Most Helpful Guy
Most Helpful Girl
Vandalism, but some can be art as well. It's just still vandalism.
It's like taking a poop on someone's yard, you can't be like, "but heyy that poop is pretty!" No that doesn't make it okay.
Both. They need to work with either the owner of the building or a representative of the city. There are plenty of buildings that are not in use that would be put to a good cause by making them beautiful as opposed to an eyesore.
Unfortunately any way you look at it wether it's a genuinely beautiful piece of art like in the picture or just someone's tag it's all an illegal way of destroying someone's property if done without permission.. also unfortunately all graffiti is looked in the same way due to all the shit people tag so it all gets a bad name
Poitry is painting a picture with word and griffiti is painting your soul with a can. Added to that most of the best political statements ever made were written in graffiti.
If it's like the ones in your pictures it's definitely art. If it's just some twat running around writing his name on stuff in the quickest and ugliest way possible it's vandalism.
For me it's art... without permission, it becomes illegal art, but still art... there's no aestheticism in vandalism, so I can't qualify street graffiti (as the ones pictured in the question) as that...
Vandalism. Doesn't matter how nice they are. If I build something, I wouldn't want to come back one day and see that one there. If I want it, I'll add it when I build it.
If someone drew on my wall without my permission yeah I'd be pissed. I don't care if it's the most beautiful and moving image. That ain't your wall.
If it's really good, it' interesting art. If it's bad, then that's about the level of the artist peeing on the wall.
Should ask permission first, it's someone else's property if they say yes thata great because some is amazing art
Pure vandalism. No wonder degenerates who think not showering and smoking pot is a life style worthy of a human being.
Well most of these artists probably had permission to do so , so I'd say art. If they hadn't it would also be vandalism.
They shouldn't touch people's property. They remind me of anarchists and communists who don't recognize the concept of private property and thus freely violate it.
Art, the property isn't damaged in the traditional sense and for many people it's the best/easiest way of artistic expression.
I believe that they're just trying to show their feelings and they don't know how to reach out to ask for help
if it ain't art, like for example gang graffitii its vandalism
that there photo though is an example of art
It can be beautiful art, but if the property owner did not give permission then even the most beautiful art work is just plain vandalism.
Both. You can do bad things with art. Depends on how you use it.
It depends on whether or not it was intended to be there.
If permission is given it's ok.
If no permission is granted it's a crime, no matter how nice.
Can be both, sometimes there are super amazing, and sometimes bad.
Mostly vandalism... Making graffiti on building walls doesn't look good in any way..!
I think it's art if they know how to use it and with permission
Think they're both. Some good artists others are vandals
i think its both, lol
Its art, they should just put it somewhere else
Vandalism and expensive to clean
If they give any good social message then its good
I think if it's properly managed, it can really liven up an otherwise dull and boring area.
You cannot undo this action. The opinion owner is going to be notified and earn 7 XPER points.