# Is graffiti an art?



## socrates#1fan

ØlandDK said:


> I'm pretty sure alot are thrown in jail for doing graffiti.


Not here.
People just get warned and the cops don't even chase them.
Kids just spray whatever, it doesn't matter if its an 1875 mansion or cemetery.
They don't care.


----------



## Galls

socrates#1fan said:


> If someone asks for people to do graffiti on their building that is their own business.
> *But rarely is it done legally and that is an act of crime. I live near a city where if something is vandalized it has to be cleaned up and painted over within a week or the owner's get a fine.*
> As stupid as that sounds it has actually stopped vandalism because people know their stuff is just going to get erased.
> Some are cool, but it doesn't change the fact that it is vandalism and should be stopped.
> Why don't they have programs for people to paint stuff on blank concrete walls?
> *Believe it or not, to the general population a neighborhood of graffiti free walls and blank ally walls is more appealing than a neighborhood of graffiti on every flat surface.*


In NYC, as you are the victim of a crime, the city will pay for the graffiti to be cleaned. As for when I have caught people spray painting my property, despite the urge to shoot them, they are now serving a year in Jail. I love my security cameras.


----------



## Jardoga

graffitii can be an art. Melbourne has alot of "tag" graffitii, but graffitii artists can get permision from the council to do some impresive graffiti artwork on blank walls. This shot is in an alleyway in Melbourne.


----------



## socrates#1fan

Galls said:


> In NYC, as you are the victim of a crime, the city will pay for the graffiti to be cleaned. As for when I have caught people spray painting my property, despite the urge to shoot them, they are now serving a year in Jail. I love my security cameras.


Indiana state law is different or at least the town officers don't enforce them.


----------



## j0nas

Galls said:


> In NYC, as you are the victim of a crime, the city will pay for the graffiti to be cleaned. As for when I have caught people spray painting my property, *despite the urge to shoot them*, they are now serving a year in Jail. I love my security cameras.


Who should be locked up, you say?


----------



## Galls

j0nas said:


> Who should be locked up, you say?


I am allowed to carry in NYC and I am not a cop, but instead the sub human scum are in jail. My building has not had additional graffiti on it since, remember getting people thrown in jail over graffiti does take effort.

So treating the rats like rats, well it works.


----------



## Manila-X

techniques1200s said:


> Oh yeah, graffiti is an art. I say that as a fan of hip-hop, but even If I weren't, I would still appreciate the artisitc aspect of it. I don't see how one couldn't appreciate stuff like this (all pics taken by me, in San Francisco's Mission District. Some murals thrown in there too):


SF's graf scene is one of the most interesting in the US other than NY or LA. There was even at one point a rival clash with SF and LA writers since alot of LA writers got up in SF and hit spots that SF writers don't normally hit.

Anyway, I saw a documentary on SF graf called *Piece by Piece*

Here's d intro


----------



## Imperfect Ending




----------



## joga

Many people post graffiti from ugly places, walls in scaring outskirts..... Ok, graffiti there could be an art, funny, full of color and so on.

But tags, signatures and also pictures on building in in beautiful areas of cities shouldn't be done and allowed.

I agree with fines (thousand of euro) and perhaps one or two days in jail to avoid the second issue.


----------



## ØlandDK

edit


----------



## Northsider

To me, unless it's gang related, most graffiti is art. I love the colors, the placement, it's part of the urban fabric. It's exciting.


----------



## LMCA1990

^^ Completely agree :yes:


----------



## godmachine

joga said:


> Many people post graffiti from ugly places, walls in scaring outskirts..... Ok, graffiti there could be an art, funny, full of color and so on.
> 
> But tags, signatures and also pictures on building in in beautiful areas of cities shouldn't be done and allowed.
> 
> I agree with fines (thousand of euro) and perhaps one or two days in jail to avoid the second issue.


agree
_________________________________


Graffiti from Poland:





































































































here you can find more: http://www.digart.pl/przegladaj/169/painting/graffiti.html?s=o&k=m


----------



## trainrover

Nothing's worse than the shape shiftings inherent in dynamic graffiti.


----------



## zachus22

-Akira- said:


> To me, unless it's gang related, most graffiti is art. I love the colors, the placement, it's part of the urban fabric. It's exciting.


Amen. As far as I'm concerned, beautiful graffiti like the murals in San Fran's Mission District is not what is causing the issue. It's the cheap, 14 second, "need to mark my turf" tagging that has given graffiti such a bad rep. 

Graffiti is definitely one of the most unique art forms out there - unfortunately, it's "graffiti" because the medium happens to be public property.


----------



## Manila-X

I would like to share one of my crazy experience on the semi-legal side of graf. I was in LA back in 2001 when a friend of mine wanted me to paint the facade of his martial arts studio. My friend's studio was located in the Marina Del Rey side of LA right on the border of Culver City. 

There were times that cops would drive by and asked questions. I just be nice to them and show them my HK ID card. In fairness, they're nice in return and just drive off. Unknowingly, my friend was only *renting* his studio and the property owner saw graf on the side of her building, she was a bit disappointed. She said that the presence of a graffiti *mural* would bring down property values especially in an area like Marina Del Rey. Plus the presence of a graf mural, legal or not can attract other graffiti writers to paint within the area.

In the end, the mural wasn't finished and got buffed but I was able to take photos of the uncompleted mural.


----------



## ØlandDK

WANCH said:


> I would like to share one of my crazy experience on the semi-legal side of graf. I was in LA back in 2001 when a friend of mine wanted me to paint the facade of his martial arts studio. My friend's studio was located in the Marina Del Rey side of LA right on the border of Culver City.
> 
> There were times that cops would drive by and asked questions. I just be nice to them and show them my HK ID card. In fairness, they're nice in return and just drive off. Unknowingly, my friend was only *renting* his studio and the property owner saw graf on the side of her building, she was a bit disappointed. She said that the presence of a graffiti *mural* would bring down property values especially in an area like Marina Del Rey. *Plus the presence of a graf mural, legal or not can attract other graffiti writers to paint within the area.*
> In the end, the mural wasn't finished and got buffed but I was able to take photos of the uncompleted mural.



That's the reason why there almost no legal walls left in Copenhagen - or that atleast what the local politians say.


----------



## Manila-X

ØlandDK said:


> That's the reason why there almost no legal walls left in Copenhagen - or that atleast what the local politians say.


But I'm sure that there are local yards or hall of fames in your city or places with high concentration of graffiti.

In HK for example, there are a few yards and hall of fames where even illegal, graf writers can still paint and not worry too much with police activity. But still you have to watch your back though.


----------



## i_am_hydrogen

Hell yes graffiti is art.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=189456&highlight=graffiti


----------



## ØlandDK

WANCH said:


> But I'm sure that there are local yards or hall of fames in your city or places with high concentration of graffiti.
> 
> In HK for example, there are a few yards and hall of fames where even illegal, graf writers can still paint and not worry too much with police activity. But still you have to watch your back though.


I only know of one fully legal wall and it's painted over almost every day, so your piece will not be visible very long. Then there is a semi-legal wall which is the hall of fame in Copenhagen and where you see the best pieces.
But in general there's alot of graffiti in all of the city - especially in the Nørrebro district.


----------



## Golden Age

Why don't graffiti artists simply spray their own walls and perhaps their parents'/relatives' walls before they devalue other people's property.

Another interesting question: What do high-minded and artistic "sprayers" think of their doppelganger "taggers"?


----------



## eklips

^^ A tag is a signature, lots of grafiti artists tag as well.

Grafiti is the social reapropriation of the neighborhood by some of it's inhabitants. If you look at it through the my property vs other people's property angle you wont understand anything.


----------



## Somnifor

Graffiti and murals in Minneapolis:


----------



## weird

Graffiti is art. Tags, aren't.

By the way, I can't support any kind of graffiti. Illegal ones are a font of problems and they should be avoided.
City Halls should offer empty walls to young artists and the fines should be higher as well, because they would have an alternative to express their art and they won't need to ruin a private wall.


----------



## Küsel

The success of this exhibition proves that it's art
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-reviews/5542684/Banksy-versus-Bristol-Museum-review.html

And THIS guy was in court several times in the 70s and 80s and nowadays there are even discussions about officially protect his art. One of his paintings was even restored and preserved by the city a few years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Naegeli


----------



## AdamChobits

Probably said thousand of times already here, but of course that Graffiti is art.

Something different is when people do it in unwanted or non-allowed places, but this has nothing to do with Graffiti being art or not. I would complain too if someone painted a Picasso in the wall of my house.


----------



## sky-eye

It's a bit difficult, some graffity is very nice and is sure an art. At the other hand an ugly tag on a house or shop i find it vandalism. Here a few graffities in my town (Sittard / the Netherlands) :











Illegal graffity in the city-center. I like the monkey, but the tags are ugly.











Graffity near the Central Station.












For years this was the graffity hotspot of the town. Some of the illegal graffities were ugly, but especialy one was very beautifull, it looked almost a picture (unfoirtunatly i have'n t a picture). Last year the bridge was done by a prossefianal graffity artist. (excuses my englisch:nuts












Illegal graffity on an abanded building next to the railway.










Graffity on the skateshop.


----------



## Seattlelife

is graffiti art?

ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY!!!!

Although "tagging" is a different story.


----------



## Andre_Filipe

yeah its art, ugly art.


----------



## Manila-X

Graf scene in a city state with harsh penalties towards vandalism,

*Singapore*


----------



## Seattlelife

The fact that there's an 8 page thread with pictures asking if graffiti is art, makes it art lol.


----------



## Golden Age

eklips said:


> Grafiti is the social reapropriation of the neighborhood by some of it's inhabitants. If you look at it through the my property vs other people's property angle you wont understand anything.


Can I let my dog take a dump on the tagging artists' cars then? You know, just to reappopriate some neighborhood property.

The more run down a neighborhood looks, the more it will feel like one, a self-fulfilling prophecy in many cases.


----------



## ØlandDK

New mural around the corner from where I live - art? - Yes :yes:


----------



## Manila-X

*Sao Paulo* is one of the most bombed cities on earth (New York included)


----------



## PragmaticIdealist

The world has become one big toilet stall in a men's restroom because of the handful of crappy excuses for human beings that think they should be able to force all the rest of us to have to look at their self-indulgent, self-described "art," which they, oftentimes, paint over buildings and spaces created by architects and designers who deserve to have their work preserved. Rocks, trees, and other nature is pissed on and shit upon, too. People's homes are defaced. Businesses suffer and leave areas. Crime rises. Property values plummet. Joblessness ensues. Poverty, stupidity, and ignorance repeat their cycles. And, drug-dealing gangs are left to kill each other and everyone else fighting over what's left of the territory they mark over and over and over again.

If I catch a graffiti vandal around my home, I'll force him to suck his own can of spray paint. 

I'm just "reappropriating" my environment.


----------



## Pincio

99% of graffiti are SHIT


----------



## Metropolitan

eklips said:


> Grafiti is the social reapropriation of the neighborhood by some of it's inhabitants. If you look at it through the my property vs other people's property angle you wont understand anything.


Your second sentence is in contradiction with your first sentence, since you define graffitis and tags as a matter of "ownership" in the first place.

Nevertheless I find your definition interesting, as you actually define tags and graffitis as the robbery of a whole neighborhood (which is a collective good) by few individuals (those tagging their signature).

Indeed, the neighborhood has no reason to belong more to those tagging than to other people living in the neighborhood. That's the reason why I don't understand where is the "social" dimension in the reappropriation you're talking about.

Considering things this way, tags are actually a denial of the existence of a collective good, and thus they are libertarian (or ultra-liberal in the European definition of the word).


Just to clarify things, I'm not anti-graffiti or whatever. I just find interesting to dig a bit more about this "reapropriation" dimension you were talking about.


----------



## socrates#1fan

1) Everything is art these days.
I can crap on a stop sign and it will be art.
2) Illegal graffiti should NOT be preserved, as it is just that, illegal, but if someone has it done legally then I see nothing wrong with it, just a difference of taste.
3) I oppose the use of graffiti in public spaces (unless it is like a highway wall or something) because some areas people just go to for the aesthetic beauty.
4) Historic properties should not be allowed to have graffiti.
5) a lot of graffiti is crude and the crude graffiti should be removed, but decent graffiti, like I said, if it is legal, go ahead.
I personally find graffiti stupid and FAR from worth preservation, but that is my taste, same as someone who likes graffiti, that is their taste.


----------



## hix

Are paintings art? Some are, and some are not. Is music art? Some is, some is not. The same with graffiti, some graffiti is art, some is rubbish.
Tags are never art, it's just vandalisme.


----------



## PragmaticIdealist

My city has four commissioned murals that were painted by a local artist and a whole group of students and others in the community, and all four are now hidden underneath layers of spray paint from vandals. 

The whole situation makes me sick. These people are the lowest of the low. They do not create. They destroy.


----------



## I-275westcoastfl

Graffiti can be a art but a lot of the time its some idiot making a gang tag or writing their name or something stupid.


----------



## dmarney

exactly, i hate those stupid tags soooooo much, but there is some very good graffiti that isnt on people's homes or on transport. but the fact is that it is still illegal and class as vandalism though


----------



## olla86

If graffiti has been making by professionals it is an art for me!


----------



## Veejay_

As long as it is a genuine plastic expression from anybody, it can be considered art in some way; but as painting, if you just mess around with it with no art intention, then I don't think so anymore


----------



## SASH

WANCH said:


> *Sao Paulo* is one of the most bombed cities on earth (New York included)


These are the most ugly tags I've ever seen and btw in the time that NY was bombed, they had not even have TV's in Brazil. 
NY is the mother of Graffiti. So hands off!!!


----------



## juanw

city_thing said:


> Heaven forbid they make your house look interesting to passers by.
> Monotony is the way of the future.


I don't care who they are or how good they are, you do *NOT* dare touch my house! I could give a damn if some vandal thinks my house is "boring" - tough to him :mad2: Take your "improvements" elsewhere; I am quite happy with the way my home looks.

I am utterly amazed that some here view graffiti as creating energy and producing a vibrant urban environment :uh: Where I live, graffiti is seen as a sure sign of urban decay and dilapidation, and indicates the time to raze the area down and rebuild. If you wander past a graffiti'ed alleyways or bridges, you stay far away from that area if you value your life - only thugs wander between walls with graffiti.

I don't know if its just in my culture, but down here graffiti and urban vibe are foreign words to each other.


----------



## JPSM

Depends...there is a thin line between graffiti beeing an art expression and Vandalism...in my city I would say that 99% its vandalism and about 1% its art...this one percent represent walls designated in parks and in places like train stations to that...


----------



## Taiki24

I think the problem is that there is a very fine distinction between what is considered "street art" and what is considered "graffiti". Art is purely subjective, but it seems that many define only legal street art as actual art and illegal art as graffiti.

While few would consider a simple tag as art, some tags are beautifully intricate. And many graffiti artists do quite wonderful murals. Adversely, some legal street murals are complete crap. Its all subjective.


----------



## girlicious_likeme

Graffiti.

It depends on the message.
If it is written on a "gang" or "street-style" font, but with a good message, like "peace" or "love" or "equality", it is acceptable, and equals a mural in terms of street beauty and modernity.

But swear words and vandals that do not make any sense (or send a bad message) should be going, going, gone...


----------



## PragmaticIdealist

girlicious_likeme said:


> Graffiti.
> 
> It depends on the message.
> If it is written on a "gang" or "street-style" font, but with a good message, like "peace" or "love" or "equality", it is acceptable, and equals a mural in terms of street beauty and modernity.
> 
> But swear words and vandals that do not make any sense (or send a bad message) should be going, going, gone...


Destroying people's homes and businesses for a "good message" is f*****-up because vandalism, itself, is a bad message!

Do people realize how much money is spent removing graffiti? California can't even afford to plant and maintain trees and other plants along its freeways because all the money is going to graffiti removal. My own city is spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year, and the money is hardly making a dent in the problem. I feel like I want to kill someone. 

The disorderliness and lack of respect for other people that graffiti suggests is inviting crime, gangs, and drug-dealing that is making city after city in the United States and elsewhere into cesspools where no person should ever have to live. Graffiti vandals are even killing old ladies and other people who try to stop the defacement. I hate the fact that spray paint was ever even invented. And, I can't believe there are people who have such a warped view of the situation that they could call any crime of this sort "acceptable."


----------



## girlicious_likeme

PragmaticIdealist said:


> Destroying people's homes and businesses for a "good message" is f*****-up because vandalism, itself, is a bad message!
> 
> Do people realize how much money is spent removing graffiti? California can't even afford to plant and maintain trees and other plants along its freeways because all the money is going to graffiti removal. My own city is spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year, and the money is hardly making a dent in the problem. I feel like I want to kill someone.
> 
> The disorderliness and lack of respect for other people that graffiti suggests is inviting crime, gangs, and drug-dealing that is making city after city in the United States and elsewhere into cesspools where no person should ever have to live. Graffiti vandals are even killing old ladies and other people who try to stop the defacement. I hate the fact that spray paint was ever even invented. And, I can't believe there are people who have such a warped view of the situation that they could call any crime of this sort "acceptable."


^^
Oops... I forgot to state the limits of my previous statement. :rofl:

Our city covers up the "bad" vandals in place of murals along the building walls (not fronting the street). This will cause the people who vandalize to stop.

In terms of "good" vandals... They compliment it with things that surround the message that was vandalized. Sometimes, when the vandals were made from a stroke of an air brush, they tend to alter the design a little bit so it becomes a little more attractive.

The murals (aka. covered-up graffiti) are often located near the children's playgrounds. In fact, the parks that have murals make the space "more attractve" especially during winter, where everything is just ice and snow. 

Seeing a mural while walking along the alley makes people feel (ironically) "safer" compared to a desolate environment, like pure ice and snow. Murals make people feel that they are not alone.

In other cities... I'm not sure with that... it depends on the city's perspective regarding vandals, and how they deal with them.

But when it comes to heritage buildings, any graffiti, good or bad, is very destructive in terms of respect for the city's culture.


----------



## PragmaticIdealist

Natural environments, too, have been utterly destroyed. It's almost impossible to go to wilderness areas in southern California without seeing graffiti and trash.


----------



## ShbIz

http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/iiitbiplbiz/album/175081/
____________________________________________


----------



## Suburbanist

For, the issue couldn't be more clear-cut:

- on private premises, not facing a public street, alley, plaza or way: doesn't matter, the owner can decorate as (s)he wishes to do so.

- on public premises: art or not, it is a disturbance to the city neatness and an appropriation of public space. Fair enough, there is some "art" displayed in public, but that is usually ancient or else it has to follow a set of legal procedures by which the city authorizes or not public display of art. Graffiti should be no exemption to that, it should follow all legal procedures, meetings, notice, community hearings, voting before it is authorized to be displayed.

- ad hoc graffiti (the tagger felt a place was "empty" and decided to paint it without asking no one as in an "intervention"): vandalism, that should be prosecuted under the law, criminally if the case

Now, as a strictly personal opinion, I think graffiti is a sort of degenerated, non-aesthetic , low-life form of visual art like rap/hip hop is for the music. It goes against my personal ideas of the public space as a sterile, neat, trimmed area that can only have monumentality, not "personalization" of a deviant mind.


----------



## Rebasepoiss

^^ Sorry for being OT here but to say that rap/hip hop is a low-life form of music is retarded. There are several good hip hop/rap artists out there who have a far greater meaning in their songs than an average rock band, not to mention pop artists.

And why the hell does a public space have to look sterile? Are you suggesting that everybody should wear the same clothes and drive the same boring cars because so not to disturb the narrow-minded people like you?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favour of illegal graffiti but some kind of personalisation should be allowed in public spaces to maintain a sense of humanity.


----------



## Suburbanist

Rebasepoiss said:


> ^^ Sorry for being OT here but to say that rap/hip hop is a low-life form of music is retarded. There are several good hip hop/rap artists out there who have a far greater meaning in their songs than an average rock band, not to mention pop artists.


Sure, I didn't elaborate. I was talking about the "protest music" crap of ghetto/gangsta rap. I usually disdain any form of "engaged" art that is not done for the sake of art but to "spread the message" or other b.s.



> And why the hell does a public space have to look sterile? Are you suggesting that everybody should wear the same clothes and drive the same boring cars because so not to disturb the narrow-minded people like you?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favour of illegal graffiti but some kind of personalisation should be allowed in public spaces to maintain a sense of humanity.


I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm not even in favor of over-detailed regulations about façades, paintings etc. What I mean is that the default state of a public place should be sterile and clean.

If a sculptor wants to place a work of his/her on a plaza, there is a formal process to get permits, to have the convenience of having a new sculpture in a place evaluated etc. Same goes for someone wanting to work on a tile mural in a public building, for instance. Is not that (s)he can appear one day and just revamp a wall of the city hall just like that...

Many taggers are totally repulsive in regard of law enforcement and just want to be able to appropriate themselves of a wall because for them, if it is blank, it is incomplete. It is this mentality I clash against.

Then, I'm all in favor of letting the OWNER of the place decide, within reason, what does (s)he want to have in his wall, if any. If the place is a public building, a detailed and fair process should ensue, it's not because you live in a neighborhood that you are "entitled" to tag the nearby school.


----------



## Marbur66

Grafitti is art, but unwanted art.


----------



## PadArch

graffiti is graffiti, art is art...

Art can be inclusive of many things, which is up for debate. So in theory graffiti can be art, in the same way that painting or sculpture can be. Whether it is good art or bad art is a different question.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Suburbanist said:


> - on public premises: art or not, it is a disturbance to the city neatness and an appropriation of public space. Fair enough, there is some "art" displayed in public, but that is usually ancient or else it has to follow a set of legal procedures by which the city authorizes or not public display of art. Graffiti should be no exemption to that, it should follow all legal procedures, meetings, notice, community hearings, voting before it is authorized to be displayed.


There is a considerable amount of contemporary public art in various places - at least here in Vienna and I don't think it is an exception in this regard. That art comes in a lot of different forms, one of them are legal graffiti walls, also in very central locations. 

It is a horrific world view to think that art should be outlawed in public spaces.

Der Zeit ihre Kunst, der Kunst ihre Freiheit!



> Now, as a strictly personal opinion, I think graffiti is a sort of degenerated, non-aesthetic , low-life form of visual art like rap/hip hop is for the music. It goes against my personal ideas of the public space as a sterile, neat, trimmed area that can only have monumentality, not "personalization" of a deviant mind.


"sterile"... in other words: dead. Luckily your view is not shared by a lot of people nowadays anymore. It is questionable if it ever was.


----------



## Suburbanist

Slartibartfas said:


> It is a horrific world view to think that art should be outlawed in public spaces.


I never proposed that. I think art could be placed in certain public places, but graffiti shouldn't get any easy way just because it is an "underground" form of expression. Some cities are taken hostage like "either you let us paint a graffiti or we'll tag the neighborhood". 




> "sterile"... in other words: dead. Luckily your view is not shared by a lot of people nowadays anymore. It is questionable if it ever was.


I just want to apply the idea of functional minimalist design to public spaces. Throw in some monumentalism and I got my perfect city: everything is huge, impressive, "wow" and nothing is within the reach of my eyes in close proximity, and everything is clean, inspired on geometric features and devoid of life - let's leave 'life' to the humans beings themselves. But is a rather utopic idea of living in the "matrix" or whatever.


----------



## Manila-X

In cities like San Francisco where it has an active graf scene. There used to be graffiti spots where people can paint legally, is tolerated or with the consent of the owner. 

One of the most notable back in the early 1990s was *Psycho City* near the Civic Centre.










When the council ordered the closure of this spot and other known graffiti spots around The Bay Area, graffiti writers ended up doing illegal graf in various walls and public vehicles around the city.


----------



## Manila-X

SASH SCF said:


> These are the most ugly tags I've ever seen and btw in the time that NY was bombed, they had not even have TV's in Brazil.
> NY is the mother of Graffiti. So hands off!!!


I would agree about NY being the centre for this type of graffiti art. 

But it is a major problem in Sao Paulo. And the people who paints these tags are not just hitting up walls but even the rooftops of buildings, facades, etc.

We cannot deny the fact that Sao Paulo is one of the most vandalized cities on earth and the situation there is argubly much worst than NY!

Can NY writers do this? This is real vandalism!






Here are other example of how nasty it can get in this city.


----------



## Manila-X

Even tolerated graffiti spots exists in cities like Singapore which has some of the most severe penalties for vandalism.

One example is Somerset skate park in Orchard Road. Graffiti spots like these give graf writers a place where they can do their art and for them not to do it in the streets.

Here is a third grade class of a known international school in Singapore and did a graffiti project in this spot.


----------



## Slartibartfas

Suburbanist said:


> I never proposed that. I think art could be placed in certain public places, but graffiti shouldn't get any easy way just because it is an "underground" form of expression. Some cities are taken hostage like "either you let us paint a graffiti or we'll tag the neighborhood".


Maybe you didn't propose a complete ban but you made it pretty clear how you would like public places to look like and that didn't really include public art unless for some rare exceptions. 

Legalizing Graffiti is easy. You take a wall, and I really don't mind if it is very visible and centrally located as long as it fits, and everyone who wants can be creative on them. That works wonderfully in Vienna. Of course, the area around it does not look sterile anymore after that, but rather like a nice place to hang out on warm summer days in the middle of the city but so what. Its not like you would be in lively urban city centre too much voluntarily anyway, would you?



> I just want to apply the idea of functional minimalist design to public spaces. Throw in some monumentalism and I got my perfect city: everything is huge, impressive, "wow" and nothing is within the reach of my eyes in close proximity, and everything is clean, inspired on geometric features and devoid of life - let's leave 'life' to the humans beings themselves. But is a rather utopic idea of living in the "matrix" or whatever.


You are at least 4 decades late with this dictatorship of sterility. What you dream of is a nightmare place for pedestrians, completely uninteresting unless for some very very few exceptions for extremely important places.

PS:
I don't support the sort of vandalism like it happens in Sao Paolo according to Manila-X.


----------



## Taller Better

Slartibartfas said:


> You are at least 4 decades late with this dictatorship of sterility. What you dream of is a nightmare place for pedestrians, completely uninteresting unless for some very very few exceptions for extremely important places.
> 
> .


That Dream is called "Suburbia".


----------



## masterchivas

this is simple:

this is art:


this is bullshit:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## Manila-X

Slartibartfas said:


> Maybe you didn't propose a complete ban but you made it pretty clear how you would like public places to look like and that didn't really include public art unless for some rare exceptions.
> 
> Legalizing Graffiti is easy. You take a wall, and I really don't mind if it is very visible and centrally located as long as it fits, and everyone who wants can be creative on them. That works wonderfully in Vienna. Of course, the area around it does not look sterile anymore after that, but rather like a nice place to hang out on warm summer days in the middle of the city but so what. Its not like you would be in lively urban city centre too much voluntarily anyway, would you?
> 
> 
> 
> You are at least 4 decades late with this dictatorship of sterility. What you dream of is a nightmare place for pedestrians, completely uninteresting unless for some very very few exceptions for extremely important places.
> 
> PS:
> I don't support the sort of vandalism like it happens in Sao Paolo according to Manila-X.


It is more the economic and social conditions why vandalism is a major problem in cities like Sao Paulo.

But the city also has some really nice graffiti art. 

One of the most notable are the works of *Os Gemeos*.




























Check out their work at the rooftop of one of the most notorious vertical slums in the city, Edifico Sao Vito.










Various graffiti / street art mural projects are happening around the city. Some in highways and walls. Some are collaboration of Brazilian and international artists.





































Then you have your typical wild-style burners



















Even art exist in the city's underground


----------



## LosAngelesSportsFan

Gotta say, These last few pics remind me of LA.

I hate tagging, despise it. i think its horrible, doesnt add anything positive and has no artistic value. Graffiti on the other hand is different and i can definitely appreciate good Graf.


----------



## Manila-X

LosAngelesSportsFan said:


> Gotta say, These last few pics remind me of LA.
> 
> I hate tagging, despise it. i think its horrible, doesnt add anything positive and has no artistic value. Graffiti on the other hand is different and i can definitely appreciate good Graf.


LA has some of the most influential style in graffiti especially those crews such as MSK/AWR, CBS or UTI.

Graffiti is also a problem in this city though there are also legal graffiti spots like the walls in Venice Beach.


----------



## Manila-X

I'm actually in favor of having graffiti spots or designated graffiti areas in various cities worldwide, especially in key cities such as NY, LA, SF, London, etc.

It did work in cities such as Singapore.










Even here in Manila, we have our own problems with graffiti but also have our own legal spots where people can create art such as this one in Intramuros


----------



## LosAngelesSportsFan

Manila-X said:


> LA has some of the most influential style in graffiti especially those crews such as MSK/AWR, CBS or UTI.
> 
> Graffiti is also a problem in this city though there are also legal graffiti spots like the walls in Venice Beach.



some of the best graffiti anywhere is in the arts district downtown. i forgot who it was, but someone posted a remarkable thread at SSP with LA Graffiti. spectacular stuff. It was around the time when the Art in the streets exhibit was going on, and that area had tons of new street art.


----------



## Spookvlieger

Some of my home town. You can moslty find these near the ringroad that goes around town. The bikes/pedestrian passages under each crossing are heavy tagged and bombed. I think it's better than bare concrete these passages would be otherwise.









http://www.hildevautmans.be/images/dbimages/pics/graffiti.jpg









http://graffitiblog.be/sites/default/files/graffitimuur/Hasselt.jpg









http://graffitiblog.be/sites/default/files/graffitimuur/Hasselt2.jpg









http://www.graffiti.org/amatic/hasselt_amatic.jpg









http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/30169864.jpg









http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2360/2177132951_f8af74c895.jpg









http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2184/2177132949_d9058e5c02.jpg









http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1102/526167362_fdf4bfce6b.jpg?v=0









http://fc05.deviantart.com/fs15/i/2007/097/0/8/Easterjam_2007_Hasselt_by_amatic.jpg

Alley near the youth center:









http://www.graffiti-jeugddienst.be/Media/File/werre.jpg


----------



## Manila-X

I have to say this kind of graffiti art is one the few artistic forms that is developed in New York and has spread around the world!


----------



## Spookvlieger

This bridge holds up the freeway that enters Antwerp city center from the north, Belgium:




































http://i706.photobucket.com/albums/...er zijn hand en de Kleine Reuzin/IMG_7201.jpg


----------



## Rev Stickleback

I think if graffiti artists did pictures like the examples shown, there'd not be too many complaints.

Unfortunately 99%, if not more, looks like the example shown here (an above)...










...and is a total eyesore, making any area look like a criminal ghetto.


----------



## diablo234

Tagging in itself is pretty stupid but graffiti can add a nice vibe in certain areas such as blank walls.









Some example of "good" graffiti at the Good-Latimer Tunnel in Dallas.


----------



## marknguyen

graffiti is vandalism. period.


----------



## Manila-X

marknguyen said:


> graffiti is vandalism. period.


Graffiti is considered vandalism if the wall painted does not have the owner's permission or if its not in a location that tolerates this kind of art.

Even Vietnam has its local graffiti scene mainly in Hanoi and HCM


----------



## Manila-X

Rev Stickleback said:


> I think if graffiti artists did pictures like the examples shown, there'd not be too many complaints.
> 
> Unfortunately 99%, if not more, looks like the example shown here (an above)...
> 
> ...and is a total eyesore, making any area look like a criminal ghetto.


The foundation of (NY style) graffiti art is mostly based on *letters*.

It is about creating your own letter style or fonts and putting a bit of colors and creativity in it. That is why the people who does this kind of graffiti art are called "writers" and not "artists".

But some graf writers would do some nice productions and add characters, background or even a theme in support of their letters.


----------



## isakres

I Like graffiti, I really do...it us just that i like to see this kind of art in determined locations and not randomly and all over the buildings and bridges in town creating an anarchism scenery and a guetto feeling.


----------



## KOTIKKEAN

some graffiti from Vladivostok...


----------



## ShbIz

Novosibirsk









http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5818/13641255.c/0_85d1e_2b22b9f3_XL









http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5312/13641255.c/0_85d20_e8cca30f_XL









http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5818/13641255.c/0_85d28_77b6e6fe_XL


----------



## Suburbanist

^^ Visual pollution the pics you posted above (no offense intended to the city, just evaluating the taggers' work).


----------



## anak_mm

i would rather have these things forced into to my sight









than these things being forced into to my sight



















baby laws set aside
heres the biggest graffiti "vandalism" 
graffiti art is altering just the wall surface... this is form of "graffiti" is altering the entire landscape & the world..









harvard.edu









since were just all opinionated primates...what would mother nature say..maybe she calls it visual pollution :lol: 
or maybe she doesnt want her surface to be gray either.


















did they ask the native americans of dakota if they want giant european faces drawn on their mountain & land? they probably hated it









this "graffiti" is legal..for now





so this .....









&

this....









is the same crap to me


----------



## trainrover

trainrover said:


> My kind of grafitti, rails & jazz ... borne by Oscar Peterson's childhood neighbourhood


...


----------



## desertpunk

*Bushwick Crew checking in:*


Brooklyn - Bushwick: EWOK 5MH by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Graffiti by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Graffiti by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Graffiti by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Macho Time RIP by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Rubin415 by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Graffiti by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Never by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Nekst RIP by Berst by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Logek of 4Burners by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Streetart by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: ROA by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: YMI Crew by wallyg, on Flickr


Brooklyn - Bushwick: Streetart by wallyg, on Flickr


----------



## socrates#1fan

To me, graffiti can be art whenever.

However, it being art does not make it worthy of preservation, or freedom from prosecution if done illegally, nor does it make it _good_ art. 

I have little tolerance for vandalism. I don't care how artistic you are, if you violate someone's property and possessions, you need to be punished and the vandalism cleaned.


----------



## desertpunk

*5Pointz Queens New York*

This aerosol heaven is slated for demolition and replacement by two bland 40+ story condo towers.


5Pointz by milfodd, on Flickr


5Pointz by Alan Houston, on Flickr


Tenz, 5pointz, Queens, 2012 by KET ONE, on Flickr


5Pointz by milfodd, on Flickr


5Pointz by milfodd, on Flickr


5Pointz by christiNYCa, on Flickr


5PTZ by milfodd, on Flickr


5Pointz-99.jpg by Lumn8tion, on Flickr


5Pointz-106.jpg by Lumn8tion, on Flickr


Schooled by Lumn8tion, on Flickr


At 5Pointz by Jorge Quinteros, on Flickr









http://www.flickr.com/photos/kellyhafermann/









http://www.flickr.com/photos/kellyhafermann/


D.A.on the P.A. by Lumn8tion, on Flickr


----------



## El_Greco

Suburbanist said:


> ^^ Visual pollution the pics you posted above (no offense intended to the city, just evaluating the taggers' work).






Manila-X said:


> Check out their work at the rooftop of one of the most notorious vertical slums in the city, Edifico Sao Vito.


Its a shame they demolished it.


----------



## LoLiTO

Not at all


----------



## nareik

Bristol, England


----------



## nareik

Bristol


----------



## nareik

Bristol


----------



## nareik

Bristol


----------



## 009

Depends on the place and quality in my opinion, if it makes an ugly run down building or wall more beautiful, then it's art; if some dumbass tags a beautiful building with some scribbles, it's vandalism.


----------



## 009

One place where I really appreciated the graffiti was on the storefront security gates in the Ciutat Vella in Barcelona. Those things are always ugly, but with some artwork they can become more interesting


----------



## 009

Here are a few examples of how ugly security gates can becomes works of art


584ataulf02 by cesar casellas, on Flickr


plaçaorwell03 by cesar casellas, on Flickr


Barcelona Graffiti by Jaguar2007, on Flickr


----------



## Rebasepoiss

I think we can all agree that this is art:


----------



## Gendo

Generally speaking, yes, graffiti is art.


----------



## Edil Arda

You can check Turkish ones here: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=105329783


----------



## Svartmetall

I'm of two minds. The murals and artwork are fantastic and liven up a city. Tagging and random scrawls of meaningless nonsense? No. No. No.


----------



## El_Greco

Svartmetall said:


> I'm of two minds. The murals and artwork are fantastic and liven up a city. Tagging and random scrawls of meaningless nonsense? No. No. No.


Agreed.


----------



## El_Greco

Especially for Suburbanist.

Hackney Wick.


----------



## Edil Arda

List of Kadıköy's murals: https://line.do/tr/mural-istanbul/5lt/vertical


----------



## smerlo

These are the astonishing works by a street artist called Jorit AGOch appeared in Naples in the last few months.




























And this one, which will be completed in the next days


----------



## El_Greco

That's cool!


----------



## brillmongo

Borås is a small city (approx 70.000) located in west Sweden not very far from Gothenburg (70km) the last couple of years they have tried to profile themselves as a city of art especially Street art Down here you see a couple of the artworks. I don´t know if this fits in this thread but i felt right when i posted this. In the link under the pictures you are directed to the website for this project. These three pictures is only an example the whole city is slowly becoming an art gallery. And i must say that i like it.

I cant´t make the picures work in this forum for some reason but if you´re interested i street art klick the links you wont be disappointed

http://nolimitboras.com/?project=pichiavo

http://nolimitboras.com/?project=tristan-eaton

http://nolimitboras.com/?project=kobra

http://nolimitboras.com/?lang=en


----------



## Bob the Labourer

Yes

I documented this because it moved me on 31st of October 2010
Felt like the artist had given me a hug and made me feel safe on that otherwise
dark South London night.
I'm glad I got to capture it because within a week the council had the graffiti removers remove this moving message;


----------



## Edil Arda

Kadıköy, İst.
Istanbul Kadıköy_3348 by jb nl, on Flickr

Istanbul Kadıköy_4087 by jb nl, on Flickr


----------



## killexpanormus

depends ,but yes it's an art


----------



## Lorrta

The wisdom from Creator.


----------



## alexandru.mircea

https://www.facebook.com/8127046254...2704625465456/819167738152478/?type=3&theater

A fantastic FB album of street art created by a Syrian collective who do their thing in places affected by fighting, even integrating the holes made by projectiles into the designs.


----------



## Zaz965

octavio frias de oliveira bridge sao paulo








http://g1.globo.com/sao-paulo/notic...o-de-pichadores-na-zona-sul-de-sao-paulo.html


----------



## Edil Arda

this one doesn't look like art :lol:


----------



## BLACK DAHLIA

....Many confuse graffiti with murals!...but of course it is an Art!
Street art is maybe the most important of all as by destination,it reaches the average citizen.


----------



## Zaz965

I never meant that photo as art, it is vandalism unfortunately :lol:hno:


----------



## Sheema

Any "art" is a statement of attitude towards reality.. Degas... 


So yep... 

Graffiti is art.


----------



## Suburbanist

If 'graffiti artists' want respect, those who do, then they should do their work in commissioned places only, or do it indoors or paid/hired by someone to embellish their building. 

"spontaneous" graffiti is always vandalism (it is much difficult to remove than, say, a yarn-bomb on a tree or bike).


----------



## Edil Arda

Kuşadası, TR,


























https://www.instagram.com/venuart/


----------



## mazarick

Real graffiti yes

just writing non sense on the wall is not art...

*ART*


























*NOT ART*


----------



## skyridgeline

http://www.lifeofguangzhou.com/node...6/node_1012/2016/05/05/1462432017174965.shtml









http://www.lifeofguangzhou.com/node...6/node_1012/2016/05/05/1462432017174965.shtml


----------



## Eric Offereins

Graffiti artists at work in Rotterdam.









http://www.ad.nl/rotterdam/grootste-graffiti-kunstwerk-van-nederland-in-rotterdam~acb80b0b/


----------



## aartdamen

I would say it is illegal art most of the time. Definitely an art. But often abused for wrong purposes.


----------



## Eric Offereins

^^ In some cases in my city artists are invited to decorate temporary walls (or walls about to be demolished) or fences.


















(not sure if this is graffiti, but it sure looks cool)

This block will be demolished soon for a new tower project:


----------



## Sainton

Graffiti can be very beautiful when done properly, but emptying a spray can on someone else's property just to be a c8nt definitely is not acceptable.


----------



## steppenwolf

If it's challenging ideas about what art is or moving the boundaries, it probably does sit on the art continuum. Especially if it's related to other established art forms. 

There's definitelty a difference between tags, vandalism or splashes of colour and paint, and creative graffiti. Value is given to art by art buyers unfortunately. They decide if something can have value attached to it to make them and others money. Its a revolting, money printing industry


----------



## smerlo

This is the last stunning work of Jorit in Naples, just a few days and it will be over.
Surely most of you know who the subject is.



















EDIT: it is completed, now.


----------



## Edil Arda

Kadıköy, İST.,
Mural Festivali 2016 by Kadıköy Belediyesi, on Flickr


----------



## scrooge.

These big graffiti are certainly art.


----------



## Lana_

The last one is really art. Unfortunately often graffity turns to some purposeless scribble that just uglify the city.


----------



## floor23

Here are some examples in Honolulu. A handful of building owners in Hawaii who own mainly warehouses and commercial buildings have allowed graffiti to be placed on the wall. Most of the action is in Kakaako. Here are some examples.








[/url]street art. hawaii 04008 by s.alt, on Flickr[/IMG]








[/url]street art. hawaii 04028 by s.alt, on Flickr[/IMG]

street art. hawaii 03999 by s.alt, on Flickr

Untitled by fulgum, on Flickr

Untitled by fulgum, on Flickr

Untitled by fulgum, on Flickr

2016-02-15_PowWow2016-26 by Robert Prather, on Flickr


----------



## Edil Arda

Murals for _Kedi _Documentary in NY,


















https://www.kedifilm.com/


----------



## Edil Arda

New murals of Kadıköy,



























http://www.gazetekadikoy.com.tr/kadikoy-duvarlari-nda-mural-resimleri,65.html


----------



## EmilianoNYC

Edil Arda said:


> Murals for _Kedi _Documentary in NY,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.kedifilm.com/


Im going to have to venture out to Bushwick and Greenpoint soon. I like cats, street art, and the film Kedi.


----------



## alexandru.mircea

This could be important: *Brooklyn Jury Finds 5Pointz Developer Illegally Destroyed Graffiti*


----------



## Edil Arda

Mersin, TR,



























http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/ph...paintings-drawn-on-buildings-in-mersin-124444


----------



## Manila-X

A city isn't a city without graffiti!


----------



## Tucson2018

6-6-6 said:


> I love graffiti and i love this thread, please continue!.


Where there's monotony, I welcome it with open arms, even if it's not artistic. Here in the SW you have all these HOA areas with lots of walls, surrounding the communities, and you only have 4 choices of paint for your house. In Las Vegas, they want the communities to blend in with the desert, which explains all the shades of brown ad infinitum throughout the Las Vegas area. Las Vegans feel naked if they don't have 6 foot tall cinder block walls surrounding their backyards, and! various shades of brown only!!! Walls and walls everywhere you go! In shades of brown of course! I lived there for 22 years, and I'd jump with joy just to see someone spray paint black on some of these walls. Las Vegas spends $30 million a year removing graffiti. But then, underneath the neon and glitter of Las Vegas lies a very conservative populace. Don't be fooled by that Sin City crab, it's actually Sin-less City!


----------



## Roxinius

It's both. Just because it's illegal doesn't stop it from being art. But it definitely is vandalism no doubt.

I love looking at really beautiful graffiti downtown but I understand that a lot of people, particularly the ones who's property are affected, wouldn't want it there.


----------



## KillerZavatar

It is art, but art does not protect against prosecution. There should be quite hefty fines for it to pay for its removal, the ones that get caught need to pay for both themselves and the ones that do not get caught.


----------



## elliot

Some of the mid-June 2020 additions that matter - Toronto’s Graffiti Alley.









link









link


T.O. Graffiti Alley









link










link


----------



## Natasza K

elliot said:


> Some of the mid-June 2020 additions that matter - Toronto’s Graffiti Alley.


That's how it should be done. Full support.


----------



## TodZyn

if you know what you're doing, it's art. But unfortunately there are far too many people who only believe they can paint.
If you have enough time and you don't have to worry about the police all the time, it is also more relaxed to draw. The legal images are correspondingly better.


----------



## Kenguy

Nairobi, Kenya. 

Wall Grafitti:




























Grafitti on buses (called Matatus) most of the public transport has grafitti on it.



















Other surfaces eg. Zebra crossing.


----------



## Edil Arda

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1314265852267692033


----------

