Can graffiti ever be considered art?

Should graffiti be considered a piece of art or vandalism?

Throughout history, graffiti has been regarded as vandalism. Though it’s really a form of artistic expression. Despite graffiti’s definition being markings spray-painted, drawn, or scraped on public spaces it is viewed as a sign of teenage disobedience, social degradation, and antisocial behaviors.

I strongly believe that graffiti is a way of expressing personal thoughts and emotions. Not only is graffiti an artistic expression but an opportunity for people to make their voices heard. A spay-painted wall can spread awareness on current events in a imaginative and artistic way.

Why is graffiti viewed so differently from other forms of art? While there are contradicting views of how graffiti is vandalism, I believe that showing one’s creative skills should be respected. If it’s art in the eyes of the creator we should view it as such.

Abandoned locations, such as buildings, are common areas for graffiti. They are universal areas for both adults and teenagers to show off their skills. These abandoned locations are preferable to private property. I believe that the cities issues with vandalism would be decreased if Portland would provide legal spaces for graffiti artist to showcase their work.

Knowing how difficult it is for artists to show their talents when it comes to doing street art, Banky is still in command of the art he shows to the public without having his identity exposed. He is a graffiti artist who has once posted a video for his fans showing how smooth he is with creating his art without being seen doing it. This is his way of showing that what he loves doing is worth the risk. This is an example for young adults not to be quite about what they love doing. How could this possibly be interpretured as a sign of teenage disobedience? It’s self-expression.