Masterpiece or Mischief?
Is graffiti art or vandalism? This is a question that has fascinated me throughout my artistic journey. Graffiti inspired and drew me in from a very early age. Growing up in a city, I witnessed a lot of graffiti. I witnessed a lot of vandalism. I witnessed a lot of crime in general. I never understood the problem with graffiti until I experienced the pain it caused first hand when I woke up one morning to my dad outside on the phone with the police because our family car had been sprayed with blue and neon green paint in our driveway at some point during the night. I remember feeling scared and violated. This wasn’t the first time something like this happened to me where I lived. This certainly wasn’t the last either. However, this was one instance that really stuck with me and has always caused me to question whether graffiti is vandalism, or if it should really be considered an art form.
Not all graffiti is created equal. Some graffiti is more detailed and artistic, while other graffiti consists of barely legible paint scribbles. Marisa Gómez makes a distinction between art and graffiti based on appearance. “First, ‘graffiti art’ describes graffiti-type works that exhibit many of the characteristics of pieces normally termed ‘high art’ or ‘folk art’. The more intricate works of graffiti entitled ‘pieces’ belong in this category because they result from a desire to create artwork. Second, ‘graffiti vandalism’ describes those mere scrawlings that are motivated by a desire to mark territory, create notoriety, or show one’s defiance of the law and society.” (Gómez 633). However, just because something is not aesthetically pleasing does not mean it can’t be qualified as art. When I was younger, I used to watch videos of guys at the tops of buildings spray painting incredible images on very large scales. These videos piqued my interest and grew my love for graffiti art. I know the intention of the teenage idiots who vandalized my dad’s Honda wasn’t to create a masterpiece, but when I watched the artists on the internet create incredible works with nothing but a can of paint (much like the before mentioned teenage idiots), I was sure that they were skillfully creating something that was meaningful and beautiful.
Hypothetically, then, what if the teenage idiots who vandalized my dad’s Honda were trying to create something beautiful? What if their intention really was to make art? A lot of times I’ve seen incredible graffiti in places I know it doesn’t belong. But should someone really just paint over it? Especially when it looks as incredible as it does? This made me question the distinction that it isn’t vandalism if the art is good.
Maturing in my own art and absorbing as much as I possibly could along the way, I learned a lot about the meaning of art and what good vs. bad art is. However, the answer only made my question, and now my argument, even more confusing. In the field, art is incredibly subjective, and the judgment of whether a piece is good or bad depends solely on the viewer. An incredibly detailed and skillful mural can sell for the same price, or less, than a painting of a green triangle in the middle of a bare white canvas. True story (Kelly). This has caused many people to shake their heads or question the motives of the artist and, even more so, the motives of the viewer (or buyer). Because art is so subjective, who are we to decide the quality of the work, regardless of what it is?
With this in mind, we understand that anything can be art if the “artist” says so. In 1917, an artist named Marcel Duchamp created one of his most famous and controversial pieces, titled, “The Fountain” (Duchamp). This piece angered many art critics because in actuality, it is simply an upside down urinal which he dated and signed. This is what started the question, “What is art?” Because of this, the artistic community came to the conclusion that if Duchamp said it was art, it was art. If a vandal claims that their work is art, then do we consider this work of art a crime? And should it be treated as such?
Ultimately, it comes down to the question of intention and location. Does the person with the paint can really intend to create art? Or are they just being destructive? If the person truly intends to create something meaningful, maybe it is more understandable, and we, as viewers, can even come to appreciate it. It is highly unlikely, however, that anyone with the intent to do good would choose to violate someone else’s property in doing so. If anyone was entitled to the freedom of altering something that belonged to somebody else, then the idea of personal property would be a moot point.
A mentor of mine, Josh Bezdek, and I were discussing this topic recently, and his insights into this topic were rather astute. Josh is a talented photographer who has been a part of the art community for much longer than I have, and he succinctly summarized the issue as, “Graffiti is when you spray paint on your wall. Vandalism is when you spray paint on my wall.” (Bezdek). That is the answer to the question. Regardless of the quality of the artist’s work, this is a matter of property. Graffiti as beautiful artwork is a gift to humanity, but when it comes to one’s personal property, graffiti as vandalism is very violating and makes a person feel unsafe in their own space. I may be less likely to take down the graffiti if I think, as the viewer, it is “good art”, however it doesn’t change that unsettling feeling if someone has intruded into my personal space.
Arguably, someone intending to create beautiful artwork will choose an appropriate canvas, while someone looking to be destructive will go out of their way to vandalize property that is not their own. I might have enjoyed or appreciated the idiot teenagers’ work if it was on the wall in a museum or a designated building in the city where I grew up. Instead, I got to spend hours watching my dad try to scrub their “masterpiece” off his car.
Works Cited
Bezdek, Joshua. Personal Interview. 13 December 2022.
Bilous, John. Graffiti Alley, in the Station North District of Baltimore, Maryland. 3 Apr. 2016. Alamy Stock Photo, www.alamy.com/stock-photo-graffiti-alley-in-the-station-north-district-of-baltimore-maryland-101829743.html?imageid=C4388E26-F5A1-4B00-AD3E-14D85E5BD60E&p=197822&pn=1&searchId=3e72e92a1ae44dfee715ed79ebc7c7d2&searchtype=0. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023.
Day, Cassandra. Vandalism — or Art? Graffiti in the Forest City. 17 May 2011, https://patch.com/connecticut/middletown-ct/vandalism-or-art-graffiti-in-the-forest-city. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023.
Duchamp, Marcel. The Fountain. 1917, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia.
Elfaki, Reham. “What Is Graffiti: Art or Vandalism?” The INews Network, https://inewsnetwork.net/10256/arts-entertainment/what-is-graffiti-art-or-vandalism/#:~:text=Though%20vandalism%20is%20an%20important,art%20among%20various%20graffiti%20artists.
“Green White.” Ellsworth Kelly (b. 1923). Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-4101187.
Gómez, Marisa A. “The Writing on Our Walls: Finding Solutions Through Distinguishing Graffiti Art from Graffiti Vandalism.” University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, vol. 26, no. 3, 1993, pp. 633–707, https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1709&context=mjlr. Accessed 18 Jan. 2023.
Kelly, Ellsworth. Green White. 1923, Sidney Janis Gallery, New York.
Vans Company. “Is Graffiti Art or Vandalism?” Vans, www.vans.eu/thewall/art/is-graffiti-art-or-vandalism.html.
