Read the article. What is the controversy over graffiti art in national parks? What is your opinion of the subject? Use evidence from the text to support your answer and respond to at least two other student entries.
70 Comments
Cara
5/19/2015 09:32:35 am
The controversy over graffiti art in national parks is that the hikers/nature lovers are disturbed by them. Others think it's art and it inspires them to do it. For example, the text says, "That makes me sick."said Steve Axthelm. He's saying that the picture of a skull drawn on a rock makes him sick. The text also says, "Grafitti is becoming more accepted. People see it as art." I think that the graffiti is kind of ruining the look of nature. But at the same time, I guess maybe some people think nature is boring and might like looking at the graffiti ON the nature. But I just like the look of normal nature. So I don't really think I would prefer graffiti on nature. There are alot more places where you can put graffiti, it doesn't have to be on nature.
Reply
Justine
5/19/2015 10:46:27 am
I do not agree with you because the graffiti art makes the parks look really pretty.
Reply
chase
1/26/2018 07:05:34 am
I do not agree with you becuse it is not preaty it is actualy downgrading the park
jonah uithoven
1/26/2018 07:09:04 am
it dose not make them look pretty it's vandalizing. it is destroying our history
Jay
5/19/2015 12:08:19 pm
I do not agree with you Cara because some people like me think the graffiti is pretty.
Reply
Cara
5/20/2015 09:06:21 am
Well actually, I wouldn't like it on nature b/c you don't have permission in the parks. If all the nature in the parks are covered in grafitti, what is the point of nature? To draw on it?
Reply
Ashley
5/21/2015 09:31:44 am
I agree with you Cara because if graffiti is on nature, a nature lover, like me, will be furious. So instead of nature I would prefer to draw on a nice sheet of paper. Even though graffiti is pretty it wouldn't be polite to nature to use it as a paper for painting. You need to respect nature even though graffiti is pretty, I would prefer to drawing on a piece of paper.
Reply
Minerva
5/21/2015 11:33:35 am
I love your last sentence: "There are alot more places where you can put graffiti, it doesn't have to be on nature." Graffiti is important to manage anger for some people and it is pretty, but not on nature.
Reply
dalton
1/26/2018 07:01:05 am
i do not agree with u cara it makes parks pretty
Reply
chase
1/26/2018 07:03:34 am
Hi my name is chase I agree with you because we should preserve nature while it is still there.
Reply
Justine
5/19/2015 10:44:10 am
The controversy over graffiti art in national parks is that some people think it is vandalism, and some people think that it is beautiful art. I think that graffiti art is great, but the people that do it should get permission from the owner of the parks first. I don't like the graffiti that is just there to be there, though.
Reply
Elena
5/19/2015 12:05:11 pm
I agree with you because you do need permission, but it is beutiful art.
Reply
Jay
5/19/2015 12:11:18 pm
I agree with you Justine because I also think that they should ask for permission.
Reply
Sarah
5/19/2015 01:28:29 pm
I disagree, no matter what, even if you ask permission, you should not graffiti because it is not your property.
Reply
jacob
5/19/2015 02:54:48 pm
i do not agree it is a vandalism even though you ask you should not do griffiti. Plus if you want to do griffiti do not do it in other people property.
Reply
Celeste and Natasha, Commenting Together
5/21/2015 09:41:20 am
They should get permission from the owner of the park, but who is it?
Reply
Minerva
5/21/2015 11:31:55 am
I agree. Graffiti helps people cope with their emotions and express their political or general opinions. But graffiti should not be in national parks.
Reply
nola
5/22/2015 12:02:28 am
I disagree Justine I think that all graffiti has a purpose to be where it is, and it would be a good idea to ask the owner first but how do they know who the owner is.
Reply
BRIAN BRIAN BRIAN
5/19/2015 11:54:27 am
I think when they graffiti some people do graffiti they do it for fun. And some nature lover's get mad and don't like that living thing. So I think it is a bad idea. And they do it without permission than that is breaking the law. Also they are breaking the law because they revered it for nature. So I think grafting is bad to in a national park.
Reply
jacob
5/19/2015 02:52:54 pm
i agree with you Brian because you because it is as bad idea because it is breaking the law.
Reply
Celeste and Natasha, Commenting Together
5/21/2015 09:38:33 am
We agree with you, Brian. It is really bad. But what can a whole bunch of fourth grade kids do?
Reply
Elena
5/19/2015 12:03:45 pm
The controversy over graffiti art in national parks is that some people think it is bad and ruining nature, and some people think that is is making beautiful art. I thinks it added perspectives of what people think, I actually like the fact that people decorate nature.Writing or drawings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on a wall or other surface in a public place. That is the meaning. "public place" A national park is a public space. But there are alot more places where you can put graffiti, it doesn't have to be on nature, but it can.
Reply
Sarah
5/19/2015 01:33:18 pm
I disagree because no matter were it is, unless it is there property, they shouldn't do it on someone's property. If it is on nature, it just looks bad. It is sort of marking your territory, when it is not theirs
Reply
Arlon
5/20/2015 01:46:26 pm
I sort of agree with you Elena because it does spread awesome messages and but it also poisons the plants.
Reply
Connie
5/21/2015 11:19:12 am
I agree with you that some people like graffiti art and some don't. Also, graffiti can be in the parks, roads, streets, etc. But, I agree with the nature lovers that having graffiti art on nature is not the best decision. I mean, it could be somewhere else that don't include nature. Graffiti art and nature are pretty in its own way, by itself.
Reply
JAY
5/19/2015 12:05:42 pm
The controversy over graffiti is that some people say that the art is affecting nature and some people say that it is beautiful art.I think that it is beautiful art work because I do street art. I think that street art is cool. Especially when you add the 3D into it looks cool.In the article it said that he did the graffiti at a friends house. The other people found it in a National Park so he lied.I do not think you should lie because it is art.
Reply
Arlon
5/20/2015 01:49:17 pm
I agree with you Jay because I think street art is beautiful,especially at my little brother's old school.They had a kinds of beautiful art.
Reply
Ashley
5/21/2015 09:59:44 am
I disagree with you Jay because even though graffiti is a beautiful art made by artists, it is harmful to nature.So like I said to Cara's comment I said that I'd like to prefer to draw art on a nice blank sheet of paper instead of drawing on some fresh nature produce.
Reply
Sarah:)
5/19/2015 01:25:25 pm
I think the controversy over graffiti art in national parks is that the people that graffiti, think it's art. The owners of the national parks, and that are nature lovers, they think it's vandalism. They said It feels like a punch in the stomach .Some evidence from the text is," Seeing them marked up is like getting punched in the stomach." I think graffiti is bad because it is on someone's property, no theirs. it also marks the territory of someone it doesn't belong to. It is especially bad when it is on nature, like I've seen graffiti on trees. When there is graffiti, other people do it to. Some evidence is," A little bit of graffiti can encourage others to make their mark."
Reply
alex
5/21/2015 11:50:48 am
I agree with you Sarah that street artists should not be able tograffiti in the national parks and it is a deep insult to park rangers or Nature lovers.
Reply
nola
5/22/2015 12:05:29 am
I disagree Sarah because some people like me do enjoy the graffiti as I said in my article it's a way of expressing yourself.
Reply
jacob
5/19/2015 02:51:08 pm
I think the controversy over graffiti in the national park is that people think that griffiti is a peace of art and some people think it is just a bad thing to do and ruin stuff. I think it is bad to do giffiti because if you do it on a plant. People say there is most giffiti in the park in the text it says " The most graffiti are in parks near big cities." I agree with a person in this article the grifiti make me very sick because i see them every day i see it on a wall, poster even other people houses. I think if you get caught doing grifiti then they should pay more than 300 dollars. That is my thought in griffiti in the park !!!!!!!!
Reply
Cara
5/21/2015 10:06:08 am
I agree, graffiti is somewhat disturbing to me.
Reply
Aidan
6/2/2015 01:22:06 pm
I agree with you Jacob because graffiti does sometimes ruin things up
Reply
Sasha
5/19/2015 03:12:03 pm
I think that the controversy over graffiti art in national parks is how many people think that graffiti is a piece of art to represent something. However not in this case. this case is not like the bad wording graffiti on walls. These artists come along onto natures natural resources such as valuable rocks and plants. Also my opinion is that people might come to the national park and say this place looks like a dump because of all of this graffiti. Then they might say maybe this isn't a safe place. I think that we all agree about this because where walls are full of graffiti, people might suppose that this is were all of the gangs and projects live or come to!!!!!
Reply
Arlon
5/20/2015 01:42:24 pm
The controversy of graffiti in national parks is that it sort of ruins and spread poisons to the trees and other plants.Though my opinion on this is that sometimes there is a time to spread art and when not to.But if you looked at the picture on the boulder on the article,you can sort of see a love note.This possibly means this spray paint artist was trying to spread a message to this special someone that he or she loves.It's actually very sweet.Maybe he or she put the message in the same park that special person loves.
Reply
Ryan
5/21/2015 08:12:00 am
The controversy over graffiti is the hikers are not very pleased with it. But....... some people are pleased with it and think it is a work of art. If I had a saying of this situation I would say that the graffiti should not be there any more. It is not as pretty and it doesn't really make the environment look nice. The graffiti usually doesn't look pleasing to other people and I am one of those people that think graffiti is somewhat disturbing. But of course that is my saying on this situation and my opinion.
Reply
Cara
5/21/2015 10:05:21 am
I agree, I think it would look a lot nicer on a sheet of paper.
Reply
Navaeh
1/26/2018 07:13:07 am
I don't agree with you because it looks better on walls!!
Wolfvoelker6789
5/21/2015 08:56:45 am
I think that the controversy over graffiti is that people are picking their sketchpad to be national parks and some people are not pleased with this and others think it is completely fine.But.. to Americans this is "like a punch in the stomach."Some see it as a work of art and others see it as vandalism. I see it as a work of art, but were people are placing graffiti is the thing that I am definitely not pleased with.(But this is just my opinion.) I only like graffiti that has a art-like quality and non-bad language.
Reply
Celeste & Natasha, Blogging Together
5/21/2015 09:13:17 am
We think that occasionally graffiti is pretty, but it isn't O.K. to graffiti in national parks, it destroys the beauty. If you are really passionate about your career as a graffiti artist, you should just graffiti up your own house and your own things. Even if you love seeing your graffiti on public buildings, everyone else shouldn't be forced to look at your art. If you like to paint things then you could start a career as an artist. Some people just don't appreciate your art. Some evidence of others agreeing with us is that "'National parks are special places for most Americans,' Schreiner said. 'Seeing them marked up is like getting punched in the gut."'
Reply
Ashley
5/21/2015 09:37:22 am
I agree with you Natasha and Celeste because leaving graffiti in parks, that isn't polite to nature and you need to respect nature. People in the comments said that graffiti is pretty they're correct but they don't ask permission and ruins the sight of nature. And I also like how you used text evidence to cite your answer.
Reply
Connie
5/21/2015 11:08:41 am
I agree with both of you that even though graffiti is beautiful, it doesn't deserve to be on nature. Nature is pretty in its own way, by itself. Nature lovers think what the artists did to the national parks were very disgraceful. Also, you're right that not everyone likes/wants or agrees to have graffiti art in national parks.
Reply
Wolfvoelker6789
5/26/2015 11:44:25 am
Agreed Celeste & Natasha!
Reply
Jorden
5/21/2015 09:39:50 am
I think the controversy is that the rangers and hikers at national parks see graffiti. This act inspires more people to do it. Saraiva paid a fine of $275, I think more people did this and should also pay a fine for there acts to a National Park. I believe that its good to have hidden cameras and watch what people are doing 24/7 so no-one will get away with doing graffiti in a National Park. I feel bad for Nature Lovers b/c when they see it they may be sad that people are writing on nature and are abusing it.
Reply
Gael
5/21/2015 02:47:20 pm
I agree Jorden it is killing plants and abusing the wonders of nature. Even though it looks cool it is doing harsh things toward the environment and people should pay for their wicked crimes.
Reply
Ashley
5/21/2015 09:55:29 am
In my opinion I don't think anybody should ever use graffiti on nature. Just like I said on Cara's comment, I would prefer to draw on a nice sheet of paper. A reason why is because it'll destroy nature if it stays on there forever. But in this case Saraiva used erasing paint so that isn't really harmful for nature because it will be erased by rain but, permanent paint will pretty much harm the nature produce. I know that Saraiva used erasing paint because I used text evidence, "His lawyers said Saraiva used paint that could be erased." And also I already feel angry, mad, and lastly furious like all nature lovers who don't love graffiti. I know some people don't like graffiti because I used text evidence, "National parks are special for most Americans," Schreiner said. Seeing them marked up is like getting punched in the stomach, he said.
Reply
Ben
5/21/2015 10:38:27 am
I agree Ashly, because nature could be harmed by using un-erasable paint.
Reply
Tommy
5/21/2015 10:26:06 am
My opinion on this subject is that it is okay to do graffiti but not on buildings or nature! My other opinion is that on trees it makes them look very ugly. It is more Bette to do it on walls because you can paint over it but on trees and other plants you can't ! The constroverty is that most people like graffiti and most people don't and the worst part is that they not ask perrmision, an ways if the graffiti people did they would of not gotten permission!
Reply
Ben
5/21/2015 10:36:17 am
I agree with you tommy because it does make the nature look ugly.
Reply
nola
5/21/2015 10:46:28 am
"These artistic acts make nature lovers furious." and "A little bit of graffiti can encourage others to make their mark." I think that these are the main to sentences to be thinking about. Because the first one is saying that if you like nature than this would be a punch in the gut, it would be a hit to the head. But the second one is telling us that if you see some graffiti once in a while it might be that extra little push to make someone, somebody. What I'm trying to say is that it depends on the person, it depends on there personality. The controversy is that some people enjoy looking and seeing the art in national forests, but others think that it is destroying nature. My opinion is 50, 50 I like seeing art/graffiti, it is a way of expressing peoples feelings. But also I kind of think it's invading nature and it's natural features and looks. I think that graffiti artists could maybe not do in national forests but a different place, a better place.
Reply
Ben
5/21/2015 10:56:28 am
The controversy is that graffiti art has started and it is disrespecting the people that like and care about nature. Some people think it is a "WORK OF ART" but some people think it is harming nature. They actually are harming living things so I think it is bad. I think they should make a rule that you cannot graffiti any kind of nature. National Parks should speak up and say a thing or two because they have not done much. This problem could get worse if the so called "artists" started using un-erasable paint and we could not get the paint off. So I think someone should step up and end this nonsense.
Reply
Gael
5/21/2015 02:44:19 pm
I agree Ben because the spray can kill plants then the animals wont have food!
Reply
Connie
5/21/2015 10:58:31 am
I think the controversy is that artists are spraying graffiti on nature(national park). Nature lovers don't appreciate that at all. In the article, it was written, "American nature lovers have said what Saraiva did was disgraceful." In fact, the artists are using nature like a sketchpad for the graffiti art. By doing that, it destroys the real beauty of nature. Sometimes, people are more interested in the graffiti art than the park, or the people are just annoyed of the art. In the passage, the author wrote, "That makes me sick,' muttered backpacker Steve Axthelm, of Portland, Oregon." Nature is beautiful in their very own way, so is graffiti art, but using nature as a sketchpad is just not okay. National parks are supposed to provide enjoyment to visitors, not show them graffiti art. By the way, graffiti art doesn't need to be in national parks, it could be somewhere else, such as streets, roads, etc. But I don't really recommend private properties. Anyway, the graffiti art on nature should be stopped. That's why I'm glad that more people(including the park officials and lawyers) are opposing that work. In the text, the author wrote that park officials installed video cameras to catch the act of the graffiti artists.
Reply
Minerva
5/21/2015 11:28:24 am
The controversy over graffiti in national parks is that some people, like the park rangers, feel like it "makes them sick" or is like "getting punched in the stomach" and others "see it as art" and that "graffiti also OK in national parks." I agree that, although graffiti art is great and sometimes pretty, there is also the argument that national parks are protected for a reason. They are special natural areas that are unique and should not be ruined. Graffiti and nature just don't mix. "A little bit of graffiti can encourage others to make their mark," just like Schreiner said. Which means that is one graffiti artist like Saravia paints "OX" on a boulder in a national park, many other graffiti artists will try to compete and show that "I was here" too. The reason a lot of people graffiti, other than to express their opinions and emotions, is to show that they had been there, compete with another graffiti artist, and sort of mark their territory. But the thing is, the national park is not their territory. Again, national parks are uniquely beautiful areas that are protected for a reason. My suggestion is to put up walls that say: THIS IS FOR GRAFFITI. When one person graffitis there, many others will and then people can look at pretty graffiti art in places that can be replaced.
Reply
alex
5/21/2015 11:47:01 am
Great job Minerva I love the way you put it and I espacially liked the part about the street artists competeing with eachother and want to show people they were there too.
Reply
alex
5/21/2015 11:42:50 am
The contreversy in this article is street artist who usally graffiti on the streets in the city are now bringing their creations to National parks. Nature lovers and park rangers see this as an insult a crime to graffiti on nature, Or as Schreiner would say it a punch in the stomach. Some people opinion on this is that the street artists make no harm to the national parks. They say that graffiti on streets is the same as graffiti in national parks. My opinion on this is that the street artists have no right to graffiti on national parks, no right at all. They should most definetly be stopped. If the street artists continue to graffiti in national parks the parks will end up being litterd with graffiti. To some people this stuff that they graffiti on is sacred and it is a disgrace and a deep insult to make your own drwings on this. I can make a connection with this. One time I was at yosemitie and saw multiple carvings/drawings on nature I saw a clown sort of human on a rock, a weird sign in a tree and even a psopasal on a log. Thankfully the park rangers are putting up hidden video cameras so they can see the street artists who are making graffiti on streets.
Reply
Cara
5/21/2015 12:22:38 pm
I agree. Once all the plants have graffiti on them, it will look like an outdoor art museum, not a national park.
Reply
L'étonnant Violet ( the amazing violet )
5/21/2015 12:39:00 pm
I think that controversy of the graffiti in national parks is because of the idea that people who are famous for their work of graffiti have decided to mark up nature instead of walls. A lot of people like graffiti and others don't creating a conflict between both sides kind of like the civil war just handled more nicely . I my self agree with those who don't agree with graffiti it is something that is not that respectable and that is not good especially if it is done to nature because me like others love nature more then some other things. I think that Saraiva should keep his " ERASABLE Paint " to himself ; I mean it.what started graffiti . Why start graffiti.
Reply
Jaya
5/21/2015 01:09:50 pm
The controversy over the graffiti is that the nature lovers and hikers are disturbed. If i was one of the nature lovers or hikers i would be angered too. These areas are hear for people to view and have fun at. They are not here for people to know what your street name or gang name is. It is for the beauty and to show how beautiful the world is. We do not need people to ruin the scenery. People like to look at trees and plants. The national parks deserve to be left alone. They are too beautiful too ruin with spray paint.
Reply
Gael
5/21/2015 02:39:54 pm
The controversy is that people hate seeing graffiti in parks and natural parks. My evidence is a hiker saying "That makes me sick" after he saw a giraffe of graffiti. People dont like it and think it is ugly. Other people are seeing it as works of art. For example in the article it says that Google is making a website for graffiti art. Also people are posting pictures or taking "selfies" as it says in the article. For example in the article it says that a girl took a picture of herself and her portrait on a hill. My opinion is that I love graffiti! Its cool and unique. I think it as beautiful art. A true masterpiece!
Reply
Aidan
6/2/2015 01:23:53 pm
I forgot to add this once somebody did a graffiti on our garage door.
Reply
ds
1/26/2018 07:08:47 am
u
Aidan
6/2/2015 01:17:35 pm
I think that most people think graffiti in parks are really bad because in the article we read it said that a picture of a giraffe made him sick to see it . I think that people just don't think when they do it. They just don't care what they are doing and where they are doing it at. Sometimes graffiti is awesome and cool. Sometimes it is a true masterpiece and beautiful. I think that graffiti is cool I like it !!!!
Reply
b
1/26/2018 07:10:03 am
fefefwefwefwefwfwfwfwfwefwefrrererefff4r33r32r23r32r34f4greretrhtynjm gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg mmjuy=uhyhyy8;ioheufgrfgu42iy4
Reply
Dalton
1/26/2018 07:04:42 am
wierd
Reply
darren
1/26/2018 07:10:46 am
your comments are very good
Reply
lily
1/26/2018 07:13:31 am
I agree with most of y'all it hurts the plants and nature. If people do it they should do it in their own yard or on paper.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorHello! My name is Mrs. Chenu and I'm a 4th grade teacher at Eagle Rock Elementary Gifted and High Ability Magnet. Archives
November 2016
Categories |