Priorities of Legalities or Aesthetic

Art is something that can be interpreted in many different ways. Sometimes artists specifically rely on the possibilities of many different view points for their piece to work. However, these interpretations can lead to controversies. One thing in the art world that has been a part of many disputes is graffiti art. Some people think it’s truly art, and some people think it’s just plain vandalism. Personally, I believe that graffiti is largely an artistic form of vandalism.

Graffiti generally being “placed on private property without the owner’s permission” means that it is fundamentally vandalism (“Is Graffiti Art?”). Graffiti being a crime outweighs how pretty or artsy it may be. The effort and money that is then used to clean up such vandalism also takes away from it being art. While Chicago has to budget “$6.5 million [and] Omaha, Nebraska spends about $100,000 annually” to clean up unwanted graffiti, it is considered vandalism (“Graffiti as Vandalism”).

Some people may argue with me and say that graffiti is, in fact, a form of art and expression due to it looking nice and sending a message. However, part of this argument has no weight, and the other part is devoid since it’s part of the reason graffiti is considered vandalism. Individuals may say that “based on aesthetic criteria, graffiti has to be considered an art form”, but I believe that the legalities of it being vandalism cancel out its aesthetic abilities (“Graffiti as Art”). When people have a message to get across, the setting that the message is portrayed in is just as important as how it’s portrayed. It doesn’t matter if it’s “a colorful mural with a message of diversity or a black and white stencil piece protesting police brutality” if it’s placed in an illegal area, that piece of art is still considered vandalism (“Graffiti as Art”).

Graffiti is vandalism, even as artistic as it can be. The illegalities of graffiti outweigh it’s aesthetic abilities. Even if there is a needed and well thought out message behind it, it doesn’t mean it’s automatically not vandalism anymore. As artistic as graffiti can be, it’s still largely illegal and, therefore, considered vandalism.

Image Citation: “Graffiti lives…” by duncan is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0.

“Graffiti in Queens, New York City” by pchurch92 is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

“Seak LosAngeles Graffiti Art” by anarchosyn is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.