Is illegal graffiti primarily an art form or a crime?
Is illegal graffiti (on walls and trains) primarily a manifestation of an artistic nature, or is it primarily a criminal nature? If we consider such graffiti not from the point of view of the law, but from the point of view of an art critic.
It seems to me that it would be appropriate to apply the same criteria to graffiti as to any other visual art. After all, graffiti differs primarily in the tools and place of applying the image. Judging graffiti purely by colored illegible letters or mats is not correct. The image can be anything and in any style. The wall here is a canvas. Everything else depends on the specific author. One depicts an abstraction, another sheep, a third aliens, and someone just his empty head.
Naturally, if a person is an artist, then he will only decorate the building, and not spoil it. But of course, there are always dissatisfied people, there is always someone who is offended by something(now it is generally very fashionable to be offended at everything). At the same time, gray panels do not outrage anyone(and they are just bad taste, and which also puts pressure on the psyche) Naturally, you need to understand where you put your image. If the day before yesterday only painted the house, which is generally nice, then why put something else there?
Graffiti also has a practical function. Why spend money on acid green fence paint(this is an example. And so in different places in different ways), when you can ask local graffiti artists to draw something on an old dilapidated fence or on the wall of a house that has not been repaired for half a century and is not going to be repaired.
And I think that the problem with the attitude to graffiti is somewhat deeper. The problem is that it's not a classic, it's not a culture that the state approves of, it's not something that everyone talks about on TV or on the Internet. This is originally a counterculture and no one still understands how to interact with it. And any counterculture does not exist in order for someone to be offended and rejected. And in order to bring something new, so that people reconsider the old foundations.
And yes, I didn't lose sight of what you're saying about illegal graffiti. Where is it legal? How can a graffiti artist move to the legal level? Well, there are cases of course, but even there are scandals that lead to alterations. That is, no matter how you look at it, but in any case it turns out not to be legal, even when the author has the best intentions. Although there are more positive examples.
From a legal point of view, applying paint to someone's PROPERTY without the owner's permission is an act of VANDALISM and is punishable by law. At the same time, it does not matter what it is depicted there – an absolute picturesque masterpiece or just letters applied with a spray. So the answer to your question is art or crime is crime!
In all countries of the world, city authorities legally invite street art masters and pay them a lot of money to paint blank walls and fences in the city and thus decorate the dull urban landscape. But at the same time, a whole army of illegal artists, without asking anyone, paints all the free surfaces with God knows what – from explicit pornography to anti-government slogans. Some people like it, some don't, but this phenomenon exists and the city authorities are obliged to respond to it. And they react! Wash everything off with water or sandblasting machines.
The question of whether graffiti is art or not is no longer relevant. Graffiti is an ART form. But…if you place your “art” on someone else's property, then the police will deal with you, not art critics!
Well, let's try to figure it out. Here you have a house with a fence or an apartment with a door. And you painted your fence or door gray. Not because you don't have any money, but because you like gray (well, maybe someone likes gray? I say everything for example). And to make the gray color last longer, you painted the door / fence not with a simple paint, but with a very good and expensive one, and also covered it with varnish (well, suddenly..) And at night, these “graffiti artists” came quietly and drew you on your “gray” something that you never expected to see there in your life. And they can draw anything there: from scarlet sails to… (I won't write it if Dad sees it… he's got a leather whip…) Well, how would you rate this “art” if it is done on your favorite “gray” paint under varnish?
My mother used to read me a fairy tale as a child, where a cat caught mice, put them on a painted windowsill with dirty paws, and the owner whipped her with the words ” you do one thing – don't spoil the other.” Here in my opinion, the same thing should sometimes be done with the authors of graffiti, when they were not asked to express their art on other people's doors / fences (just sometimes, I do not deny that many people like it when the owners of fences like something for God's sake)
It seems to me that graffiti is neither an art nor a crime. This is a manifestation of idiocy based on the desire to”stand out”. There are other ways to “stand out”, but they require significant resources and effort in their implementation, rather than drawing on the walls of some, let's put it mildly, nonsense.
Graffiti-it has always been and will always be illegal, this is its meaning, the meaning of expressing oneself through protest, perpetuating one's name without asking anyone. Calling graffiti legal or illegal is the same as calling crime legal or illegal. And what you want to call legal is called street art.
To a greater extent, this is not a legal daub ! Why spoil the integrity and accuracy of architectural structures? This can be completely solved on banners or paper. Not everyone approves of this dirty urban environment!