Graffiti

In the graffiti article Kriegel brought up some very valid points. At the beginning I was a little confused about how the graffiti in the tunnel made him scared. Yes, it did have words of hate but it is only paint on a wall, not a violent person. On page 202 it states graffiti is a form of visual pollution. I have to disagree. I see it as a form of expression. Sometimes there can be hateful things written and that is when i see it as a roblem. Graffiti gives a city character and color. Most artists that write the grafitti do it because they have something to say or show. There can be beautiful pieces of work done by these artists and to try and cover all of it up is a shame. On age 203, it states "graffiti is an urban statement whose ulitmate end is nothing less than the destruction of urban life." I disagree with this arguement because all graffiti does not have the intention to destruct life. It is merely artwork displayed in public in a unique fashion that only relates to its genre specifically. No other art relates. Graffiti is so flowing, colorfull, vibrant and the style/font is so unique its beautiful art to me. The following pic is a good example how how graffiti is art and not violent or out to hurt anyone....