Is graffiti considered art or Vandalism?

It depends what if it. If someone writes "****" on a wall. It's probably vandalism but a lot of graffiti is also art.

Graffiti isn't always art. And there are graffiti art that isn't always vandalism. If it's on someone's property, then it's vandalism. However if it is done nicely and is not just a sloppy gang name or something then it can also be art. (However being art does not take away the fact that it's vandalism). Also, graffiti can be used to send messages and humor in public places. Another thing is that street art is also a style. It does not have to be on the street or on properties, it can also be done on a canvas or something. So it can be both, depending on situation.

The distinction usually revolves around PERMISSION. Graffiti is often removed, regardless of its aesthetics, because the owner of the surface it's painted on wants to assert their ownership. The surfaces that attract graffiti are often really ugly, but an owner will dislike any interference that hasn't been 'authorised' through an official process. Bristol Council has accidentally destroyed several BANKSY pieces (because he's famous, they have a policy of preserving the 'artworks' that he has made in his hometown), during their regular anti-vandalism patrols. Countless other works that are just as attractive as those, are continually wiped out simply because they were made by anonymous painters that the authorities disapprove of. Most graffiti (including simple 'tags', which can be just as decorative as the more artistic 'bombs', IF they are allowed to build up into a squiggly overlapping mass of coloured lines) can look extremely decorative. Some lines in the New York's subway system are famous for the colourful appearance of their trains. This 'livery' was provided (free of charge and overnight) by urban taggers and bombers. But now, security at the depots has been improved, and a lot of the graffiti that appeals so much to tourists is being regularly preserved and repainted by well-paid squads of professional painters. Sadly, the popular notion that these people are the original 'vandals' who tagged the trains, and have now been rehabilitated into 'normal' society and given jobs, IS A MYTH.

to many it's considered art. others its vandelism. because it can be used for different things people have different views. it's art when graffiti is used in a legal way. like on free walls and such. or on paper. anything like that vandalism is pretty much the destruction of any property owned by anyone but you. it doesn't have to be graffiti it just could be egging a place.

See, it depends what kind of graffitti you are talking about here. there are basically 2 types of graffitti. your average everyday hit ups or just little taggings which for me is vandalism. now murals, on the other hand is art. its still a form of graffitti but its a bit better for the fact that it actually looks like art. so thats my p.o.v.

i consider it art! but unfortunately when taggers do their "art" on occupied nd unoccupied buildings, its considered vandalism

just put it this way if you think its art its art if you want to do it just because you hate the law then its vandalism