Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

"Graffiti is not art, it's crime," - Tony Blair


What do you think about graffiti art? The professional one. Do you think its art, or is it a vandalism?

I dont think graffiti is vandalism, i generaly believe its art, just outside the studio or museum. But closed minded idiots like Tony Blair come out with sentences like the one above due to the ignorance!

I hate when people think that making something illegal will solve all problems!

I dont believe graffiti should be banned. Not at all. The tag-graffiti should be controled, i agree, but banning it all together is like banning a style of art.

Thoughts?

Well, I rather think he came to that conclusion by opinion, Lil, not ignorance. I think it is rather vicious to try and write it off as such.

Graffiti is inflicted upon people, on public property, whether they want it or not. And a very large amount do not. So it is entirely appropritate to label it criminal.

It is a wide term, of course, and if done in a more formal manner it has as much right to be art as anything else- but the modern day phenomenon of graffiti is a public nuisance.

I think it definitely is art, it's only vandalism when it is used to destroy other people's property I don't think anyone can define what is not art

and I don't like Tony Blair anyway

So if someone shoots someone dead and calls it art no-one has the right to say otherwise? That's ridiculous thinking. If done in a criminal manner it does not deserve to come under the banner of art as is generally recognised.

Well statues are art, are they not? They are on public property are they not? So why not ban them, why not bann everything everywhere in case someone gets offended?!

Statues cannot be put up on public property without legal permisison, can they? You cannot just randomly build one. The point is that graffiti is inflicted by people on others without any form of process.

Art forum

There are people who are being payed to draw such things. How can you just make it illegal all together, just because there are some tag-graffiti arround?

The point is that making it illegal is certanly isnt going to get rid of the problem. People who draw tag-graffiti will do it regardelss of wheterh its legal or illegal.

Graffiti is vandalism for me. And yeah, I agree. ART FORUM!

Lil

If they are being paid and they are going through the correct process, then no-one is complaining!

And making murder illegal doesn't necessarily stop it. That's hardly the point! If it is wrong, it should be made illegal, so that perpetrators can be punished if caught.

Right on the spot Ushgarak. That's why is call Graffitti and not art. I can understand an artist trying to express his/her artistic gift on public. But to damage other ppl property with gang logos or thugs names is unacceptable. I can also see the rule getting bend a little. For example, chalk artists who draw on the streets. It's art and it's chalk eventually it will wash away.

Many cities like Los Angeles and New York have been trying to put a stop to gang thugs from spray painting walls and murals on the streets. But it keeps getting worse everytime. There have been new laws prohibit (sp?) the sale of spray cans to ppl under the age of 18. So far there have been some improvements. There have been fewer reports of Graffitti in commercial areas of the city.

In my view its criminal when its on public property or private property or anywere not wanted or permited. Besides who wants a park or a public place too be graffied and vandalised? I dont realy care if its legal or banned not my problem, but Just like Ush said its all a part process.
Also if your paid to do the job then it would be legal. Also making actions that are wrong illegal is the only things that keep criminals at bay. If everything were legal there would 100 times more criminal activity than there is today.

WD you either havent read my thread, or you have missed the point of it, or you dont know the differance between tag-graffiti and art-graffiti!

Actually, there are places in New York and LA where there are places allowed for painting in people's memorry for example.

I dont get how/why is this vandalism that deserves to be made illegal?

http://www.graffiti.org/index/graffiti_lodzi_zdjecie_wp.jpg


And Neo Version 7, im not talking about the graffiti as a goddamned art and its beauty of it or whatever im talking about the idea thats currently on the news in UK about making it it illegal altogether.

depends on what kind of grafiti...

But if it is permitted under official projects it isn't being termed vandalism any more, is it?

Which is exactly the point, i was trying to make Ush. They are wanting to bann it all together.

Im all for the banning of tagging, but not approved art-graffiti.

Err... no, they are not banning that, Lil, so your point is kinda lost.

Erm..yes they are. I have just read the news and listened to them before i made a thread.

There wouldnt be an argument going on currently, if they are only banning the tagging.

They have to get permits from the City, the community, and the owner in order to make those memorials. That's acceptable and legal. When a thug does it without a permit he is breaking the law. No matter how artistic the mural might be without a permit is illegal and is consider criminal.

Sorry Tex, didnt mean to ignore you


Im ot talking about the art of graffiti, just about the debaite thats currently going on in UK about making it illegal

Sorry, Lil, but you are wrong. Only public nuisance graffiti is going to cracked down upon. The type that WD describes above is OBVIOUSLY fine.

graffiti can sometimes look cool but it's vandalism and i don't agree with it

depeends...if they are alouded to do it..it sometimes look cool...but sadly most of the time its vandalism

when done on a wall (mural) or canvas....it's art.

When done on a freeway overpass or wall dividing a road from a freeway...it's vandalism...no matter how nice the picture is...

The way I interpret it:
What Lil posted is a Mural. Murals are accepted forms of art.
Graffiti is vandalism, and should be punished as such.

What Lil posted could not be Graffiti because there is no way that could have been done without the athorities being notified.

True Tptmanno1, however, no drawings of such will be allowed.

Even the Greenpeace has been critisised because of the drawings on the wall, even though they are no crminals.

I just re-read the news, and they are not wanthing the drawings on the wall whatsoever. Which is a shame.

Obvioulsy, tag-graffiti shouldnt be allowed, it never was in the first place.

As is usually the case around here, the question is too open ended.

Graffitti is definitely a form of art, no question. Whether or not its vandalism depends on where you put it. The 70 year old shop-owner may not like the bomb you drop on his wall, no matter how well done it is. On the other hand, that same shop-owner may commision an artist to beautify that same wall.

I think that if they get permission by the owner of whatever tehy want to draw on, then it's perfectly fine and can be considered art.

If some dumbass gang member writes something like "Liz wuz here" on an over pass, then it's not art, it's a crime.

graffiti is vandalism. How would you like to build a nice wall outside your house, spend a heap painting it and then about a week later some idiot comes along a writes their name all over it!

Exactly

And its because of those idiots that they are not going allow any kind of writings on the walls, permitted or not.

as backfire said. some stoopid punk a$$w!pe spraying paint all over the city bridges and structures deserves to be arrested for vandalism. but what lil b showed on the previous page was pretty impressive. to concieve and materialize a concept like that requires skills... mad skills. spraying "i'm a gangsta" under a bridge is way beyond stoopid... any two year old with a spray paint can do that.

Art

to me if you scrawl i fuked..... here 9t9 then its graffiti that shudnt be there but at my sk8 park theres a wall with a big symbol saying leek crew and that looks really respectable and fits in wit the surroundings...


so to me its the area and wat itses that matters

depends on the type

yup

If the owner gives permission to paint on their building why is it called art-graffiti?......isnt graffiti vandalism? and doesnt vandalism mean to distory property why dont they just call it art?
I think that if the owner is saying your allowed to paint on their wall then its ok. Its dumb that they want to get rid of that too because seriously who complains about that? its like saying go take all paintings off the walls and close art galleries cause people might get offended. its when people go and do it without any permisson its not right.

they explained why they want to out-law it?

yup ..

graffity is udoubtly art. but some people do "graffity" like strange and ugly notes on buildings. it isn't graffity!

art that is not sanctioned by a city which infringes on private property is not art but a blotch in the landscape...whether they're burners or taglines...graffiti done on canvas and in galleries is another story...and to those who call these artists as sellouts are deluding themselves in thinking theirs is true art when done on the side of a wall or over a freeway sign...where's the logic in that???

i think graffiti is vandalism

can't it be both?

i think its both cuz some is good and some is bad

I believe some graffiti is as much art as any painting.
In fact I love looking at it, and find it more stimulating and expressive then alot of things in an art gallery.

I think that yes, there should be boundries placed on it like anything else, too much of a good thing is still too much, but I don't think outlawing it altogether is a solution.

And I am thinking of tasteful graffiti, not the vulgar words or phrases found sometimes

It depends on:

1) The intention behind the act
2) The place inwhich said act was carried out


It can be both




Now who watches too much Family Guy?

Recently i went to London there's tons of graffiti some of it is crap
and some of it is amazing art, what would say?tank

The cool stuff is cool. ermm

when done properly and taken time over, it can be truly incredible, and/or put out a good political message. however, the small scrawls you get are rubbish.

I've been to London a couple of times and once there was a piece of graffiti about 3 blocks from 10 Downing street that said "Cops are smelly..." always thought that was great.

Originally posted by Bloigen
I've been to London a couple of times and once there was a piece of graffiti about 3 blocks from 10 Downing street that said "Cops are smelly..." always thought that was great.

I live in London it's all shit. "Street Art" says it all. Give out the ASBOs and curfews please Mr Blair!!!

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
"Graffiti is not art, it's crime," - Tony Blair


What do you think about graffiti art? The professional one. Do you think its art, or is it a vandalism?

I dont think graffiti is vandalism, i generaly believe its art, just outside the studio or museum. But closed minded idiots like Tony Blair come out with sentences like the one above due to the ignorance!

I hate when people think that making something illegal will solve all problems!

I dont believe graffiti should be banned. Not at all. The tag-graffiti should be controled, i agree, but banning it all together is like banning a style of art.

Thoughts?

Tagging is an art, ey.

Technically its also vandalism, since its illegal.

Graffitti can be both obviously. But the point Blair was probably trying to make is that to spray something on public property without permission is vandalism..which....it is.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Graffitti can be both obviously. But the point Blair was probably trying to make is that to spray something on public property without permission is vandalism..which....it is.
Indeed, I say fill Britains Prisons Mr Blair, Oh you have, well fill them some more. What do you mean no room?

ASBOs all round, tag the Chavs!!!!

Like many sensible people have said; Nobody is denying that some graffiti is great, but if it's done where it's not allowed, it's vandalism.

Nobody is saying vandalism can't look good in the form of graffiti, just that it is, in fact, vandalism.

-AC

If graffitti is treated like art, it is. If tis treated like vandalism, it is.

I myself have done graffitti. I always do it in non-permenant materials, but I know people who use permenant materials.

Scrawling your name or gang symbols is not art. Art has a message...and a lot of graffitti does. It is still art, even if its not on your property.

I know people who have done graffitti art on buildings and the owners have decided to keep it. True graffitti SHOULD be on someone elses property.

Originally posted by Alliance
Scrawling your name or gang symbols is not art.

Um, yeah it is.

Originally posted by Alliance
Art has a message

Exactly, which contradicts what you said above.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Um, yeah it is.



Exactly, which contradicts what you said above.
Do you "tag" things homie?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Um, yeah it is.



Exactly, which contradicts what you said above.

Though I'd say gang symbols can be called "art" I might also add that he said Art has a message not that something with a message is always art.

By the way, npot sure about the "Art has a message" part either.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Though I'd say gang symbols can be called "art"

Of course, they perfectly fit the definition of art.

Originally posted by The Libertine
Do you "tag" things homie?

Not any more.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Of course, they perfectly fits the definition of art.



Not any more. That being?

Originally posted by Bardock42
That being?

Tagging is another word for "graffitti art by using spray paint".

Honestly, how do you not know that?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Tagging is another word for "graffitti art by using spray paint".

Honestly, how do you not know that?

He isn't from the hood like us blood.

Originally posted by The Libertine
Indeed, I say fill Britains Prisons Mr Blair, Oh you have, well fill them some more. What do you mean no room?

ASBOs all round, tag the Chavs!!!!

Well said.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Tagging is an art, ey.

Technically its also vandalism, since its illegal.
I like this, this is interesting.

So it is only vandalism, because it is illegal? What if braking windows was not illegal, would that still be vandalism?
What is vandalism then? Only things which are illegal?

Interesting stuff. Im interested in what you think.

.....


Obviously graffiti artists are a whole underground subculture. To paint something somewhere, you need permission (at least in Brighton you do) but they are trying to re-name it 'aerosol art' which of course none of the artists want.

There is a lot around Brighton, and they are beautiful...but unfortunately still illegal.
Council does not like it, thats why they are thinking of re-naming it. Then it will be ok. As long as its not called ''graffiti''

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
"Graffiti is not art, it's crime," - Tony Blair


What do you think about graffiti art? The professional one. Do you think its art, or is it a vandalism?

I dont think graffiti is vandalism, i generaly believe its art, just outside the studio or museum. But closed minded idiots like Tony Blair come out with sentences like the one above due to the ignorance!

I hate when people think that making something illegal will solve all problems!

I dont believe graffiti should be banned. Not at all. The tag-graffiti should be controled, i agree, but banning it all together is like banning a style of art.

Thoughts? graffiti is like interupting someone's speech at a ceromony dedicated to them. It's rude and ntrusive and not very nice. You could argue graffiti is art, but interupting someone's speech is expressing yourself.

It should be illegal, but not to the extreme.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Tagging is another word for "graffitti art by using spray paint".

Honestly, how do you not know that? Originally posted by The Libertine
He isn't from the hood like us blood.

I ****ing hate you guys.

So, back to my actual question:



That being?

Originally posted by The Libertine
He isn't from the hood like us blood.

Did you just call me "blood"?

Que lindo, guey?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
So it is only vandalism, because it is illegal? What if braking windows was not illegal, would that still be vandalism?
What is vandalism then? Only things which are illegal?


Vandalism is defacing property that isn't yours, so yeah, breaking a window is vandalism.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Obviously graffiti artists are a whole underground subculture. To paint something somewhere, you need permission (at least in Brighton you do) but they are trying to re-name it 'aerosol art' which of course none of the artists want.

There is a lot around Brighton, and they are beautiful...but unfortunately still illegal.
Council does not like it, thats why they are thinking of re-naming it. Then it will be ok. As long as its not called ''graffiti''

"Aerosol art"???? What the ****!

Originally posted by Bardock42
That being?

Gang symbols.

ARGH

My, slow minded, latino friend....what is your definition of art?

Originally posted by Bardock42
ARGH

My, slow minded, latino friend....what is your definition of art?

Using the imagination to express toughts or ideas in abstract ways.

One thing I don't like is the frivalous use of the word "Art". Like if someone gives an orangatan a brush and an easel, and the ape goes crazy and makes messy blotches every where, and then that's called "art".

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Using the imagination to express toughts or ideas in abstract ways.

One thing I don't like is the frivalous use of the word "Art". Like if someone gives an orangatan a brush and an easel, and the ape goes crazy and makes messy blotches every where, and then that's called "art".

How abstract? Are books art?

Originally posted by Bardock42
How abstract? Are books art?

Visual and sound, primarily.

Art can be literary too. Depends on the book: a car owner's manual? no, but a poetry book? sure.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Visual and sound, primarily.

Art can be literary too. Depends on the book: a car owner's manual? no, but a poetry book? sure.

Okay...though still slightly broad, I'd say.

Some Graffiti is art, but most of it is no different then marking. Instead of piss, we use spray pain.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Some Graffiti is art, but most of it is no different then marking. Instead of piss, we use spray pain.

That was a dumb comparison.

Graffiti murals take a lot of time, skill, and precision and are clearly art. I can't believe you just compared that to taking a piss.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
That was a dumb comparison.

Graffiti murals take a lot of time, skill, and precision and are clearly art. I can't believe you just compared that to taking a piss.


You did not read what I wrote!

"Some Graffiti is art," Graffiti murals fit within that "some".

"but most of it is no different then marking."

Animals spend a lot of their resources in marking their territory.

"Instead of piss, we use spray pain." This is me making fun of my own statement.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
"Graffiti is not art, it's crime," - Tony Blair


What do you think about graffiti art? The professional one. Do you think its art, or is it a vandalism?

I dont think graffiti is vandalism, i generaly believe its art, just outside the studio or museum. But closed minded idiots like Tony Blair come out with sentences like the one above due to the ignorance!

I hate when people think that making something illegal will solve all problems!

I dont believe graffiti should be banned. Not at all. The tag-graffiti should be controled, i agree, but banning it all together is like banning a style of art.

Thoughts?

Drawing, coloring, scribbling or painting, whatever you want to call it on property that does not belong to you without permission of the owner is a crime.

Would you be alright if the worlds best graffiti artist painted a picture all over the side of your car or house? Would you still call it "artistic freedom" then?

Originally posted by -hh-
depends on what kind of grafiti...


You're absolutely right. For me, that's what it all comes down to. I think graffiti can be art, and when done tastefully it should be allowed to appear on just about any surface that isn't dedicated to some other function. Some of the graffiti I've seen is really great, even if it's only writing.

However, not all graffiti looks like the picture posted by lil B. A lot of it is little more than bathroom stall chicken scratch and personal attacks that mean nothing to anyone that will ever read it.

So unfortunately this is a case where the negatives outweigh the positives. If everyone who picked up a can of spray paint and coloured a brick wall next to a parking lot did so in a tasteful manner(which is subjective) no one would have an issue with it. But they don't. (speaking of which, the picture you posted lil' B would have been approved or sanctioned by the city government of the town in which the mural appears. I don't think there are a lot of vandals with scaffolding)

Originally posted by Bardock42
How abstract? Are books art?

Put them in a pile light them with a match and I bet you win the Turner prize, particularly given your own cultural context for this action.

Originally posted by The Libertine
Put them in a pile light them with a match and I bet you win the Turner prize, particularly given your own cultural context for this action.
Funny, you sure have to make me certain, don't you?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Funny, you sure have to make me certain, don't you?

About books being art? Of course!

banksy...enough said

http://www.banksy.co.uk/

Originally posted by jaden101
banksy...enough said

http://www.banksy.co.uk/

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Um, yeah it is.



Exactly, which contradicts what you said above.

No, it does not contradict.

Explain how tagging involves skill, message, and thought.

Originally posted by Alliance
No, it does not contradict.

Explain how tagging involves skill, message, and thought.

Skill = hanging upside down off a ten story building and not hurting yourself or getting caught by the Police.

Message = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Thought = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Simple Blood. Big Up.

Originally posted by The Libertine
Skill = hanging upside down off a ten story building and not hurting yourself or getting caught by the Police.

Message = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Thought = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Simple Blood. Big Up.

It might be simple blood, but you're going to have to explain it in simple english if you'd like the rest of us to understand.

Originally posted by The Libertine
Skill = hanging upside down off a ten story building and not hurting yourself or getting caught by the Police.

Message = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Thought = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Simple Blood. Big Up.

Just what I thouhgt.

Tagging is not art.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Well, I rather think he came to that conclusion by opinion, Lil, not ignorance. I think it is rather vicious to try and write it off as such.

Graffiti is inflicted upon people, on public property, whether they want it or not. And a very large amount do not. So it is entirely appropritate to label it criminal.

It is a wide term, of course, and if done in a more formal manner it has as much right to be art as anything else- but the modern day phenomenon of graffiti is a public nuisance.
good point...not to mention that when a rival gang sees another gang tagging their hood, it leads to bloodshed. all over spraypaint.

Originally posted by The Libertine
Skill = hanging upside down off a ten story building and not hurting yourself or getting caught by the Police.

Message = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Thought = Keep the **** off our turf esse

Simple Blood. Big Up.

It might be possible you are joking, but if not - that seems to reiterate the whole "tagging is generally a load of crap"

Skill - yes, driving up insurance and sending people into shock when a tagger plunges to his death isn't skillful. It has happened in Australia and all it does is cause heartache and trouble. Of course for that taggers news one of them got squashed by a train or fell of a bridge just makes it all the more exciting. Little thought for how the train driver who couldn't do anything as the train took out the tagger felt about the whole thing.

Generally when I think great art I think the art itself, not the stupid, dangerous ways in which an artist went about making it.

Message & Thought - since gangs or groups don't own parts of a city, beyond their own homes, they have no right to be proclaiming such things in an eyesore of a way, upon others property. It isn't their turf.

Really I think intent and the like is important. Graffiti art is just that - graffiti art. Back in my old home town there was an area filled with walls put their specifically for graffiti use. And some artists made the most amazing images - I would call them art. They'd come in, and it would be mind blowing. Of course it was disgusting when some amazing piece would then be defaced because some person "tagged" all over it - nothing more then scrawled names and things that read like badly spelled rap lyircs.

If a person has artistic intentions and it is legal then graffiti art can be pretty amazing. Tagging some Asian shop keepers store front or messing up the inside of a train is not art. It is damaging property, it is little more then thoughtless destruction, even more so when it is some scrawl like my little brother used to make on paper back in kindergarded - which is exactly what a lot of tags look like. It is simply the taggers trying to add legitimacy to their pointless rebellion or gang pride by making out society is out to get them by persecuting their "art."

grafitt is not a crime cause it's cool. plus just cause it's outside the museum doesn't make it a crime wtf tony blair, hardass. plus some of the pictures look pretty awesome

but what about the violence it leads to?

Originally posted by homer2.0
grafitt is not a crime cause it's cool. plus just cause it's outside the museum doesn't make it a crime wtf tony blair, hardass. plus some of the pictures look pretty awesome

"Because it's cool" - yes, legal systems should run on "coolness" factors, shouldn't they? I have heard stealing a car, going hooning and then dumping it is considered extremely cool by some... that is the people stealing the car, not the people whose car has been stolen.

Just like graffiti is cool for those doing it, not always for those whose property is vandalised, those who have to clean it off and those who have to see ugly scrawls all over walls and trains.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
"Because it's cool" - yes, legal systems should run on "coolness" factors, shouldn't they? I have heard stealing a car, going hooning and then dumping it is considered extremely cool by some... that is the people stealing the car, not the people whose car has been stolen.

tagging is an art..it depends what type of tagging someone is doing


watch the movie "Style Wars"...it's a class documentary about tagging in nyc in the 70's and 80's. It explores this exact same subject and after I watched it I came to the conclusion that depending on what kind of tags are done it is an artform

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
"Because it's cool" - yes, legal systems should run on "coolness" factors, shouldn't they? I have heard stealing a car, going hooning and then dumping it is considered extremely cool by some... that is the people stealing the car, not the people whose car has been stolen.

Just like graffiti is cool for those doing it, not always for those whose property is vandalised, those who have to clean it off and those who have to see ugly scrawls all over walls and trains.

Thats why graffitti artists need to be more sensative about what they are doing. If you're gonna paint a traincar, do something nice...not bubble letters.

I prefer to use temporary media, charchol or spraychalk. Don't piss people off as much.

does "tagging" to you mean gang tags, or simply an artist expressing themselves?

Here it means leaving an alias or trademark of some kind.

-AC

Originally posted by Alliance
Thats why graffitti artists need to be more sensative about what they are doing. If you're gonna paint a traincar, do something nice...not bubble letters.

I prefer to use temporary media, charchol or spraychalk. Don't piss people off as much.

Exactly. Hell, often over here bubble letters can seem high class compared to the "intelligible scrawl" that is so popular amongst the youth who do it.

Generally I like the real graffiti artists who do amazing things in their medium. I have little love for the down and out taggers, especially the uncreative kind.

Originally posted by Alliance
Explain how tagging involves skill, message, and thought.

Skill? Because not everyone can do it. Not everyone can create a beautiful mural, placa, or even a simple two-tone word without screwing up by accidently leaving excess paint which cause it to slugde (build up) and ruins the entire thing. Can you?

There's always a message behind tagging words, phrases and symbols. Hell, even murals, which are mainly for visual appeal, often have a message behind them. And they're typically subtitled.

^ Which also includes and encourages thought.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
does "tagging" to you mean gang tags, or simply an artist expressing themselves?

Yes. But like many other aspects of gang culture, tagging has crossed-over from it and has become popular among civillians (non-gangsters).

But so you know; yes, tagging has its origins with gangs.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Here it means leaving an alias or trademark of some kind.

-AC



So? Does that make it right, legitimate, or tasteful?

No. Thaty's why it isn't allowed.

I think it depends on the type of graffiti. If we are talking about tagging, this is in no way 'art', because, quite frankly, it looks like a mess. (Actually, it IS a mess)

Other graffiti, in my opinion, is fantastic.

On the rare (and I mean rare) occasions in which I travel by train to Melbourne, I often see graffiti, often on old warehouses, people's old, wooden gates, and the backs of shops/stores. Much of it is tagging, just scrawl. A name, or nickname, as if to say, 'I was here, this is my mark'. It looks awful.

However, sometimes I see graffiti that, honestly, blows me away. The use of color, pattern. Not everyone would see it the way I do, and that is understandable. Sometimes I wonder about the kids who do this. Are they aware they have such a talent for art?

Perhaps, in some minds, graffiti isn't art, but many graffiti 'artists' do have a talent. I would love if these kids had a place to show it off.

Such ideas have been thrown around for ages, but nothing ever come of it. If these kids had somewhere to go, somewhere to graffiti as much as they liked, maybe we wouldn't have so much of it.

Originally posted by The Libertine


laugh you may...but banky started as a graffiti artist and is now considered one of the UK's best artists

his last exhibition of street art is just amazing

http://noisydecentgraphics.typepad.com/design/images/banksy.jpg
http://www.eskimoblood.de/wp-images/blog/banksy.jpg
http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/whatever.jpg

or what about Julien Beever's pavement art...is that to be considered a crime or a nuisance

http://zarius.com/neato/pavement-art/batman-robin.jpg
http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/mosaic.jpg
http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/waterfall.jpg

Originally posted by jaden101
laugh you may...but banky started as a graffiti artist and is now considered one of the UK's best artists

his last exhibition of street art is just amazing

http://noisydecentgraphics.typepad.com/design/images/banksy.jpg
http://www.eskimoblood.de/wp-images/blog/banksy.jpg
http://www.banksy.co.uk/outdoors/images/whatever.jpg

or what about Julien Beever's pavement art...is that to be considered a crime or a nuisance

http://zarius.com/neato/pavement-art/batman-robin.jpg
http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/mosaic.jpg
http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/waterfall.jpg Awesome!

Julien Beever is kind of a ****ing genius if ya ask me. I would think his work would be sanctioned.

That's some amazing Graffiti, posted up there.

IMO, Graffiti can be art or vandalism, it all depends on where you do it. Like in a public place people have to pass every day, it's vandalism but if it's like a junk yard or something, it's cool.

Basically, you shouldn't draw or write on stuff that you don't own.

Heres the facts. While the "art" might be VERY nice and the person who did it might be very talented, if that person does it on something that is not his or her property, and the people who's property it is do not want it there, then its a criminal act. You cant do something to someone else's property without proper consent from the owner of that said property, it makes no difference how "pretty" or how "awesome" it might be. Defiling someone else's property without consent is criminal.

graffiti is both art and vandalisim. think this can be used as i dont know to paint a picture for a school or w/e. the vandalism part of this is the gang shit. grafitti can be used both ways its just how you use it.

Grafitti is definitely art. Not the stupid gang tags that are everywhere, the actual good stuff. I don't think it should be legalized because that would kill its whole charm, but I do think building owners should be pressured by the public to keep any Mona Lisa's on their walls.

Graffiti should be legalised and liscenced. As in, you need a liscence to do it. Like a job.

I think its okay as long as its not offensive to people or directly on their property... but the some of them are incredibly artistic and it sometimes adds character to an area.

jaden101's post: I like the waterfall and Batman one, really distorts your perception.

Both, nothing much to explain..Someone is creating a work of art..but at the same time destroying a piece of property..unless it's theres..scared

Depending which city you live in, most property can only benefit aesthetically from decent graffiti. Buildings are ugly

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
I think its okay as long as its not offensive to people or directly on their property... but the some of them are incredibly artistic and it sometimes adds character to an area.

jaden101's post: I like the waterfall and Batman one, really distorts your perception. And you have permission.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Graffiti should be legalised and liscenced. As in, you need a liscence to do it. Like a job.

I dont agree. The fact that it is illegal adds to the thrill of it. It also adds to the satisfaction when you've completed the tagging, so the next day you can anonymously drive by it and think to yourself 'Yeah, I did that!'.

I firmly believe that if it was legalized (in the U.S. anyways) its popularity and prevalence would decrease dramatically.

99% of graffiti is absolute trash vandalism. Those other pictures are art because they have an undiscernable-albeit-evident value.

Originally posted by FeceMan
99% of graffiti is absolute trash vandalism. Those other pictures are art because they have an undiscernable-albeit-evident value.

Well if that isn't a generalization if I ever heard one...

WEST SIDE 4 LYFE

Grafitti is definitely art, but if it defaces old buildings that are historical then it is vandalism and it is vandalism if it is done in unwanted places. Good artists will know where their graffiti is wanted and where it shouldn't be. xD

I cosider most Graffiti to be art unless it's offensive or on something historical.

i like graffiti... it makes things look more interesting..

While some people are creative, if it's done without permission, it's vandalism.

sure its art. but its also vandalism

Originally posted by leonheartmm
sure its art. but its also vandalism

Not much more to say than that.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
sure its art. but its also vandalism

I would be more specific that it can be art and vandalism.



To paraphrase Doug Stanhope again after less than ten minutes

Art is a word much like love that doesn't mean anything. The Mona Lisa and the butter knife in ass joke on stage are "art". It doesn't say anything.

^ i just realised that "bardock" rhymes with "buttock" . have a nice day buttock42 .

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^ i just realised that "bardock" rhymes with "buttock" . have a nice day buttock42 .

so does big cock...never thought of that did you?...DID YOU?

why am i saying this?

^ yes yes, go on inflating his already large and translucent head.

the car park by the recreational centre nearish my house was covered in graffiti, the sorta typical swearing **** swansea or someone loves someone sorta graffiti
but now its been cahnged and teh graffiti was done by actual artists i think...it looks amazing now!

so i think graffiti is art, but it can be abused

Originally posted by Ushgarak

Graffiti is inflicted upon people, on public property, whether they want it or not. And a very large amount do not. So it is entirely appropritate to label it criminal.



Exactly. It is a crime to deface public or other peoples private property. Not to mention that most graffiti looks like utter shit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7125611.stm

a link to some of banksy's new work on the west bank

and julian beever's new pieces

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7125611.stm

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/stilllife.jpg

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/independence.html

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/rafting.html

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/transformers1.jpg

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/images/world.jpg

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/dungeon.html

and a link

http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/pave.htm

Stuff like Jaden posted above is pure art, to my opinion genius art even. To bad so much graffiti is just foul looking tags and crappy throw-ups.
But concerning the real works of street art, the more the merrier!
Can't really understand why the public could get upset about a 'perhaps illegal' painting on a wall, while buildings are being paved with unwanted advertisements and neon signs with full approval of the man.

Graffiti is art because it's vandalism.

If I was around a microsoft company i'd be graffiting them big time.

Originally posted by Pandemoniac
Stuff like Jaden posted above is pure art, to my opinion genius art even. To bad so much graffiti is just foul looking tags and crappy throw-ups.
But concerning the real works of street art, the more the merrier!
Can't really understand why the public could get upset about a 'perhaps illegal' painting on a wall, while buildings are being paved with unwanted advertisements and neon signs with full approval of the man.

I think it can be "good art", I do think though that the approval of the owner is needed in order to make it not criminal. Those Advertisements are paid for and the owner of the property gives their approval, if every graffitti had that there would be no problem whatsoever.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
"Graffiti is not art, it's crime," - Tony Blair


What do you think about graffiti art? The professional one. Do you think its art, or is it a vandalism?

I dont think graffiti is vandalism, i generaly believe its art, just outside the studio or museum. But closed minded idiots like Tony Blair come out with sentences like the one above due to the ignorance!

I hate when people think that making something illegal will solve all problems!

I dont believe graffiti should be banned. Not at all. The tag-graffiti should be controled, i agree, but banning it all together is like banning a style of art.

Thoughts? On Public property I lean towards vandalism

I used to dos graffiti and tagging, meh, it's lulz till you is caught. I am no longer in a gang.