The Case for Graffiti as a Genuine But Immoral Art Form
posted on 3 January 2011 | posted in
Arts and Entertainment
Graffiti is a topic that generates wildly different reactions depending on whose viewpoint is being considered. Artists only focus on the quality of the work, techniques used, and social messages conveyed. Property owners think only of the damage to their building or land’s reputation and the cost of removing the “vandalism.” Who is correct? It is difficult to say that graffiti is without artistic merit. Look at the international following of artists like Banksy, who has moved from underground to art museums and exhibition halls. However, the lost revenue and time of businesses must be addressed. That is why officially sanctioned graffiti walls in very public, high-profile locations could give the artists of this particular genre a place to display their work in the appropriate context without breaking the law or causing distress to others. Granted, the “edgy” quality of an illegal act is lost, but ignoring the law, vandalism of property is just not nice, and graffiti artists should respect this as human beings, not out of concern for whether they might answer to the law or not.
| |
|
|