I would be weary of showing anything that could be construed as illegal. I would probably leave off the trains and call the walls "murals". Or better yet "commissioned murals". I'm sure the work is great. I would just hate for anyone to get in any kind of trouble over applying to grad school, of all things.

Hell yes you should!

I would suggest totally celebrating the ways you engage the city or trains or whatever...
I am actually jealous...


Graffiti is architecture!

I'd put it in! If it's really good work and expresses something you feel is important, include it. If the grad school is put off by it... fuck 'em! Do you really want to spend your time (and a whole lot of money) attending a school that can't acknowledge the value of something you love?

I would not do it. You now think Graffiti is architecture, well some proberly is, -- but don't , not if Graffiti is not your life, case then you would do Graffiti, and newer architecture.

well, if he wouldn't do it, then i'd definitely do it - and send it to a museum or gallery.

Bad idear with ilegal Graffiti , school is more than showing off ,even the graffiti is good, then think about what it is if it is ilegal graffiti -- still think it's a bad choice. And what are the if chances someone who will use the papers just had tacs painted all over his front door -- belive me, ilegal Graffity proberly are high value among other Graffiti painters, but realy if it is ilegal many see it not as art but vandalism , that's how most asume it, me to even I paint Graffitu -- but I would newer make Graffiti where it is not apriciated and where it is in fact vandalism.
If it as legal Graffiti , and the messeage is that it is legal graffiti, then I would understand but like this no, even without knowing it.

I think if presented well you should definitely do it...if it is part of who you are, what you do, what gets you out of bed in the morning, do it, show it...my approach to my port was to give people a piece of myself...best decision I made...though, I had no graffiti, but if I did, it would have gone into the book.

perhaps reading is in your future?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti

for our urban planning class one of the students went to wal-mart (or similar big box) and did a bourne-identity style kidnapping, filming the pick up into a van from nowhere, the torture, and the final snuffing with a sledge hammer. He brought the pieces to school and installed them with the video. was quite well done. but the dean gave prof and student shit. he may have liked it personally, but the school could not appear to condone illegal activity. it was dismantled in hours and all trace of activity swept away.

i could not say how it works in portfolio. it should be acceptable (this is easy for me to say cuz i don't own any trains), but who knows what policies might be lurking in the administrations you are trying to woo.

maybe you can include them with obvious/stupid titles like "graffiti on train definitely not created by sir-smokes-alot @ 12:45 am in location xxx, and absolutely not using xxx paint and not photographed by yyy during said activity." a series of not-art. although that disclaimer probably wouldn't hold water either...

frankly, it all depends on the school you are applying to. if its a snobby, uppity place, then they would probably look down upon such things.
Well, if you ask me, why would someone apply to a uptight school anyways?

how many times has a student went into an abandoned building and took pictures..that tresspassing......

how many time has student installed project on lots/areas that are not theirs?


i would include the "bombs, burners" etc....


people get soooo concern with hiding talent than showing it....


drop me a link too....... krylon/montana/caps/etc.....werd


cryzko
bboy-detroit

Put It In!! the old farts would love to feel new age for once. haha

just frame your photo's so that it looks like the grafitti was done for a gallery etc

but how would they know if that graffiti was illegal or not. As a photographer, you get kicked out of many places, or even chased, yet the people who get into trouble will still post their photos into magazines or photo competitions ( I am one of them). I think you - placing your graffiti into the portfolio allows people to see your not afraid to be true of what you like to do, and your not creating that "ass-kissing-goody goody" front.

dangle those round and curlys and place them in. Reminds me of a grad professor that got himself tattooed by nearly two dozen parlours in the XXX area and filmed it for a piece on self mutilation. No where near the same but the angst is in the right place.

btw I'd love to see the trains...if anyone were to ask me, I believe they make those rolling boxes beautiful

this thread is worthless without PICS!!!!! show me the wastage!

Absolutely you should do it. I think the scenario that JUMP posted might have gone a bit overboard into appearing to be illegal activity, and anyone with decent judgment might see why such a project would cause a fuss.

Having said that, graffiti is part of the urban lexicon (is that the right word) and any school worth their salt is going to acknowledge that. Architecture is the one place where you should be free and even encouraged to push the limits - yours and theirs. Otherwise, what's the point?

If a school rejects you solely on some photos of graffiti, I wouldn't want to go there. Make sure the photos are well-done and you'll be fine. Regardless, it's not as if any potential school is going to calll the cops on you.

There are plenty of legal walls in Los Angeles - just state somewhere that it is all done legally.

I'm doing it in my portfolio.

Doooo it, thats a skill that will influence your design process...

do the damn thing.
graffiti is an interesting topic; its gone beyond vandalism and into the realm of applied ornament and interactive sufracing. i'm trying to write a thesis right now on the topic, or the convergent/divergent relationships between architecture and graffiti and possible hybrids, or symbiotic vehicles that contain aspects of both art forms.
there's a small feature in the latest praxis magazine.

do it, definitely.
some small things to consider to protect your neck:
-is the location obvious? will they immediately identify the building?
-is the tagged-upon surface designed in some way by a faculty member?
-is the school your applying to conservative?
-does the review board seem like the type to 'report you'?

do it.

and post some flicks for our pleasure and future discussions.

^^^the small feature in praxis is not my feature. duh.


i agree with FF33: graffiti is architecture. its space-shaping; circulation defining; facade composition.

i think it shows that you are interested in changing your immediate urban surroundings for the better. thats an architect-type goal.

if the graffiti is important to you, keep it in. If it's that important, then you wouldn't want to go to a school that is too stiff to appreciate it anyway.

if the graffiti is just an interesting sidenote, then play it safe and keep it out. You would be forever known as "that graffiti kid", and wouldn't want to be rejected by schools because of something that's not central to your work/personality.

To the original poster - if your graffiti is good, then why not take along your black books/sketches? They must be good evidence of your design skills?

On the idea that graffiti is architecture, well, from what I've seen, part of the wit of graffiti is it ignores its surface - the windows, doors, walls of a train, for example, will often be painted equally. It is almost an 'anti-architecture'

check it

Say you become an architect, --- get the chance to have a great house build. Then next morning a gang of wild tacians and Graffitians colored it all pink with graffiti paint impossible to wash off ,and amature graffiti letters, not very good portraits.

I know it sound silli, but that sort of things is what happen in life.

i hope my new architecture gets graffiti.

Now I admit I did Graffiti to, -- but Legal that is , and I do not try hide that fact, as that is a statement to. But Graffiti is not just about the painting it is much more it is conforming to Graffiti ideology ,beliving in some of the statements above and readyness to have your life ruined by great fines --- are you that much into Graffiti that this is the price you want to pay ?
Now you said that the Graffiti has an architectural theme, then look at this, that also has an architectural theme -- in particular where it is placed ,a place where there are a debate about building or not is going on, ----- please tell me if it would display any different, on a legal oposed an ilegal graffiti fence, in fact my point is, that this particular piece has a value on a legal one not becaurse the fence are a legal graffiti canvas, but becaurse the piece has a messeage ;



Also if graffiti has something of relevance in architecture, why not show that, why not in a project combine graffiti with architecture, --- that might count better, than just some paintings you find nice.

Sorry wrong image ;

Thats it.

I need a Graffiti Tutor. I missed my calling.

i would say just go for it, if the location is not too obvious.
My thesis was all about creating an architectural-graffiti. An intervention into the urban space.

bronson, architect/assassin: i'm very interested to read your report...

I'm with rationalist: you don't want to be known as "that graffiti kid".

If your overall portfolio shows intelligence, talent, a desire to investigate, a rigorous approach to projects, and overall kicks ass, and the graffiti is just a shot or two showing your interest in the urban environment, then show a bit of it.

If you think your graffiti is the best example of your talents, then don't include it; focus on architecture.

what about the naked pics of my girlfriend I took back in '02?

..if you ever need someone to give constructive criticism of your portfolio, mdler...


anyway,
regardless of any subjective opinions by any of us, myself included, on the topic regarding what graffiti is, what is ugly and should be made beautiful, etc, etc..., enrolling someone who admittedly engages in overt illegal activity if that is indeed what you are doing is a liability to the school and they will quite likely want nothing to do with it. if you can indeed prove what you did was within legal boundaries than do it.

and in terms of making it comparable to if you sneakily wander on to someone's property to take a photo and then display it anyway despite the fact that its not your property and technically you were trespassing (and maybe even got chastised with 'no photos!', and yes actually if you publish a photo of someone's private property from within their property without permission they can come back and say take it down/take legal action against you).. but how about this comparison instead.. lets say someone is "fascinated with bathroom stall architecture" and wants to "study the way the user interacts with the space, their motions, their comfort levels, how much they disrobe for whatever their doing in there, etc. etc." and turn it into an art/architecture/design project by studying and displaying hidden camera footage. would it be wise to include that in one's portfolio?? i wouldn't. (of course i wouldn't do something like that in the first place)

the point some things in the public domain do indeed tread the fine legal line between what is victimless/minimally intrusive public art, grafitti and photography included, and some things are downright criminal and subject to arrest and punishment.. and our opinions of the law unfortunately don't determine where things fit into which category.

I thought this was a post about 1.) which children's books to see in grate britain's borders stores or 2.) if it is ethical to put a children's book you drew in your graduate portfolio.

This reminds me of all those teens who video taped their illegal activities and got caught.

Depends on where you're applying, but generally speaking, I can't see it helping you tremendously considering what a problem grafitti is for the built environment - regardless of how beautiful or appropriated yours is / had been.....

isn't legal graffiti kitsch and therefor shit?

Herzog & de Meuron would approve!

http://www.triplemint.com/triplemint/2006/02/40_bond_in_deta.html

Honestly, unless it were TRULY original and thought-provoking, in a way that VERY few graffiti artists are--and yes, I'm thinking of Banksy's pre-commerical years--I would not include it, because frankly I would consider it gimmicky. Same reason I can't stand the old "look how I screwed my portfolio pages together with post screws" or what-have-you. Unless it is truly different, and TRULY defining of you--in a way that flatters your candidature--I would leave it out. For the record I feel the same way about including photography. There are some things that have the unfortunately tendency to look cheesy unless done outrageously well.

A great trend in Graffiti is how more and more Graffiti painters now offer their works on canvas. Beside the Legal Graffiti movement and the projector Graffiti, and the street art Anamorphic drawings this is where the train is heading --- many galleries suggest graffiti artists to migrate to canvas -- laser shows and projector graffiti point in other directions , architecture that invite but legalise graffiti by offering legal graffiti walls are more visionary, than continuing the old graffiti trends.

I remember applying to arch schools and visiting the institutions for face to face interviews. While interviewing at Carnegie Mellon, a photo of graffiti fell out of the back of my book. It was there because I had been debating whether or not to include it. "What's this?" the interviewer asked.
" Oh, it's some graffiti art I did."
"This is good. Why isn't it in your portfolio?" I explained to her that i was worried about the way the work would be perceived, what colleges would think about it, etc.

She replied, "Why would you ever want to attend an institution that wouldn't be fully supportive of the work you do?" She was right, and Louis' comment above is right: if it gets you out of bed in the morning and feeds what you do creatively, it's imperative that you include your graffiti art because any institution that wouldn't support what you do and how you think isn't worth attending.

I remember meeting a guy who was genuinely pissed off because the city removed his "artwork" from an important building in Pittsburgh.

He's in my top ten list of dumb asses I have met in my lifetime.

its funny that 'gets you out of bed in the morning' keeps getting mentioned. most of the people that tag public/private property here in chicago are just going to bed in the morning

you should graffiti a FOG building and put that in your portfolio (and smoke it!)

Crazy! I was typing about a CMU building and didn't see your post, Marlin.

Anyhoo, I agree with myriam above.

oh and for the record i adamantly disagree with the few posters who were indicating you should leave it (or anything for that matter) out if it isn't exceptional or groundbreaking or is 'cheesy', pasee, whatever (or even non-architectural).. that i don't think is what the original poster was even asking and who the hell's place is it for anyone on this board to make that judgment. i guarantee you every member of this board has something in their portfolio either by content or by subject matter or by technique that someone else would subjectively label as 'that's cheesy' or 'that's not relevant' or 'unoriginal'. myself definitely included.

my comments were simply that here in the united states vandalizing property is against the law. yeah, there might be uber-open minded neosocialist or whatever people in any institution that give a big wholehearted thumbs up to expressing yourself in any way even if it is displaying artwork wherever and however you feel like, but the bottom line is if you're applying to architecture school and if you plan on becoming an architect than welcome to the wonderful world of having to learn and follow a shiiiiiitlooooaaaad of laws to even contemplate designing the smallest most insignificant of anything (legitimately).. my point is that why would you want to begin that already skirting issues of legality and someone else's potential negative reaction to such skirting... there's nothing you can say about an institution (as a whole, not an individual) not wanting to support you if its a legal issue. that's reality.

but don't take 'cheesy' or 'gimmicky' as a deterrent...ever.

Ive seen whats in his portfolio ^ he means it

ha, awesome, garpike! what cmu building was it, do you know?