I was driving in Calgary today in the rain and noticed what I think was a city worker taking a photo of a bit of graffiti art on a concrete retaining wall. I presume that he wasn't stopped just to admire it but was likely documenting it so that crews would know where it was so that it could be removed. It got me thinking, as many things do.
Would I rather see a plain, ugly concrete retaining wall, or a kinda cool, black and white stencil of Charlie Chaplin? Personally, I vote for Charlie.
So, the question is, is graffiti free public art, or a costly public nuisance? I get that not all graffiti is beautiful, but I also get that in some cases it actually adds beauty to otherwise ugly places. I watched an episode of 'What the Future' a while ago, which talked about Faith 47, a South African graffiti artist.
 |
| artworks by Faith 47 |
There was a story about a homeless woman who lived in a doorway beside one of Faith's street artworks. Similar to the one above, it was a figure of an angel, and it made a difference to this woman's otherwise difficult life by bringing beauty to her environment.
So, what do you think? Art or nuisance?
