Graffiti Harmful Or Art Essay

798 Words 4 Pages
Graffiti: Harmful or Art? As you travel around your city, you may see colorful splashes breaking the tan surfaces of the buildings. Some of the colors seem to spell out obscenities, while others look like art. A picture taken by Tom Fox for the Dallas News called “Deep Ellum Art” showcases this art. A mural of two hands and cacti and black and white outlines of people are shown through the shadow of a fence. These commissioned, legal “graffiti” works, range from elephants to a Texas flag. However, if you looked around your city and saw a spray painted Texas flag under a bridge, your first thought would not be ‘art’. Just because it was painted illegally does not change the fact that it is art. While graffiti is usually associated with drugs, gangs, and violence, most graffiti artists are not a part of that (“Good Graffiti”, 2011). Painting via …show more content…
However, this is truly incorrect. As Sylvia Ann Grider puts it, “Contrary to popular opinion, not all graffiti are ‘dirty,’ humorous, or erotic.” Graffiti is a way of expression; of lifting people’s spirits and allowing them to get their message to the masses. In the seventies, when the economy was bad and the people felt bad in New York, a strange tag showed up. “TAKI 183” was written on the subway, and when people saw it, the trend started. People everywhere in the city started to write this on buildings and other places, which helped people to realize that things aren’t so bad and that they will get through the hard times. Graffiti is a way for people to share out their opinions without being afraid of the public’s response; whether it be good or bad. It allows the artists to showcase their feelings and thoughts without fail. If an artist attempted to talk about their messages, then they may mess up or stutter, however, through art, there is so stuttering. Their message is pretty much permanent

Related Documents