The Instigator
L_class1
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
ksu11
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Graffiti - art or vandalism?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The Voting Period Ends In
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/24/2021 Category: Arts
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 530 times Debate No: 127688
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

L_class1

Pro

Graffiti is seen as a form of artistic expression and can have positive outcomes for people, It is also illegal and considered vandalism. So, Where is the line between art and vandalism? Artists are going out and creating art, But not with permission to do so. To some extent, Graffiti is a little bit of both art and vandalism. What do you think?
ksu11

Con

I think, That graffiti is vandalism because:
1) government lose money to clean up streets because it ruins walls so graffiti is considered to be visual pollution
2) it can be illegal
3) some kids can go for a walk and see this graffiti and they may want to do the same
Debate Round No. 1
L_class1

Pro

I agree with Ksenia that graffiti sometimes can be bad but there are many benefits also.
But I will respond to Ksenia arguments. She says that governments or authorities lose money but it can attract people or tourists so they can look at graffiti that improve the look of the area or streets and be amazed by it so they stay in this area longer and can spend money at local shops and cafe. This is about money. Now about laws - you can ask authorities for a permission and it even can carry an important message. About kids - I can say that it depends on parents firstly if children will become vandals so it is a weak argument.

- Polina
ksu11

Con

Polina has good points, But still the so-called "artists" should be fined to pay for the damage. Every time you graffiti, It is still illegal so these vandals must be stopped. Surely it makes more sense to paint on canvas. Then you can actually sell your work for money. Graffiti has destroyed road signs and made it confusing for road users to follow so I still agree more with Ksusha that it is a visual pollution even if it is beautiful. And we could be spending council money on more important projects.
Alisya <3
Debate Round No. 2
L_class1

Pro

I must mention that I am some sort of artist and I even tried to paint graffiti and it was a very interesting experience I can't say that this is vandalism. It is a very good way of expressing your (k4;l5;m1;m0;l8;k7;l5;l5;l0;l1;) inner (? ) world and in our city there are many building that covered with murals that done by professional artists so the town looks a lot more attractive because of the graffiti.
And also I know that museums and art galleries are now considering graffiti as art and placing it in their own buildings and if even artists admitted that this is art we (I mean common people) can't argue with them. Still I agree with the comment that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. " that some person put here.
ksu11

Con

I totally agree with Milana, That beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

To sum it up, When people in our society see any form of graffiti, They shut it down. We have told ourselves that spray painted art is vandalism. In reality, A spraypaint can is just a tool that artists use to create an art piece. Like painting tools, Graffiti is a tool for the mass communications of the world. It can get a person"s opinions and voices heard in an anonymous way, And get people talking.

Let"s leave it up to everyone to decide what art is and what isn"t.
Thank you very much for your work! Let's continue the debates in the next lesson! =)
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by BartMarlows 1 month ago
BartMarlows
I have to agree with "ksu11" graffiti can be art & vandalism because here in Atlanta there is a tunnel that is covered with graffiti and it is a tourist attraction which is considered Art. Now on the other hand someone that tags a statue in a town center is considered vandalism because it is disrupting the statues message.
Posted by JennArt 1 month ago
JennArt
In my opinion we need to understand the point of art, Express what the soul have to say, Graffiti are a kind of street art, In the street you live hard things, So its logical that the strong messages, With angry or pain, Like rap music, But i think that its better paint a wall, That unleash that anger on someone else or a violence attack. The talent of this artist could be a huge oportunity to find a new chace of lifestyle, Claim his own history, A second oportunity, So they need to recived more suport and respect.
Posted by JoCostaRica 2 months ago
JoCostaRica
I'm not an expert on this topic but in my opinion, Some graffiti is spectacular and it could give some exposure to any city if it is made well. I mean if the graffiti is just lettering in black, That kind of graffiti doesn't help.
Posted by Hezikiah 2 months ago
Hezikiah
Another Consideration. . . The Lady Or The Tiger? Https://en. Wikipedia. Org/wiki/The_Lady, _or_the_Tiger%3F
Posted by Hezikiah 2 months ago
Hezikiah
A s an expert, I tossed a coin to decide
Posted by ksu11 2 months ago
ksu11
As an expert, I agree that graffiti is art, But it can be good art like murals, Or bad art like tags, But both have a right to exist, Because this is history of art and if some person puts effort and time into it, It deserves to be art.
Posted by Alisya1 2 months ago
Alisya1
As an expert, I want to say that both teams did not convince me, I still have my own opinion on this issue, And I would like to see statistics and facts in future, Because personal experience is not quite a strong position.
Posted by Juliana1 2 months ago
Juliana1
As an expert, I give my vote to the team 1 which were for graffiti. They gave convincing arguments and did less mistakes.
Posted by Hezikiah 2 months ago
Hezikiah
Beauty Is In The Eyes Of The Beholder
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BartMarlows 1 month ago
BartMarlows
L_class1ksu11Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I have to agree with "ksu11" graffiti can be art & vandalism because here in Atlanta there is a tunnel that is covered with graffiti and it is a tourist attraction which is considered Art. Now on the other hand someone that tags a statue in a town center is considered vandalism because it is disrupting the statues message, but Pro had a more convincing argument.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.