Fall 2012 Tu/Th Survey of Art

Graffiti can be view as art and history because it is a way to express feeling in two different way by using pictures or writing . Egyptian writing is history ,they left a sign of life and telling us today that they once existed, to tell us about how their life use to be. Graffiti is art, is a way of telling how people feel a way to release their emotion by drawing pictures of things that come to their mind . Personally i think graffiti give life to certain places five points use to be a building without any use, a plain building but with the art and history it has, it give it a sense that there is people trying to tell us something about them whether it is from the past or from the present, they are there.

After I watch the video “Graffiti as Art, Graffiti as History.” I think Graffiti should be as art and history. Graffiti is a way to express our thought to the society. It reflects of complaints and unfair things around our lives. This art consciousness reflects the fact, as long as the event is the existence of such facts, will generate ideas in our mind. Because the graffiti culture is a human culture and human had spread all over the world the graffiti culture also should be worldwide. On the wall or floor that is not possible for the paintings. But, graffiti could do it. That also make graffiti the one and only.

If someone were to ask me if I think graffiti I would tell them yes. If you ask any artist they will tell you that art expresses their feelings and come from the creativity of their mind and thus being that graffiti is expression through spray paint on walls it should and by me is considered to be art. Although there is a wide aurety of opinions about whether or not graffiti is art many of the people who disagree argue about the people who do graffiti and where it’s done. To further elaborate upon this art has its time and place just like painter has his canvases to paint a graffiti artist should respect other people’s property and find places where people who appreciate the art can recognize the work of the artist just like famous painters art are located in museums.  This is how I feel about graffiti being an art.

Graffiti can most definitively be defined as art. Art comes from the creativity of the mind. They also say a picture is worth a thousand words. If you look closely at any type of graffiti, whether it be writing on an old statue or on a building in the street, they all tell a different story. The story can be about the person who created the graffiti, such as their name or where they’re from, or it can tell a totally made up story. I do believe, however, that graffiti does have a certain place to be made, as does any other type of art. It should not be made on private property without the owners consent. If it is on a train or an abandoned building, graffiti artists should be able to do as they please. As stated in the videos, the graffiti isn’t damaging any of the property, it can be easily painted over. Something that has been going on for hundreds of years should not be stopped because some people of society do not believe graffiti is considered to be art. I do believe that graffiti can be labeled as art and should go down in history as art.

Before I can give my opinion on this question I must first define the word “art”. Art is defined on the global internet as “The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture”. And as we see from the video by Barry McGee and Margaret Kilgallen, when one does graffiti they express their thoughts and emotions so that the world may see. Graffiti isn’t just words on a wall. It is showing the artist past experience, struggles and triumph through  out life. Graffiti is almost similar to relief works in such a way that they are both drawn on straight walls with the exemption that reliefs are shown out slightly more. In my opinion anything may be art, whether it is a line a do or just shades of color, once the pencil is used on paper it has now became art.

This video of  the Polykleitos is in between when it comes to accuracy. The reason for this is because some of the points made like when he mentioned that the position of the foot and the weight being placed on one and how weight is being shifted. But there were some in accurate descriptions as he called the sculpture an athlete.

The narrator had few errors when talking about Polykleitos , although his explanation on contrapposto was okay he did make a mistake. He stated while one side of the body is in motion and the other isn’t, when it should be the statue experiences a weight change where one part of his body supports another while maintaining the pose. Also, the Polykleitos was a representation of the ideal man, yet the narrator says it was to show the ideal athlete.