to think that illegal graffitti is not art it is just vandalism...

[theBOD]

no matter how many "street artists" talk about it being public expression and modern pop art or how many skinny jeaned emo teenagers talk about "banksy" being a political voice it is still just vandalism.

i find some of it very cool.

Depends where it is and what it is. Some scrotty old tag done on the side of a beautiful building I would agree is vandalism. But the more elaborate works are art - especially if they are enlivening an otherwise grim place.

True but some of it is very good imo.

I get torn about this between my principals and my liking of art and rebels I think .

Hasn't Tate Modern commissioned some graffitti for the outside? I thought it looked amazing. Apparantly the artists were rather shy about being identified.

I like a lot of it. Some of it is quite amazing actually. Crappy tagging isn't art obviously, but nothing wrong with street art is there?

Mind you, I'm not one to think that just because something is illegal means it is wrong or people shouldn't do it.

better than looking at miles of bare concrete

Here

I love the piece with the camera on the outside of the Tate Modern.

Agree tagging and scrawling are not art, but a rose growing in a potato bed is still a rose even when it's a weed.

and Banksy is a political voice

I agree, Banksy is a political voice.

Very funny (Well I think so )

tagging is vandalism, Bansky is art. IMO

I don't see why it can't be both, it is an art form but that doesn't stop it being vandalism at the same time.

Its annoying when its on your fence. Is is also very rarely any good.

Obviously if banksy wants to come and do my fence he is more than welcome.

but its very nature is that it's specific to place (well, the nature of the good stuff is anyway)

Handing out sheets of paper saying 'Please inscribe graffiti below' means the results are no longer graffiti.

I loved this news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4748063.stm. Brilliant.

But a lot of graffiti is just willy-waving "I woz 'ere". I suppose there's some deep and meaningful explanation about excluded youth needing to make their mark on the environment or something, but can't they do it in a more interesting manner than just stylised scrawled initials?

"tagging is vandalism, Bansky is art. IMO
"

but every little tagger believes he could be the next banksy and that is indeed how banksy started.how do you differentiate it?
i have nothing against commissioned works as they have the legal right to.
but defacing others property because you want to draw something is just inconsiderate and costs people alot of money.
why don't they do these "works of art" on the sides of their own houses or bedroom walls?

my favourite graffiti was in wood green, someone has written 'ranking john major' over a road sign.

Now this is one reason I love Oxford

people graffiti in chalk

fair point theBOD - I forgive Bansky if it's vandalism because he is good, tagging your name isn't exactly skilled.

Agree with OMDB here.

I personally like graffitti - it does not offend me, I think it is art and just because something is illegal, does not make it necessarily wrong IMO. However, I like to challenge social 'normality', and appreciate that not everyone does.