Graffiti And Freedom Of Speech

Graffiti and Freedom of Speech: An international perspective of American and International Students

The research goal in this study is to determine what aspects people consider are important for the validation of Graffiti as a form of freedom of speech. The primary source of information is based on a survey where Drexel students and Fulbright grantees gave their opinions.

Literature ReviewGraffiti comes from the Greek word graphein, which means, “to write.” The earliest recorded graffiti is dated 1851, for ancient wall inscriptions found in the ruins of Pompeii (Online Etymology Dictionary, 2010). Graffiti can be defined as drawings, messages scribbled on the walls, or carved onto a surface. The origin of graffiti is uncertain, but it can be attributed to the dynamic changes insocieties and in the people’s wishes of expressing themselves.
Graffiti has been perceived as having a negative as well as positive connotation according to research conducted over the last decade (Phillips & Susan, 1999). In some cases it has been perceived as a gateway to crime or vandalism. In other cases, it has been perceived as a form of self-expression and a gateway to a new kind of artspatterns in which people can be successful in communicating.
Runza (2009) says, “Graffiti has been considered blight to the cities that find their buildings and transits systems marked by copious amounts of paint”, but also, states “not everyone sees graffiti in such a negative light”. Nowadays, graffiti is considered as a kind of art, without borders, one that touches people of every gender, age,race, income, and political affiliation.
In their article on graffiti and gangs, Phillips and Susan (1999) state:
Motives for the production of such marks may include a desire for recognition that is public in nature, and/or the need to appropriate public space or someone else's private space for group or individual purposes. Illegitimate counterparts to the paid, legal advertisements onbillboards or signs, graffiti utilize the wall of garages, public rest rooms, and jail cells for their clandestine messages.
From their work, it can be perceived that the reasons why people participate in graffiti vary from person to person. The graffiti location can also be perceived to vary widely, from public restrooms to walls in jails. Though the people have a freedom of expression, thisfreedom ought to be curtailed to restrict putting up graffiti in some areas.
One study conducted in the US in the last decade (Lamm, 2002) states that “Graffiti contributes to lost revenue associated with reduced ridership on transit systems, reduced retail sales and declines in property value.” In addition, “Graffiti generates the perception of blight and heightens fear of gang activity,” reports theU.S. Department of Justice. For some people, artistic graffiti is a kind of freedom of speech. And also as Stowers (1997) points out, “graffiti is an art form, and the reasons, including aesthetic criteria -color and composition-, as to why it is an art form far outweigh the criticism of illegality, incoherence, and nonstandard presentation.” Moreover, people employ graffiti to express social andpolitical messages as well as feelings.
Mixed opinions have been put forward concerning graffiti; it has been viewed as a nuisance and deserves heavy penalty. On the other had such penalties are a detriment to artists who wish to express themselves in a unique way. Even more, trying to censor a graffiti artist may, in some cases, be considered against the essence of the First Amendment (Fein,2005). In other instances, graffiti has been viewed as an annoyance and in some cases causes disturbances and strong reactions; it has still been accepted as a freedom of speech and expression as long as it is constructive and not abusive and hence not particularly against the first amendment (Paulson, et al. 2006). In other cases, graffiti has been viewed as a criminal act and legal measures have...