Blog Post #2

The question "Is graffiti art?" calls to attention a very controversial subject. In my opinion, I think graffiti can be art, but even when it is art, it is still vandalism. By definition, graffiti is committed on another person's property without permission, an act with the purpose of creating a sense of entitlement and ownership. Therefore, even if graffiti is created for aesthetic pleasing, it is still an act committed on another person's property without consent. With that in mind, some graffiti, which is still vandalism, is definitely art. For example, in New York City, there are many interesting graffiti walls in Soho painted by famous artists, beautiful works of art that attract many viewers. Forms of graffiti like this, which contain intricate images as opposed to words, are most definitely art. Their striking images not only evoke meaning but are also pleasing to the eye. Yet, no matter how amazing these canvasses are, they are still vandalism. On the other hand, most graffiti containing only words or symbols are often gang tags and therefore not works of art. This form of graffiti is not only invasive like all other vandalism, but it also creates conflict with other gangs and serves to become a threat to the communities inhabiting the gangs. Tagging creates a lack of a security and a sense of fear for the people who are surrounded by gang tagging. Overall, all graffiti is vandalism, but not all graffiti is art.