Seattle grapples with redefining graffiti

It’s the question that always spurs heated conversation. Is graffiti vandalism or art? A recent survey showed Seattle residents are almost evenly divided on the issue. Now, there’s a push to start a photo database to track graffiti and amend the city’s municipal code to include stickers.

With the help of the nonprofit Common Language Project and communications students at the University of Washington, we take a closer look at the graffiti issue through the eyes of the people tracking it, cleaning it up, and making it.

Continue reading “Redefining Seattle graffiti laws is a sticky issue”

Geeky Swedes

The founders of My Ballard

4 thoughts to “Seattle grapples with redefining graffiti”

  1. Seems to me that the key thing is who owns the surface you’re “decorating”. If you own it, fine. If someone else or the public owns it and you haven’t got permission, not fine. Doesn’t seem very controversial in that light.

  2. What a PC dishonest and stupid question. “Art” isn’t spray painting someone else’s property without their permission. It doesn’t matter how “creative” or “unique” the (probably their initials or some other absurd slogan or gang sign) art is, it is really just plain vandalisim.

    You are what’s wrong with this country right now. Under the veil of everything is OK if it makes YOU feel good, nothing is wrong anymore.

    Well, tagging is wrong.

  3. Would it be art if I went to the tagger’s house and paited it say, bright pink? How about if I did some really cool “art” like donuts in their front yard with my car? A really neat design with my back tires type thing. Better yet, how about if I thought it would look better if I I burned their house down because I really believed in piles of charcoal? Is that art?

Leave a Reply