. Vandalism is a deliberate alteration of public or private