Reference no: EM133650920
Requirements:
The film "Style Wars" presents a largely positive interpretation of NYC subway graffiti in the late 1970s. What do you think? Is graffiti a form of public art? Or is graffiti a "quality of life crime"? Why? Be specific.
Answer this question fully and choose a side. is graffiti a form of public art? Or is graffiti a "quality of life crime"? and support it from The film "Style Wars" and Glazer, "On Subway Graffiti in New York" with sources.
Glazer, "On Subway Graffiti in New York"
The author's central argument is that subway graffiti in New York is a significant problem that has far-reaching consequences for the city's image and the well-being of millions of subway passengers. He asserts that while graffiti may be viewed as a form of art or personal expression, its impact on public transportation extends beyond artistic merit. Glazer contends that graffiti contributes to a sense of fear and uncontrollability among subway riders, making it a pressing issue for New York City. Also, The author argues that removing graffiti is essential to maintaining the safety and reputation of the New York City subway system as well as safeguarding public property. (Glazer, 1).
The author uses 12 sources, one source references Chief Garelik's observations and experiences with the transit police, as well as some anecdotal evidence. For instance, Real-world information is incorporated into the text, including the quantity and ages of graffiti artists and the possibility of graffiti leading to more serious crimes. It also refers to several recommendations and deterrent strategies, implying that real attempts have been made to address the graffiti issue. The author draws from firsthand observations and insights from those engaged in addressing the issue. (Glazer, 4).
In my opinion, Glazer's article raises important concerns about the consequences of subway graffiti in New York City. His argument about the negative impact of graffiti on the public's perception of the transportation system and the resulting sense of fear and chaos is compelling. However, I find myself questioning the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. While deterrence and educational programs are mentioned as possible ways to address the issue, the article leaves room for the exploration of more innovative and practical strategies.
One issue is that the proposed solutions, such as punishments or cleaning up graffiti, may not adequately deter graffiti artists, given their often youthful and rebellious nature.
Furthermore, Glazer's reference to education and therapy programs for graffiti artists leaves me wondering whether these efforts can truly change the mindset of individuals who perceive graffiti as a form of art and self-expression. The cultural and societal factors that drive graffiti creation are complex, and addressing them would require a more nuanced approach.