Defence Of Graffiti

Graffiti as crime or as art
Can graffiti be considered as an art or it should be considered as an illegal activity? When graffiti began to appear in art galleries in New York City since late 1950s, there has been debate over whether it is an acceptable art practice or not. Graffiti combines features of art with self-expression but media often encourage a negative understanding of graffiti by relating it to crime. Moreover, municipalities and government spend a huge amount of money removing graffiti in order to create a clean and safe environment.
In his essay “Defence of Graffiti,” Toronto writer Alex Boyd acknowledges that there are cruel and useless examples of graffiti such as “stupid racist remarks, empty slogans’ [and] illegalable signatures”

It is true that youth is responsible for much of the graffiti that is created but this can also not denied that there are as many graffiti writers from low income-families as middle-and upper-middle class families. Graffiti writers from all demographics are inspired by the opportunity for fame as well as recognition from their peers. They are not essentially motivated by the urge to rebel or boredom. Instead, they pursue to express their feelings, ideas or share an interest with general public. Furthermore, Boyd notices, “Graffiti becomes an affordable method of communication” (par.4) for artists to show their concerns, challenge the meaning of public space or to make a political statement. Aesthetic reasons also lead to graffiti creation. A black wall can look more attractive thought the elements of art including: colour, space, size, form, line, texture, space, value, interest, and style. Nowadays, many graffiti artists viewed their graffiti work as public art as it is a god-gift that is intended to improve the aesthetic surrounding their environment and