If we can all agree to the central idea that graffiti kicks ass, I think there are some interesting conflicts that were had in class the other day. Now to kick it off, I'd like to address the misconception Morgan had about graf (as we will herein call it) being vandalism, or a crime. Now, she was saying that she wouldn't like it if someone graffitied on, or "tagged" her car, and tried to wrongly persecute the art form with this example. The fact is, no right-minded tagger would WANT to bomb her automobile. It would simply defeat the purpose of tagging in the first place. 

As stated by the NY Mag article, the reason for graffitiing on buildings and train cars (less now than the 90s, but more on that later) is that the tagger is gaining public exposure. To bomb a white girl's car in our wealthy caucasian neighborhood would only be a waste of paint. There is just not enough appreciation in our "'hood" for graf. This segues us into our next re-interpretive misinterpretation, Katie's comment about the meaning behind the tag determining whether it was a work of art. Graffiti artists determine the meaning behind the tag, not some snoody ass critic wearing a beret sipping his espresso. If a graffiti artist paints a mural on the side of a building, then it is art. If he writes "Fuck", with a pictorial depiction of stick figures performing the act next to it, then he is making a statement against the building he has tagged. The sincerity of the message must be heartfelt,  or else the tagger is parodying an art form and means of communication. And when you parody something sincere you look like an idiot.

As for graffiti's acceptance into pop culture, there is a cruel irony surrounding the paradox of consumerism versus self proclamation and profit. For example, there is a game for the Nintendo coming out soon entitled "WiiSpray", a collaboration involving Nintendo and Montana Cans, a spray can company. The game features a tagger protagonist (lol), and is all about bombing buildings and making your own tag. Also, the well-known artist from New Jersey "Kaws" is now a multimillionaire because of his graffiti. He owns a clothing and vinyl-producing company known as Original Fake, and has worked together with influential people in the fashion industry such as Nigo, Pharrell, and the Prada house. This is a good idea of graffiti going mainstream, but staying underground in the big picture.  On the other hand, the authoritarian hate for graf is all around you every time you're in a major city. Up until the very late 90s, subway cars were painted a dark red, and made of a more environmentally-friendly material than the ugly silver ones we ride today. Being narrow-minded and hardheaded as people in positions of power usually are, the MTA and New York Mayor's office decided put the artistic energy and creativity of graf artists everywhere in a chokehold. They got rid of the nostalgic red cars only because they were an easier surface to tag on than the new silver behemoths.

Graffiti artists are wrongly persecuted for an amazing art form that they built from the ground up. It is shocking to see such censorship in our modern America, and one can only hope that it ends soon.

graffiti

In the excerpt of the interview with "Dondi," Dondi says, "they don't know what its like with all that freedom, all that power knowing that someone might admire this work by an unknown artist." I think it's really interesting how he mentions this idea of connection. A lot of people think art brings people together (especially in literature and music). I never really thought of how a graffiti is just another way of displaying art. Its canvas is anywhere, and that makes it really accessable to the public, which is often an issue with art. It's really cool that graffiti artists actually take their veiwer into consideration. Or at least Dondi does.

graffiti

after reading the New York magazine article all that was left resonating in my head is how cool it is to think that art is moving.  LEE says "the movement is about movement" with that being said its so interesting that the art is on a subway or train that is also moving, obviously as the artists shared this was on purpose.  i think its amazing that there are people with such dedication to their work that they will do anything to share it.  to think that graffiti was used to bring color and life to a depressing new york is fascinating.  enough rambling on graffiti but andrews writing touched upon the whole movement that followed graffiti. i loved reading the interviews from the older graffiti artists because now that they are adults they are still proud of what they did and do not regret taking the risks.  i guess there can only be one lesson from this seize the day to make a change.

Graffiti

I think graffiti is often misrepresented. It fulfills the functions of language. It is used to unite a group of people from all over by creating this competition of who has more "hits" and the best ones. This also allowed for others to be inspired by writings and try to out do it, which led the the growth of graffiti. It also is a way to creatively express yourself and also defines you as an individual.

Graffiti, hip hop, and break dancing are all intriguing forms of art. Graffiti is an urban way of communicating using art and pictures. It really ranges from a murals and pictures to just tagging and trying to put your name out

Hip hop is an urban way of expression through rhymes and lyrics. Best mc's have always battled for pride in the lime light. Many people put hip hop down for saying its not music and it takes not talent but to b honest it takes just as much talent as any other form of music. (and its definitely a way of expressing yourself not all rap is about violence, sex, and drugs)

Break dancing is actually really interesting it stems from a martial arts form that started in brazil because at the time they were not allowed to practice martial arts so they disguised it as a dance. Then people just took the fighting part out of it and added more to become break dancing.

The Art of Graffiti

In reading the two articles, especially the article that is specifically about Graffiti, my eyes were opened to the cultural and social significance of this movement.  In the sixties and seventies, it became so widespread in New York involving competition and the desire to gain fame.  Writers would try to "kill" subway cars and buildings by writing all over them and getting their names out there.  However, as time progressed and the "battle" against the New York government began, the style of these works changed and became more bold and more filled with purpose.  The writing became more motional and abstract, and people all over the city could interpret it in several ways.  I think this is extremely important because through language and writing, even in the form of graffiti, we can see the changes and evolution of a group of people, and this writing specifically is a means of communication between the artist/writer and the entire city of New York.  That, I think, is the most powerful part of this movement, and only after reading these articles was I able to realize that that is the reason for graffiti's prominence in today's society.

Graffiti: the arts

The first article talks a lot about how graffiti built communities within the boroughs in New York.  They created rivalries and other competition based on power and expression within the graffiti itself.  I also realized that outsiders of the city and urban areas tend not to understand the true meaning behind graffiti.  It is only once one enters the urban environment and is exposed to the people and mental thinking behind the meaning of graffiti that he/she appreciates it.  Otherwise, others just consider it vandalism.  I, however, think that graffiti does express inner emotions and such.  I think it utilizes the personal function of language, as well as imaginative.  It portrays a message and establishes a name for the artist.  However, I can also see where the idea of vandalism comes from - these forms of art are placed on other people's and the government's property.  It makes me consider whether or not this takes away from the purity and beauty of graffiti.  I am not sure, but I can definitely say that this one aspect does bothers me to an extent.

The second article also talks about how it is a form of art.  Graffiti allows for freedom and gives the artist a sense of personal expression and power. The artists want to influence their viewers.  They want to make a difference in the community; they want to be known.  I feel like the only difference between graffiti and the other art forms of hip-hop (like break dancing and rapping) is how it affects others in ways other than influentially and emotionally; graffiti can cost others a lot of money.  I feel that pure art must be expressed in ways that are not "physically" harmful and hurtful to others, but just beneficial.  This is the only problem with graffiti.

GRAFFITI

i think people's first impressions when they look at graffiti are inaccurate. Graffiti can fit into many of the 7 functions that we talked about in class: personal, interactional, imaginative, heuristic, and informative. Graffiti comes in all various languages and can be seen around the world, mainly in the larger cities. In NYC, it is painted all around subways and buildings which can be said to be vandalism; however, it does give people something to look at while driving and expresses people's character. 

Graffiti: art or vandalism?

I've always admired Renaissance art in particular and preferred that to any kind of modern art type of movements, and graffiti was definitely a new movement. I saw it as a kind of vandalism because, by nature, I always liked to keep things in pristine conditions, and it always bothered me when people didn't appreciate what they had. So when I thought about graffiti, I saw it as an unnecessary measure. Why would people "destroy" public property? Why would you need to draw on trains, walls, or any other places?

I never thought of graffiti as art or a form of self-expression until now. Graffiti movement really reflects upon the African American and pop culture, and because of the negative media exposure, it has been viewed as harmful. As MICO says, "graffiti" was a term coined by the New York Times and the paper, "denigrated the art because it was invented by youth of color." I think it's definitely true when MICO said if the rich and the well-known artists had come up with graffiti, it would've been seen as a revolutionary and an avant-garde artistic movement because we are less familiar with African American culture in this country. 

In any case, I look at graffiti with a new perspective even though I still think it's a kind of vandalism (because I like keeping things in pristine condition). Rather than dismissing something new because the media reported it as harmful, I think we need to get the inside info on what that new thing is about and try to see it in others' perspectives. 

Graffiti

Each artist describes the rush of energy, the high, he experiences from every sketch. These people are not only doing something illegal, but they are also getting their ideas out there for the public to see--whether the public wants to see it or not. It's a game to these artists to see who can hit the most trains, subways, and building walls. MICO describes it as a guerrilla war in the beginning because it's a mystery as to how/when the artists strike, where they can paint their signatures, lettering, and cartoon characters. If you look around, there's still a lot of graffiti today--on city buildings, on buses, on high way rocks. Up till now, I've always thought that graffiti was just the doodling of kids who thought it'd be cool to have their name written on a public surface...but I was ignorant. Now I realize from these two readings that it is so much more than that. These people are breaking barriers, sending out messages. It is art, and they dont even want the recognition for it because their real names are really never exposed.

I never really realized what graffiti really signified to the people who created it. To them, it seems like it is a way to communicate themselves and preserve themselves, much like the goal of a writer. For this reason, I believe many of these people could be considered artists. Many of their works are amazing and beautiful, and I really don't think it matters where their art is being displayed. It seems like they just want to be heard and recognized and known. The main intention here is not to vandalize. Tracy 168 says "we painted them to make them look beautiful." I think graffiti is greatly misunderstood and it is really an attempt by talented people to be heard and recognized. They only do these things on public property because many of them come from low social classes and it would be hard for them to be able to sucessfully reach a large amount of people with their art.

In the second piece, Dondi says "Every time yoe read a name you're reading a story." I thought this was very interesting and for some reason this made a lot of sense to me. These signatures are of real people, many of which have had great struggles and are trying to express their anger, resentment, and sadness through any medium accessible to them.

My Post about nothing

I for one liked the piece about graffiti. I feel that graffiti is not only a form of communication, but it is also an extraordinary form of art. A little tidbit, the person who designed President Obama's logo was recently arrested for a piece of graffiti artwork he was working on in Boston. Anyhow, graffiti still is, and always will be an important form of communication in the years to come.

The Stories Written On The Walls

Something that has always captivated me is this idea of what is deemed right, verse what is deemed wrong. We are given sets of rules by parents, teachers, bosses, religion, even husbands and wives; that THEY believe you should follow. Now, i do not believe this for every regulation, but for some, i believe it is right to do the wrong thing. Written in "Breakin'!", lines of the poem read, "We broke the rules/ We broke boundaries". Each of these Grafitti Artists do something they believe is right, even when the government says it is wrong. Yes, they are technically correct.. It is not their property, they shouldnt deface what isnt theirs. But walk by a street with plain brick and concrete sidewalks. Now walk through one filled with the color, the fresh smell of paint, read the stories written on the walls.
Many of my weekends are spent in Sheepsheadbay, Brooklyn. I walk around to the corner store and see a beautiful mosaic of Joshua and Renne, two youths who passed away in a fatal car crash. Every morning I am there, I am thankful for my life. It is a constant reminder of the effect art can have. It captured the happiness of these two kids and posted it on a the facade of a building. No one will forget their story.

I was actually interested in both of these articles, mostly because of the incredible controversy that seems to surround graffiti and the style of hip-hop in general. The first line in the "Breakin'!" article is really true: in order to appreciate the styles you really need to remove any bias pertaining to the definition of Hip-Hop. Before reading these articles, I often got annoyed when I saw the weird writing plastered across the side of a random building or train, assuming that it was some crazy teens trying to find something interesting to do at 2 A.M. But truthfully, it's so much more than that. Graffiti is an art form. In fact, since we've been talking about language, it fulfills a key function of language: the ability to express oneself. It is a form of letting out emotion, evoking emotions for the viewers and for many protesting. MICO, a successful graffiti artist, discusses in the NY Times Article that graffiti artists got pumped up and were able to write about protesting the Vietnam War when the vets came back. The art of graffiti is looked at as heroic and a way to make a mark of culture and thoughts that others may not have seen. I have concluded that this is actually one of the most impressive art forms and can definitely be considered art. The amount of time and commitment that many of the artists put into their work cannot be dismissed as simply vandalism or defacing a building. In fact, many of the graffiti artists that were interviewed said that the attempt to block their writing just allowed it to grow more and reach more surfaces than the initial ones.

I found these articles incredibly interesting and the ideas really should be shared with more people because they can help to eliminate the stereotypes that may be associated with them.

Hip-Hop

After reading the two packets, I thought that the use of graffiti as a method of communication was interesting.  How the art was used to convey the artists true self to the masses.  However, I felt that the reason for their creations was not impressive.  I feel that the original purpose was primarily to write his or her name in as many places as possible to potentially gain fame made graffiti less artistic and less important.  However, as time went on and it became more about creative expression, I felt that I was able to appreciate it more.  I was able to clearly see how graffiti is part of the Hip-Hop movement.