Tox faces the Box spurs the argument: Is Graffiti Art or is it Vandalism?

With the recent arrest of graffiti artist Tox aka Daniel Halpin who has been convicted for thousands of pounds worth of criminal damage and the debate between other “graffiti” artist “Eine” deciding whether or not Tox’s work was art, it begs the question is graffiti vandalism or is street art?

Tox a.k.a Daniel Halpin, 26 years od age, has been responsible for thousands of po unds worth of damage in the past ten years since he got started. He’s accessed places those who work for the London Underground have admitted they have no idea of how to access and is notoriously prolific tagger who now faces going to prison after his work was considered to be vandalism and not art. Ben Flynn aka “Eine” whose work has been showed to Barrack Obama at the White House was called to Blackfriar’s Crown Court as an expert witness to give evidence, refuses to accept that Tox’s graffiti has any value, describing his work as “incredibly basic” and lacking in “skill, flair or unique style.” However others who enjoy graffiti and taking part disagree and has been hailed as an urban legend. Tox has managed to get his name up into many different places, some impossibly hard and risky places and has got his name all over London, some even ranging as far as Paris. Others would describe his work as meaningless and unlike other’s who do graffiti such as Banksy, Tox as little to say apart from his tag “Tox” folled by “09” the two last digits of the year, with “Eine” saying that “his statement is Tox, Tox, Tox, Tox, over and over again.”
Other graffiti artists and even those who just enjoy the form of graffiti itself hail Tox as an “urban icon” for his graffiti, Tox being one of the most prolific taggers in London. One graffiti artists said, “He has embarrassed the police, outwitting all their CCTV and security schemes. He is a genius and an inspiration to all artists.” Others would argue that rather than spend time on more artistic based dubs, he uses a simple style to be anti-art, yet he is swell known for having got his tag out there in many different places whilst getting people to think and talk about him. In 2009 he sold canvases bearing is tag on them for around ｣75 which yet again provoked a debate over whether he could be prosecute from profiting from crime. With his sentence soon to be coming up at a later date of July 1^st, you can’t help but think if his work had been deemed has having far more artistic value, such as works by the likes of Banksy, Eine and Roa, then perhaps he may have have even been facing such a long sentence, if a sentence at all. All the three graffiti artists mentioned haven’t been prosecuted or have face minimal prosecution, but if private property has been defaced why do the likes of Banksy get away with it due to their works apparent artistic merit? The question itself gets right into the heart of the debate what is art, and can graffiti ever be art? Let us know what you think