Alan Nguyen
Mr. Rehak
English II
19 March 2013
Graffiti markings predate back to ancient Egypt, Greece, and the Roman Empire
in which they are mainly used for religious or cultural purposes. Throughout
time, the uses of graffiti have gradually become a sign of vandalism, creating
multiple problematic issues. The use of graffiti art in major cities of Western
Hemisphere should continue to be prohibited and more strictly enforced because
it creates problems ranging from economic issues to mind alteration.
While artists provide reasons to support the usage of graffiti, it still remains
debatable. Since the 1980s, the use of graffiti has been a big controversy,
with supporters viewing the art as a form of emotional expression, and
antagonists arguing that it produces economic, youth, and environmental
problems. Those who view writings on walls as art have little evidence to
support their argument. Dr. Fiona Campbell, a researcher from Britain’s Environmental
Campaign, conducted a research study on graffiti and stated, “[G]raffiti
stencils of the type used by Banksy are found at only 1% of sites [in England]”
(Campbell). Only 1% of all graffiti are considered acceptable as opposed to the
rest of the 99%, making it difficult for supporters to validate its purpose as
art. Multiple cities in the United States of America have developed graffiti
removal and protection programs as the exercises of graffiti increases
throughout the years. Although graffiti uses multiplied, cities have increased
their effort to counter the situation. For example, the Development Services
Department of the City of San Antonio has produced a phone application that
easily reports graffiti. Therefore, citizens of San Antonio can send real time
information and photos to the department (
City of San Antonio).
1.
Psychological Effects
1.1 Youth’s Minds
Ever since
graffiti has been introduced into urban societies, many childrens’ minds have
been altered. According to Graffiti 911, a nonprofit organization that educates
the population about graffiti, “The impact of graffiti on a young life is often
the strongest and harder to repair” (“Graffiti911”). As children start to
interpret these images, they develop generalizations on humanity. As they age,
these mindsets are embedded, making it difficult to change their concept on
societies. Taggers and vandals tend to create graffiti with negative messages
towards minorities such as “fear of identification and betrayal, the majority
abuse alcohol and drugs, [and] the practice of stealing” (“Graffiti911”). These
delinquents often use the practice of “racking” paint, which is a general crime
of illegally selling spray cans for graffiti, thus promoting the idea of
stealing to the youth’s minds.
1.2 General
Population’s Minds
Not only does it affect the minds of the youth, graffiti generates
psychological effects for the general population. The more apparent graffiti is
in a neighborhood, the more likely people will feel that the law is not bounded
to their neighborhood in which it brings order. In the article Criminal graffiti is not art… it is
a CRIME! by the City of
Eugene, Oregon, it stated “Criminal graffiti makes people feel that the
neighborhood is being lost to gangs and lawlessness” (“Criminal Graffiti Is Not
Art”). People outside these neighborhoods view this as a sign of lack of
concern of appearance. This is also a form of urban decay as graffiti increases
(“Criminal Graffiti Is Not Art”).
2.
Economic Effects
2.1 Business Gentrification
With the
multitude of graffiti, the economic results of it are immense. They vary from
house owning problems to using city incomes to remove these graffiti.
Businesses reckon this type of vandalism as a factor that debases their income.
In The Scoop on Vandalism by the Sacramento County Sheriff,
it states, “Some businesses are forced to move to different
neighborhoods, taking a good shopping out of your community” (“The Scoop
on Vandalism”). This is an example of gentrification, where businesses and
people move to other societies as a result of sociocultural changes. In the
long term, this will cause the neighborhood to slowly decrease their quality of
life as economic agents decrease. Overall, graffiti creates multiple issues
relating to the economy of a city or a neighborhood.
2.2
Homeowners’ Issues
Homeowners
also endure a blow from graffiti, as realtors also lose their businesses. With
the increase of graffiti uses, homes are beginning to become targets for them. California
Realtors Association provides facts to Graffiti911, “With the median home price
in California at the time being $522,590 you are talking about an impact to a
property owner of nearly a $100,000” (“Graffiti911”). While applying graffiti
to homes cost only mere dollars, the bigger picture is that home values
decrease tremendously. Current homeowners find it difficult to move to
other homes as “[the] purchase prices for homes decreased 20% in areas that are
victimized by graffiti vandalism” (“Graffiti911”). Graffiti does not only
change the appearance of homes, it changes their values.
2.3
Statistics Involving
Costs
While graffiti affects individuals in a neighborhood, the
local counties and cities take a hit as they end up with the removal costs. Sheriff’s
Office of Washington County, Oregon, indicated that “[T]hey spend approximately
$2 million dollars per year to clean up graffiti in their city.” (“Graffiti
Hurts Program”). This only accounted for a small county in the state Oregon,
while larger cities experienced much more devastating costs. According to the
National Crime Prevention Council, an organization funded by United States
Department of Justice and Office of Justice Programs, they stated “In 2003 the
city of Los Angeles spent $55 million on graffiti removal” (“Facts and
Figures”). The apparent difference of costs between the Washington County of
Oregon and the city of Los Angeles is immense. With Los Angeles being the second
largest city in the United States in terms of population, there are other large
cities that have similar numbers, such as New York and Chicago. According to
the National Center of Problem Oriented Policing, “The cost of graffiti
vandalism nationally is estimated to be more than $15 billion dollars”
(“Impacts of Graffiti”). Totaling up to more than 15 million dollar, graffiti
takes a large shipping out of government funds.
3.
Environmental Effects
In recent
years, taggers have started to change their targets for graffiti, resulting in changes
of the natural environment. As removal and prevention programs have become
readily available to counter these vandalisms, artists seek for areas in their
graffiti will withstand, such as elevated grounds. One intriguing area of
target is trees. Using trees as hotspots for graffiti adds another issue, which
is removing it. Dan Flanagan, executive director of Friends of the Urban
Forest, questioned the general population of taggers, “What do you do to clean
up a tree without messing it up?” (James).
Finding solutions to removing graffiti on trees without causing harm to
the tree itself is strenuous. Though easier to remove from trees than buildings
with the help of soap and water, it later prevents trees to complete their
exchange of gases. Not only does graffiti affecst existing trees, it destroys
those being planted. “[C]ity’s unusually foggy climate and other factors
(including vandalism) kill 20 percent of newly planted trees.” (James). Newer
trees have a lesser tolerance to the chemicals that spray cans contain, thus
killing them off (Frabetti). Increasing uses means the decreasing of tree
populations.
4.
Counterargument
Even
though graffiti is widely opposed, artists have reasoning that graffiti should
be legalized. Some graffiti, like community art, provide positively motivated
messages to the public. “They could also provide a creative outlet and be used
to communicate messages about important issues such as road safety,” stated Dr.
Fiona Campbell (Campbell). Rather than calling them graffiti, the correct term
for these type of wall art is murals. Also, artists consider their masterpieces
as form of expression. Though true, this is still debatable due to the fact
that only 1% of all graffiti fall under this category. (Campbell).
Local
environments, young minds, and the economy of the Western Hemisphere all
experienced a negative impact as a result of graffiti. For some, graffiti is a
source to express their emotions, but for others, it is a way to vandalize
various places. Graffiti comes in many forms and is done by many different
people around the world. Although it may be positively useful to some people,
graffiti has caused multiple problems throughout history. Graffiti is a type of
art that some people have to resort to, however it should be enforced in major
cities of the Western Hemisphere, forever, and new ways of expressing feelings
should be considered.
Works Cited
Campbell,
Fiona. "Good Graffiti, Bad Graffiti? A New Approach to an Old
Problem." Keepbritaintidy.org. ENCAMS, Sept. 2009. Web. 27
Feb. 2013. <http://www.keepbritaintidy.org/ImgLibrary/graffiti_report_647.pdf>.
"Criminal
Graffiti Is Not Art... It Is a CRIME!" Eugene-or.gov. City of
Eugene Oregon, Nov. 2007. Web. 27 Feb. 2013.
<http://www.eugene-or.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/3613>.
Frabetti, A.
C. "Reciprocity between Graffiti Vandalism and Its Virtual
Documentation." Gnovisjournal.org. Disqus, 21 Nov. 2011. Web. 27
Feb. 2013. <http://gnovisjournal.org/2011/11/21/a-c-frabetti-journal/>.
"Graffiti." Sanantonio.gov.
City of San Antonio, n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2013.
<http://www.sanantonio.gov/ces/graffiti.aspx>.
"Graffiti
Facts and Figures." Ncpc.org. National Crime Prevention Council,
n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2013. <http://www.ncpc.org/programs/catalyst-newsletter/catalyst-newsletter/archives/february-2005-catalyst/graffiti-facts-and-figures>.
"Graffiti
Facts: Graffiti911." Graffiti911.com. Graffiti911, n.d. Web.
27 Feb. 2013. <http://www.graffiti911.com/costs.php>.
"Graffiti
Hurts Program." Co.washington.or.us. Washington County Sheriff,
n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2013.
<http://www.co.washington.or.us/Sheriff/OtherServices/GangsGraffiti/graffiti-hurts-program.cfm>.
"Impacts
of Graffiti." Jacksonholepolice.com. Jackson Police Department,
n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jacksonholepolice.com/graffiti.html>.
James, Scott. "THE BAY CITIZEN; Graffiti Taggers
Turn to Trees, With Some Possibly Harmful
Effects." The New York Times. The New York Times, 18 Nov.
2011. Web. 27 Feb. 2013.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/18/us/graffiti-taggers-turn-to-trees-with- some-possibly-harmful-effects.html?_r=0>.
"The
Scoop on Vandalism." Sacsheriff.com. Sacramento Sheriff
Department, n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2013.
<http://www.sacsheriff.com/crime_prevention/documents/juvenile_crimes_01.cfm>.