Giller has both agreeable and disagreeable views on graffiti. I believe that her perception of graffiti is much too liberal, and that she gives credit to social deviance. I only partially agree with giller. I do agree that Giller gives many positive points of graffiti in her article. Such as, the fact that she views graffiti as an art of letters. I feel graffiti is an art, and like an art it needs to be done professionally on canvas. On the other hand, I do not agree with Giller on the grounds that graffiti beautifies the urban landscape. Graffiti written on the walls, signs, and fences of cities is blatant vandalism. Graffiti vandalism is destroying our cities, and decreasing property value; not to mention the graffiti clean up which takes thousands of dollars from the cities every year. When written on our city walls, graffiti becomes a form of vandalism that needs to be placed in museums where art belongs.

Giller is partially correct as she states, " Graffiti is an art of letters". Giller is wrong when she says all forms of graffiti are an art. I believe throw-ups and pieces can be considered quality art, however tags can not. Tags are low quality scribbles done in seconds that have no detail and take absolutely no time or effort to compl

Some common words found in the essay are:
Inscribing Transgression, According Giller's, graffiti art, graffiti art letters, views graffiti, art letters, agree giller, urban landscape, beautifies urban, graffiti giller, Sarah Giller's, hold amount credibility, graffiti form vandalism, views graffiti art, beautifies urban landscape, names quickly, throw-ups pieces, art graffiti,
Approximate Word count = 848
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)