11th-ELA Discussion Group
Home  Discussion Forum  Can Graffiti Ever Be Conside...
Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art?
Subscribe Flat View
 
Monday, January 26, 2015 4:20:19 PM
llewis
Joined on 6/9/2014
24 Posts
Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art?

Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art?

Photo
A work by Banksy in the West Bank city of Ramallah shows an Israeli soldier getting frisked. Go to related book review »Credit Jim Hollander/European Pressphoto Agency

I don’t know what art is, but….” People have been finishing this sentence with “I know what I like” or “I know it when I see it” for a long, long time.

How do you define “art”? It is something that shows mastery, has stood the test of time, speaks for the era in which it was created, is valued by the masses, is not valued by the masses–or something else?

In “Stalking a Most Prolific Phantom,” Michiko Kakutani reviews “Banksy: The Man Behind the Wall,” a book by Will Ellsworth-Jones that is about the work of the elusive graffiti artist.

The graffiti artist Banksy’s work is immediately recognizable: clever, funny, sometimes political stencils and artworks that have popped up on walls (and occasionally in museums and galleries) in cities around the world — giant rats clutching paint brushes or umbrellas or boom boxes; chimps wearing placards (“Laugh now, but one day we’ll be in charge”); trompe l’oeil windows/holes (opening out onto a mountain vista or a picturesque beach or a pretty cloudscape) on barrier walls in the West Bank; children wearing gas masks or chasing after balloons that are floating away.

Some are out-and-out sight gags — giant scissors with cut-here dotted lines stenciled on a wall. Some are doctored works, replacing the Mona Lisa’s famous visage with a yellow smiley face or flinging some shopping carts into one of Monet’s tranquil water gardens. And some are oddly philosophical meditations: showing a leopard escaping from a bar-code zoo cage, or a woman hanging up a zebra’s stripes to dry on a laundry line. What they have in common is a coy playfulness — a desire to goad viewers into rethinking their surroundings, to acknowledge the absurdities of closely held preconceptions.

Over the years Banksy has tried to maintain his anonymity. He has argued that he needs to hide his real identity because of the illegal nature of graffiti — that he “has issues with the cops,” that authenticating a street piece could be like “a signed confession.” But as obscurity has given way to fame and his works have become coveted — and costly — collectors’ pieces, critics have increasingly pointed out that Banksy has used anonymity as a marketing device, as another tool in his arsenal of publicity high jinks to burnish his own mystique.

… Mr. Ellsworth-Jones’s book is at its most fascinating in tracing Banksy’s evolution from outsider, spraying walls in Bristol like dozens of other young graffiti practitioners, to international artist with work that “commands hundreds of thousands of pounds in the auction houses of Britain and America.” He is adept at examining some of the existential dilemmas this success created for Banksy — dilemmas shared by many outsider and counterculture artists, who suddenly find their work embraced by the very mainstream they’d once scorned.

He also looks at the eclectic new fans (including kids and street toughs) that Banksy’s art has attracted to museums and galleries, and the debates over whether wall art by Banksy and other graffiti artists should be left on the streets, where it runs the danger of being written over, defaced, scrubbed clean by city cleaning crews or filched by opportunists eager to make a fast buck. Some argue that such pieces should be liberated, so that they can be preserved and exhibited in museums and other places. Others argue that context is everything, that these works were made for specific sites and need to be seen in their original environment. If they vanish, so be it; ephemerality is part of what street art is. (And besides, photographs posted on the Web, which has hugely accelerated his fame, can always provide a pictorial record.)

In one interview, Banksy observed: “I’ve learnt from experience that a painting isn’t finished when you put down your brush — that’s when it starts. The public reaction is what supplies meaning and value. Art comes alive in the arguments you have about it.”

Students: Tell me …

  • What do you think of Banksy’s statement that public reaction gives art meaning? What examples back your point?
  • Do you consider the Banksy image shown above to be art? Why or why not?
  • Have you ever been moved by a piece of graffiti, street art or even a billboard?
  • Does the viewer need to be moved in order for something to be considered art? Why or why not?
  • How do you interpret Banksy’s anonymity? Is it art, marketing, shyness?
  • PLEASE RESPOND TO POST BY FRIDAY, JANUARY 30, 2015

Tuesday, January 27, 2015 4:18:52 PM
Unknown
Joined on
7 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art?

 Banky's statement is true about the public. That it is what gives the art meaning. A few examples are that cops try and stop it, city workers erase it, people try and make money off of it, and that some people enjoy. 

Some people believe that graffiti isn't art. That it is vandalism because of were it is put and it also brings some things to light that people don't want. Personally I believe it is art because most people enjoy graffiti also graffiti tells a story without using words and people can make their own story out of the graffiti.

Personally I have seen only two or three street pieces. They are beautiful they are on the highways past Elida they are large pictures of Indian heads and one is of a humming bird. Too me it blows my mind how you can draw something that large with that much detail in such a short time.

The viewer doesn't need to be moved for it to be art. Art comes from individuals as a way for them to express themselves. Some people believe that graffiti isn't art for the way it is presented. I believe that graffiti is just a way for a person to tell a story. And sometimes that story moves people. In addition to that I also believe if it isn't profanity or x rated pictures it shouldn't be painted over, destroyed ,or sold.

The anonymity of Banksy in my mind adds to the story of his art. It makes it stand out that much more. There is a reason for his anonymity and that is because of how we treat his art. It tells the truth which many people do not want to hear because the truth hurts. It goes against the grain. If we knew who it was we could just point fingers and say he is crazy. Seance we don't know who it is we have to face what his art is really saying. Which is unnerving the people that understand his art and are trying to find him. It is his way of making people look in the mirror.
Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:52:50 PM
Unknown
Joined on
8 Posts
Re: Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art?

Tyler,
I completely agree with you on the graffiti art you talked about. Those art pieces are gorgeous! I can see so much detail, and with a painting that big it amazes me too.
-Jenn
Tuesday, January 27, 2015 9:23:19 PM
Unknown
Joined on
6 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (1)

Public reaction gives art meaning because anyone can paint something, but the viewers or the public can only say if it is true art or not. An example would be when Vincent van Gogh painted and the people that were around him didn't think it was art. Later in the years passing, his art was labeled by his bold colors, emotional honesty, and rough beauty. I believe the stencil above is considered art, because no other artist has used stencils in such a way that Banksy has; his art is different and worth pondering on. 
I have been moved by the tree of life. There were women on the sides and a tree of life and love between them. The significance behind the painting if what moves a person. Necessarily, a person does not need to be moved by a painting or sculpture to consider it art. Like I said before, The significance behind a painting is what considers it art. 
Banksy's discreetness is perfect in a way. He is able to roam the day away and at night be someone else that nobody can judge. People seeing his art can only judge the art and not be bias to the person behind it. Banksy is determined to remain anonymous so people on their own can interpret the art in there own way. Banksy would, in my opinion, would be marketing his art. Leaving the art to speak for itself.  
Thursday, January 29, 2015 4:19:17 PM
Unknown
Joined on
7 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (2)

 

I believe that Banksy’s statement that public reaction gives art meaning is entirely true. True art doesn’t mean the same thing for everyone, it might not even mean the same thing to you if you see it at different times in your life. Art is all about perspective. In the article there was argument on whether or not Banksy’s art should be moved to museums. Like many people argued, I believe that his art should be left where he made it; some art shouldn’t last forever.

            Art comes in all shapes, fashions, sizes, and forms. Banksy’s drawings are art. Not all art has to make you really stop and think about life, although some of his pieces do. No, art can make you laugh, make you smile, make you cry, just make you stop and pause and enjoy the smaller things of life. I believe that everyone, whether they acknowledge it or not, is moved by art.

            Banksy’s anonymity is something that no one but Banksy will know the true meaning of. Many people can take guess however. My guess would be that yes, at first Banksy didn’t want to get caught by the police and get in trouble so he left his identity a mystery. As he became more famous he could have decided to stay hidden in the shadows to increase his fame. I like to think that Banksy isn’t just one person, he might have started out as one person but he isn’t anymore. I like to believe that as Banksy’s fame grew he created his own group of “disciples” to teach and to draw for him. Based on Banksy’s art, we know that he is a man of pure emotion and he, like a true artist, wants to share that emotion with as many people as he can. 

Thursday, January 29, 2015 4:21:45 PM
andres.soliz
Joined on 10/30/2014
6 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (3)

Banksy's statement on public reaction gives art meaning because art is a profession and it a has to be criticized in order to become famous or well known. The Fact of backing up this point is that public reaction brings value and meaning to the art. Yes, i believe the the painting of Banksy's up top is art because everyone has there own style of creating or making art. I see graffiti as an art form and should be done more often. I never really seen graffiti personally but i have seen the sculpture of the gava plant  going to Albuquerque. I always wondered how someone make such a fascinating thing for a road side attraction. No the viewer doesn't have to be moved about the art because the art to the artist is what considers it art. The artist has his own style. Bansky's anonymity marketing is not considered shyness because he is revealed his identity he will be arrested for the art form graffiti which is illegal. So i think of him hiding his identity is fascinating because it gives him a mysterious feel and it also brings out a more creative side of him.
Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:13:23 PM
Unknown
Joined on
6 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (4)

I agree with Banksy's statement. His art conveys a message and the real magic is seeing how others interpret it. I do consider this as art, not only did it take great skill but also it sends a message. I have witnessed multiple works by Banksy and each one has a story. I do not believe that the work has to move someone. I considering anything that requires skill and precision to be an art. Banksy's anonymity is partially marketing but I also think he doesn't want to be an icon. He likes the shadows.
Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:20:15 PM
Unknown
Joined on
7 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (5)

When Banksy stated that public reaction gives art meaning, I agree with him. Not only dies the artist have a meaning behind their artwork, but the public may connect in their own different way, therefore, the public's feeling toward the art gives it a more significant meaning. As the artist, seeing others appreciate your work and connect with it is what gives them the emotional connection to the piece. "Banksy has used anonymity as a marketing device, as another tool in his arsenal of publicity high jinks to burnish his own mystique." This is evidence as to why.
I consider Banksy's image above to be art, because there are many connections to this image. Not just to the artist or to people that see this image everyday, but also to me. The message that speaks to me behind this art is extremely powerful.. Yes, I have been moved by graffiti artwork. 
Banksy's anonymity shows his passion for the graffiti art, and how much his artwork means to him. It also shows that he wants others to be affected my his artwork. Not necessarily in a bad way such as offense, but a powerful emotional meaningful connection and influence.
Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:26:02 PM
Unknown
Joined on
8 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (6)

When Banksy says that public reactions give art meaning, I think he means that if people didn't react to peoples art work it would't mean anything. When people react that means they have something to say about that piece. If they like it that means that the word is out about that piece and the artist. 
I think that everything Banksy does is art. He may put his art in places it doesn't belong but that's how it gets noticed. He made a name for himself and is an amazing artist. The work that he does is art, its better than off the stuff they try to call art nowadays. We study Banksy one time in art class and I loved his work. He has a certain way with his work and it's very good. To me, I feel like he is telling a story with his art, like there's a reason why he draws that piece and a reason behind where he puts it. Art is art to me, nobody needs to be moved by a piece in order for it to be art. If you can draw, paint or even cut out something and make it into your own creation, it's art. I think Banksy stays anonymous because he can get in trouble and go to jail. I also believe he stays anonymous because it leaves his viewer always thinking about who he is, and some of them even wondering what his next piece might be. Banksy is a mystery artist.  
Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:30:09 PM
Unknown
Joined on
4 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (7)

I feel as if Banksy's statement of public reaction gives art meaning is that the art if famous for what other people see in its beauty or mysterious figure. The artist only has so much control over how the image is over looked by others or art critics. Some people in this article believe that graffiti is a way of expressing ones self and it is an art; others on the other hand will say it is against the law and a tacky way of expressing art. I do believe the picture above could be an art form. It explains how there are issues of harassment or abuse against little girls or children by people we should be able to trust. It tells a certain story that people can interpret in their own way. I personally have seen many art pieces that have touched my heart in some way or given some type of meaning behind it that I have been able to understand. I do believe that graffiti is very beautiful in its own way and I also take into consideration that the ones who decide to mark places with graffiti may be trying to tell us something that they see wrong with the society, just like Banksy. I dont think a viewer needs to be moved, they just need to be able to tell the difference between what the story behind it is. They should be open to ideas and use their imagination.  I consider Banksy's work art in a sense that he is trying to get a certain type of news across to people and show them what he sees in our society that everyone else could be missing. He doesnt want to come out about it himself and say it out loud so he tends to show it in his art because as they say, "pictures are worth a thousand words". Banksy sure has proven that. 
Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:46:00 PM
Unknown
Joined on
8 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (8)

Banksy's statement that public reaction gives art meaning is true. Art is truly only given meaning by how the people that view the art react to it,they could absolutely love it or absolutely hate it. An example of this is when the article says, "a desire to goad viewers into rethinking their surroundings, to acknowledge the absurdities of closely held preconceptions." Banksy's artwork is often times very comedic in a sense, however, he has a meaning behind it that causes to people to question accepted practices. So, the way people react, either negatively or positively, they still bring meaning to the artwork.

Banksy's image is a piece of art, however, I believe graffiti is illegal. Unless the artist is given permission to create graffiti art, it is illegal. With that being said I also think it can still be considered art because it is unique. Banksy's artwork causes controversy, which many works of the past did at the time. So I guess what I'm saying is I can see both sides, it is illegal but it is also beautiful. Which most artwork was once "illegal" but very beautiful.  

I personally have been moved by graffiti before. On my way to Portales, I notice the paintings of Indians on the side of some buildings. While I do not know if it is considered graffiti, I think it is very beautiful and unique. The paintings are kind of the outskirts of town as you are driving in which leads me to infer that it is graffiti. I can see the time that was put into the work and I can hear the Indians speaking in my head. All in all the graffiti is quite beautiful.

No, the viewer doesn't have to be moved by the artwork in order for it to be considered art. Art from the past was often looked down upon but today it is viewed as unique and powerful. Abstract art used to be pushed out of the main stream but it praised today. During Picasso's time his artwork was harshly criticized. The point I'm making is art is an expression of one's own self and surrounding. So, others may not be moved by it in the way another person is. "Art" doesn't have to be perfect lines or shapes, it can be a stick figure. It is still art. 

Banksy's wish to remain anonymous is, to me, correct. I feel like since the nature of his art is technically illegal, he wants to stay out of trouble. Also, if he wasn't anonymous he wouldn't be able to express himself without risk of people noticing him. I believe Banksy truly cares about his art and as an artist doesn't want that to be interfered with. That to me is truly what it means to be an artist.  
Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:34:08 PM
allison.wilton
Joined on 10/30/2014
8 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (9)

I believe that public reaction gives art value, but not meaning. For example, when Banksy's artwork became world renowned, they became more coveted, and as a result, more costly. However, a simple finger painting from a younger cousin made just for you holds just as much meaning, maybe more, as a Picasso painting in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. I think the example shown above is an example of art because it makes people stop and think, and leaves them wondering as to its meaning. I, personally, have never been moved by a piece of street art, graffiti, or a billboard. In my opinion, a viewer does not have to be moved in order for something to be art. I think as long as a piece makes at least one person stop and think, and ponder the meaning of the work, it can be considered art. I interpret Banksy's anonymity as an effort to stay away from the law, as well as a marketing ploy. I don't believe he's shy, as he was willing to be interviewed.
Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:37:28 AM
Unknown
Joined on
5 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (10)

“Public reaction gives art meaning” this statement is very true I believe and can be explained by the many people talking about it. For example there is a good public reaction and a bad public reaction but both still have meaning behind them. Yes I do consider the image shown above as art, but a political type of art. Personally I have never been moved by a piece of street art but have thought some are very interesting. No the reader does not need to be moved for them to consider it art. Eye appeal to the reader is the only thing that needs to happen to be considered art.    

Thursday, January 29, 2015 5:14:38 AM
Unknown
Joined on
6 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (11)

Banksy's statement shows that he is believing in more than just the picture he wants the people to feel passion and meaning through these depictions. A example of this is statues all around the world but one we hold very dear to us American's the Statue of Liberty. It symbolizes freedom and hope. 

Yes, because that painting tells a story that resonates a message to the many people in that area. The people who see that painting know the meaning behind it and can recognize what the struggle behind that piece of art was.

I personally have not been moved by graffiti I've seen because I normally only see the gang names on trains as they pass by. They when I am in the city it is mostly gang names again and not really any pictures depicting a meaning to the people.

The people need to be moved not just a individual anyone person be moved but moving a community and group through a piece of work is art. Art should give a message to more than one person because it should mean something for everyone.

I think Banksy chooses to be anonymous because maybe he doesn't want to take attention away from his art by coming out now. He simply chooses to live simple life spreading a message thoug his art.
Friday, January 30, 2015 8:43:08 PM
Unknown
Joined on
7 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (13)

Banksy's statement is completely truthful in my opinion. It doesn't matter the opinion of the artist, it's the views and impression the pieces make on others that classifies it as art. Some examples include when city workers are erasing it and when people wish to make money off the pieces. The image above is art for me. It gives another look at what would happen if the tables were turned. What if you had control, rather than the government. Yes, I have been moved by graffiti at times. The viewer has to have an opinion, either good or bad, in order for something to be considered art. Everyone either likes, or dislikes something. That opinion can change if they classify it as art, or simply trash on a wall. Banksy's anonymity is more of an artist thing for me. He doesn't need to take credit and show people look what i did, look at what I created. Instead, he gives you his perspective, and it is up to you to decide if you think it means something or not. 

Friday, January 30, 2015 9:08:02 PM
Unknown
Joined on
6 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (14)

Banksy's statement that public reaction gives art meaning in my opinion is true. If the public never had a reaction towards Banksy's art he would never become as famous as he is today. Public reaction truly matters to all artists everywhere because it gives them the belief that they have a great talent being an artist.

I do believe that the image shown in the above article is definitely a work of art. In my opinion any drawing or painting, good or bad is art. It doesn't matter if the art is hung up on the wall of a museum; or just on the outside of a building, the artist still took their time to show everyone what they can do.

Honestly in Fort Sumner there are not many places that I have been that had graffiti, the only graffiti I have seen here is mainly on the trains that pass by. There are some pretty interesting thing but nothing like what Banksy could be capable. Same with billboards we don't have as many as the big cities do. Even being in a bigger town like Albuquerque, I have never really looked around for any graffiti, so therefore I have not been moved by a piece of graffiti or a billboard.

I do not believe that the viewer needs to be moved in order for something to be considered art. An artist. It is really the viewers opinion because if they like the art then that is their opinion whereas someone else may not like the same piece of art as them. Every viewer has a different way of seeing art.

The way I interpret Banksy's anonymity is basically him showing everyone what he can do by putting it throughout cities. I believe that to Banksy it doesn't really matter to him what people think about his art or what their comments are, I believe that he doesn't care to be in a museum. For him, even though doing graffiti on buildings and such may be illegal, he is doing it because that is what is considered "fun" to him and may be his way of putting his art out there.






Friday, January 30, 2015 9:07:07 PM
claudia.ramirez
Joined on 10/30/2014
8 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (14)

I agree with Banksy's statement "The public reaction is what supplies meaning and value meaning and value. Art comes alive in the arguments you have about it." Any famous art work is known because of all the fame the audience gives to it. For example, Picassos's cubism technique is well known today because it was, and still is, pleasing to a vast amount of people. 
Art: something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings. With this definition in mind, I do consider Banksy's image to be art. I doesn't matter if I like it or not. The picture represents Banksy's feelings and any action that involves expressing feelings should be considered art. I can't recall a time when I have been moved by a piece of graffiti, street art or billboard. I don't think a viewer has to be moved in order for something to be considered art. Once again, art is the expression of ideas or feelings. It is not other's opinion. It may sound like I am contradicting myself. To be clear, I believe that art is the expression of feelings and ideas. However, the public and/or audience is what makes the piece of art famous. 
Banksy's anonymity is a an act of shyness, marketing, and art. At first it might have been just an act of shyness or a way to be "safe". Now that he is famous, it may be an act of marketing. If people would discover who he really was, his fame may wane. 
Friday, January 30, 2015 9:20:44 PM
Unknown
Joined on
7 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (16)

I agree with Banksy "... The public reaction is what supplies meaning and value. Art comes alive in the arguments you have about it." If graffiti weren't controversial then we wouldn't be talking about this topic right now would we? Art is a beautiful thing and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. One person might find Van Gogh repulsive while the other prefers graffiti and vice versa. It is all a matter of opinion. And yes I believe that this piece provides all the basis for good art. A topic, a preferred medium, and controversy. The topic of the piece is obviously war as we can see that the soldier is being frisked by a little girl. In conjunction we see that the street sign says "Jerusalem" which is located in Israel a country ravaged by war. And in true Banksy style we have the spray paint and concrete. The controversy over the painting is that the little girl is frisking the soldier although his weapon is field stripped next to him. I think it shows that innocence will overtake the violence and normality will be restored. I personally love graffiti I think it is more beautiful than some works in museums. It displays more emotion depending on the artist though. Some images can be vulgar and unappealing. The viewer has to be moved if he/she is not moved than the artist did not get his point across to the person or audience they are trying to captivate. I think Banksy has an even mix of both he is shy and will be persecuted for all the things he has done. I also believe that he is doing it to feed his ego a tad bit. 
Friday, January 30, 2015 9:25:42 PM
alexis.reyes
Joined on 10/30/2014
7 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (17)

Banksy's statement that public reaction gives art meaning in my opinion, is true. Art is all about perspective. Without public's perspective art wouldn't have value or meaning to it. For example, Banksy's art has attracted museums and galleries. If Banksy's art didn't have a reaction from the museums and galleries it wouldn't have a purpose. 
Yes, I do consider the Banksy image shown above to be art. I consider this to be art because in my perspective anyone who puts forth hard work and is passionate about something is art itself. The picture above has you question what this artist is trying to say and has you rethink your surroundings.
Yes, I have been moved by numerous pieces of graffiti. The font of graffiti is obviously completely different from any other font out there in the world. Yes, gangs and groups do graffiti for vandalizing and rebellion. The vandalizing is yet still art because it comes out with anger and goes on as meaning. Art becomes alive because there are many emotions behind it.
No, in my opinion, the viewer does not need to be moved in order for something to be considered art. Art is completely opinion based. There are many opinions in the world and there is not one that can judge that something is considered art. Everything is art. Life is everything. Life is art.
Banksy's anonymity is his fame. In my opinion, if Banksy hadn't chosen to be anonymous he wouldn't be as famous. Until the day he reveals himself, Banksy will always remain bashful and cryptic. And if he was revealed he would automatically be arrested because graffiti is illegal. That may also go along with his anonymity. As an artist Banksy wants to be private and stay to himself. 
Friday, January 30, 2015 10:56:03 PM
Unknown
Joined on
5 Posts
Re: Can Graffiti Ever Be Considered Art? (19)

I agree with Banksy when he says that public reaction makes art. Reason for agreeing with this statement would be, one that if the masses do not like it nothing will become of it, and two if is not looked out by the public the art work will be forgotten before it would become memorable. One example that backs my decision is the song "Friday" by Rebecca Black. No one appreciated this song, so Rebecca repeatedly got bashed on for this. And in end did not have a music career.
Yes, I do believe the Banksy image above is art, due to the complexity yet simplicity of the piece. The piece shows the opposite side of being searched by a cop. And puts the cop in the position the arrested would normally be in, but uses a little girl as the searcher.
I have always been moved by graffiti om trains and billboards. This is something that I find very intriguing,  ever since I was a young boy. Graffiti is type of art used to express ones feelings by acting out a bit, which isn't always a bad thing.
No, an audience doesn't have to necessarily be moved by a painting or image for it to be considered art. Art is something that gives life meaning with out directly saying it in words, such as a book or a poem.
I feel like Banksy's anonymity at first was just out of art and not wanting to get arrested for expressing art in an illegal way. Although now I feel like Banksy knows that if he stays anonymous his painting will become worth more and more as time behind the scenes goes on.