Graffiti artists

The professor strongly disagree with the author of the text that he shared with his studens. He belives that Graffiti can not be called Art, and explain his point of view with several reasons. Firts, the lecturer states that grafitti artists are actually breaking the law, and destroying private and public spaces, istead of expressing themselves artistically, as the author says. Furthermore, neigborhoods with that kind of intervention has higher crime rates and lower values for their propiertorships. The reading inform us abut the famous artist Christo and how he had transform ordinary scenes into beautifull and interesting pieces of art. However, the professor thinks that it is not fair to compare Christo with many young poeple writing their nicknames on the walls, they are just criminal artis. Besides, it is not the same, because Christo get permission for ussing the spaces and his art is always removed by himself, after a couple of weeks, while, in the orther hand, ordinary name tags will be there for years. The professor also indicates that we should ecourage grafitti artist to take part in other forms of “real" art, for example teaching them to paint murals. In order to avoid misconceptions, we need to crearly states diferences between artist, for instance Christo, and vandalism: people who are definetly destroying private and public spaces with aerosol paint and marking pencils.