Art is an expression of human creativity and imagination, but sometimes society doesn’t accept this definition and rejects it all together. A truly relevant category of this topic is graffiti art. Graffiti art is more than often considered vandalism opposed to something pretty to look at. In a lot of cases it is illegal to do and is punishable by law if caught. Looking at what the principle of art is, should this be considered a crime and an obstruction to a city? Graffiti should be considered art because it it human expression and creativity about the world around them. This is important because it adds to the art culture of the city. One of the main principles that makes graffiti recognized as art is the culture it adds to the city.
…show more content…
An anonymous writer does a good description of what they go through exactly, they says “Pride relates to the sense of accomplishment writers experience upon completing a piece because, for the writer, it is art, and because it has taken a great deal of their labour” (279). Its obvious that the street arts have close connections to their art, they work really hard on them. Further, it is what they think about the world expressed rawly for the world to see. Laurie says, "Graffiti is a very raw and organic form of expression that came from kids just wanting to express themselves." (23) This reiterates the true definition of art, expression. If art is supposed to be about expression and that is what graffiti is all about, than graffiti should be a more respected type of art all together. Instead of being in the positioning question if it’s art at all. Lastly the overall visual aesthetic of graffiti art is more than enough on it’s own for graffiti art to be considered art. Graffiti is a very beautiful modern radical approach on art. Its is very aesthetically pleasing and there is a growing push towards alternative arts. Building owners are making the radically decision on keeping their graffiti art instead of letting the city take it off. In the Toronto Star(2012) a building owner says, ‘it’s very nice, artistic, not-scribbled art,’ hanna said. ‘This is sort of pretty”’(1). …show more content…
There is a considerable amount of graffiti that is hateful and just wrong to do. A victim of such crimes expressed to the Toronto Star (2012) “She’s removed the graffiti every time, disappointed that people could be so careless, so ‘cruel’”. It is clear to see that not all graffiti is done in a positive manner. Not only are they hateful words but there is also recurring tagging which is often gang related, to make it worst. It is recognised that not all graffiti is done positive, but nothing is perfect. In many ways graffiti is a selfless act, it is doing free art for the community. It is mention here by a young writer “ Sentrock views the pieces that he and his crew create as a way of giving back to the community, as an unselfish act. He will ask permission to paint in an area of the city, but does not want to be told what to paint. He believes that he and his crew are beautifying the neighborhood.” (25) We can conclude that a lot of these artist think they are doing a public service by spreading their
An anonymous writer does a good description of what they go through exactly, they says “Pride relates to the sense of accomplishment writers experience upon completing a piece because, for the writer, it is art, and because it has taken a great deal of their labour” (279). Its obvious that the street arts have close connections to their art, they work really hard on them. Further, it is what they think about the world expressed rawly for the world to see. Laurie says, "Graffiti is a very raw and organic form of expression that came from kids just wanting to express themselves." (23) This reiterates the true definition of art, expression. If art is supposed to be about expression and that is what graffiti is all about, than graffiti should be a more respected type of art all together. Instead of being in the positioning question if it’s art at all. Lastly the overall visual aesthetic of graffiti art is more than enough on it’s own for graffiti art to be considered art. Graffiti is a very beautiful modern radical approach on art. Its is very aesthetically pleasing and there is a growing push towards alternative arts. Building owners are making the radically decision on keeping their graffiti art instead of letting the city take it off. In the Toronto Star(2012) a building owner says, ‘it’s very nice, artistic, not-scribbled art,’ hanna said. ‘This is sort of pretty”’(1). …show more content…
There is a considerable amount of graffiti that is hateful and just wrong to do. A victim of such crimes expressed to the Toronto Star (2012) “She’s removed the graffiti every time, disappointed that people could be so careless, so ‘cruel’”. It is clear to see that not all graffiti is done in a positive manner. Not only are they hateful words but there is also recurring tagging which is often gang related, to make it worst. It is recognised that not all graffiti is done positive, but nothing is perfect. In many ways graffiti is a selfless act, it is doing free art for the community. It is mention here by a young writer “ Sentrock views the pieces that he and his crew create as a way of giving back to the community, as an unselfish act. He will ask permission to paint in an area of the city, but does not want to be told what to paint. He believes that he and his crew are beautifying the neighborhood.” (25) We can conclude that a lot of these artist think they are doing a public service by spreading their