Greg Pidgeon

Graffiti – Art or Vandalism

One dictionary defines art as “the conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colours, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.”
Graffiti art originated in the late 1960’s and has been developing ever since. Originally used by street gangs to mark territory and political activists to make statements. Then was used to breathe life into dilapidated, run down areas such as on American subways, which during the 1970’s were dull, grey, unsanitary and desolate places. It has been subject of much debate over whether it is art or vandalism.

Graffiti is unique in many ways some which suggest that it is an art form and some which quite clearly suggest that it is merely nothing more than pretty vandalism. Firstly and most importantly I think it should be considered as art is because of its medium. Graffiti predominately is produced in public areas for all to see whether they want to or not. It can be scrawled across the inside of a train or presented thoughtfully across a wall. Either way it is a medium that has certainly failed to be reproduced in any gallery to hold the same impact as in the public arena, giving it strength as an art form in its natural state. Here are some examples that in my opinion could never have been produced without their urban canvases. They are created by Banksy, a street artist from London;
Example 1
Although individuals and institutions have tried, Graffiti still remains completely uncensored which upholds freedom of expression giving any artist the opportunity to portray their opinions visually without constraint. This in my opinion is an essential part of any art therefore also suggests that Graffiti cannot be classed as little more than criminal behaviour.

However Graffiti does have its pitfalls as an art form. It can often involve grotesque defacement on public property, where an unorganised mess of writing blankets a public space created by people who want little more than to have there name protruding into your world. This is known as ‘tagging’ and is popular with many street gangs to mark territory and gain respect. I good example I think is another piece to which Banksy has contributed to;
Example 2
This shows a statue that has in my opinion been ruined by people lacking in any artistic scope.

So basically I think there really isn’t an answer to the question is graffiti art or vandalism. I think it has to depend on context, motive, artist intention and most of all the opinion of the audience. The Handbook of American Popular Culture explains that graffiti has the 'high art' characteristics of a 'strong and identifiable aesthetics theory' and a similarity to such recognised art movements as abstract expressionism, pop art, conceptual art, and new realism, and personally I believe it does fall for the most part under the definition of art. But I will say each piece certainly needs to be given its own consideration.

References

Handbook of American Popular Culture
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth EditionCopyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Graffiti Art: An Essay Concerning The Recognition Of Some Forms Of Graffiti As Art By George C. Stowers

1

4 bottles of beer on the wall, 4 bottles of beer...