https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh Some argue graffiti is a democratic and youthful art form other argue it is vandalism what do you think? en-us 2018-03-19 00:32:08 UTC 2025-09-28 13:59:10 UTC hello@padlet.com efpana https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/243284250
Professor Synder in Graffiti Lives a book published by New York University Press, argues that graffiti culture has, in some ways, been uniquely democratic. “What is lost sometimes in the cacophony of the debate over whether graffiti is art or vandalism is that when it’s art, it is free art,” he writes. “You don’t need money, or special knowledge, or the right outfit, or a car, or an ID to see it. This is why the graffiti subculture has inspired such a diversity of young people.”

]]> 2018-03-19 00:36:52 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/243284250 efpana https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/243284557 How about graffiti has protest and political art?

]]> 2018-03-19 00:38:40 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/243284557 https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/244363395 I am not going to pick a hard and fast answer, because like all forms of art, it is all subjective. But I put some dot points on a few things.

- What about the historical aspects of graffiti? There is still graffiti that exist on the ruins of Pompeii. But they are preserved even though if the same stuff was written on a public toilet block would be rubbed off with ethanol by a local council worker or had some poor old dear clutching their pearls (NSFW link to what was written here). But it is preserved because the societal consensus deems it to have an archaeological and anthropological significance and an industry maker for the area.

- If anyone did studies in art, they would know that the academic consensus on art is that there is no hard and fast definition of what is art in the first place. A large amount of people don't like tags but is it art or isn't it art because it is widely seen to be unlikeable? Who decides what is art in the first place? The bougie academics and property owners or the lay people who would never had much encountered with 'traditional art culture'?

- Tagging can be seen as a societal dysfunction of young people finding not much in means of expression. But is it really a societal dysfunction because it could devalue an area's property worth and 'those damned youths should join the Scouts of Hyper-Conventionalism and learn some respect like respecting muh $80k house that they would never able to afford'. Or should it just be looked at as an innetable means of non-violent youth rebellion, something that could be seen as best dealt with by letting some leeway to expression, and apply harm-min strategies like making incentives on minimising conflict between young people and property owners?

- Personal experience: I used to volunteer for an arts program for 10 - 14 year olds from CALD and/or dysfunctional backgrounds. Most of these kids would never step foot into the NGV or the Ian Potter Center unless it was a school excursion. But the program takes them to those places plus Hosier Lane for inspiration for an art project that they decide individually embark on. The one thing the kids would talk most about the trip? Hosier Lane. What inspires them to make their projects? Hosier Lane. What happens when they completed their projects from the experience of Hosier Lane? They have a sense of confidence that they can have self expression and self satisfaction in decision making. 

- Unfortunately, I guess that graffiti is usually evaluated under a Capitalist lense. In a few short years, it went from a property devaluing factor, to a tourist attraction, to a means of gentrification, to a means for corporate companies to hire artists to recreate street art for to sell their products. Is Graffiti really a means of democratic action when people with power cast the Capitalist light on the matter and uses it to effect the people who are exposed to it? Would it be different if society didn't had people in power swaying their opinion and they had more freedom to come up with their own conclusions?

Final sum up, asking questions like is the matter black or white is a bit low brow. A smarter question is to ask what is the summed up aspects of the matter, and not to put them in positive/negative binaries. Otherwise you are asking for a lively debate in a narrow and acceptably deemed area, that is how Rupert Murdoch makes his living. ]]> 2018-03-21 04:50:30 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/244363395 https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/245926445 I believe the graffiti is both art and vandalism.

Hosier Lane located in the heart of Melbourne has become one of the largest free art experiences of pure beauty people come all around the world to see. This place has held much controversy from being painted blue back a couple years ago to having Ed Sheeran play a free performance for many individuals walking by. 

However, in saying that i believe the graffiti can be seen as vandalism when people are spraying on other peoples property causing home, business owners and other individuals money to fix their property. 

Having free spaces for people who enjoy expressing themselves can create more effort for the community to both strive for less vandalism and more art. ]]> 2018-03-26 02:49:13 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/245926445 https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/245936333 I believe that graffiti can be seen as art or vandalism.

It depends on the type of graffiti. Hosier Lane is an amazing sight to see for anyone in Melbourne, whether they are from Melbourne or are tourists visiting Melbourne.

 I view graffiti such as what you see at Hosier Lane as art, however, I view general tags that you see on general walls, trains, etc, as vandalism because they are just like scribbles and don't actually look nice.

Graffiti can be both, but it depends on the types and locations.


]]> 2018-03-26 03:59:36 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/245936333 https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/246331806 In my opinion I see graffiti as art and vandalism I believe that it depends on location and the type of graffiti.
Eg one: The graffiti that is seen in Melbourne's Hosier Lane is a form of art to me. People from Melbourne and all across the world come to see the art. So many different colours, pictures, words and shapes that are created by talented people.
Eg two: I can consider graffiti vandalism when people grab spray paints and spray on other peoples property, public spaces, transport etc. This then causes people to be paying money to have the spray paint removed.



]]> 2018-03-27 01:41:49 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/246331806 https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/246419987 Graffiti can definitely be both art and vandalism. I think it's verrryyyy clear when you see graffiti, if it's vandalism or not. It's vandalism when its gross stuff or 'tagging' done on peoples property, or train stations or bus stations or abandoned stuff but then there's stuff that 'lushsux' does around Melbourne which is just funny graffiti but that's art. Like, you kind of just know and you can tell ya know]]> 2018-03-27 10:26:57 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/246419987 alexis_paniagua https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/249688897 I believe that Graffiti can be seen clearly as both vandalism and art. there are a number of beautiful pieces of artwork around the world that can be seen to people as vandalism but others interpret it as graffiti. vandalism and art i feel can be distinguished quite easily. graffiti is generally done by tagging. ]]> 2018-04-09 08:35:27 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/249688897 https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/345593310 I believe graffiti is both art and vandalism. However very dependent where it is placed and what it is.  ]]> 2019-03-27 09:10:59 UTC https://padlet.com/efpana/4ojf39zlzbsh/wish/345593310