Graffiti, as seen in inner-cities and urban areas, is an emerging phenomenon from the mid-to-late twentieth century. However, the understanding, perception and social significance of graffiti continue to remain unclear within this twenty-first century. It is very much an open field. An initial issue is that the term ‘graffiti’ is one fuelled by ambiguity. Additionally, the associations that are attributed or made with this one word vary extensively amid different people. Expressions such as ‘public art’, ‘street art’, ‘tagging’, ‘vandalism’ or ‘social crime’ all relate to graffiti in some way. These blurred perceptions also extend to those who undertake this practice: the graffitists.
Think of Banksy. A current “heavyweight in the art world” and a pride of Bristol, Banksy is one of a few graffiti artists who has successfully and commercially imposed himself and his style within urban society and modern art. Most often termed as a ‘guerrilla artist’, his status has led to Bristol (his hometown) council ordering that all his work in the city be ‘preserved’, yet all other graffiti adjacent to Banksy’s work, be tackled. This example in itself emphasises the contradictions and inequalities that continually surround the world of graffitists. While one will be recognised internationally for his thought-provoking work and street style, another just as capable and talented will be deemed worthless out of a lack of reputation and status.
Graffiti is a topic that has captivated me for a while now. Really, what prompted such interest was my seeming inability to define what graffiti is. I realized I was unable to pinpoint it down to a single definition because of the endless associations that I had learned to make with the word: graffiti. Essentially, graffiti may be identified as a ‘tag’ (generally a signature of one’s name or ‘crew’) or a ‘piece’ (being a larger and more complete mural). For others, graffiti is something far more ancient relating back to prehistoric cave paintings and wall scratchings of Ancient Rome. The division, however, remains very much blurred and subjective to the individual. Personally, I identify and discuss graffiti as mural ‘pieces’. My current interest lies in the wall paintings as a whole and particularly the context surrounding them. Yet, when dealing with the topic and context of graffiti, a series of questions (which have led to enduring debates) arise, such as: is graffiti art or crime? Is it an act of vandalism or an act of expression? Is it segregating society or unifying communities? Keeping in mind that “what is art to one person may be disfigurement or vandalism to another”, it seems inevitable that there be conflicting perceptions of graffiti. The notion of vandalism is one view that particularly reinforces an important negative opinion of graffiti. However, many people fail to consider whether graffiti, also known as ‘street art’, provides a sense of identity and unity amongst those who either undertake it or appreciate it. Has it encouraged the creation of a subculture? Does graffiti provide a form of identity for artists and aficionados?
Extending from mere mural painting, graffiti has seen the formation of an alternative press to purposely present it how the graffiti artists understand it and try to reduce the images of “vandalism” and “defacement” it conjures. Magazines, internet sites, advertisements, music videos are all areas where graffiti has increasingly featured within a more positive context: as a personalized and occasionally politicized artistic form. There is also an increasing demand for graffiti artists within the branding and marketing world. This is all the more emphasised in a recent project entitled “End-to-End” between Adidas, Footlocker and seven of the best graffiti artists. These graffitists were provided with a warehouse in London, art materials and three days and three nights to create a unique collection of designs, based on their graffiti works, for Adidas footwear, clothing and accessories. So, one wonders whether graffiti is finally beginning to establish itself as a creative and expressive art form in our contemporary society.
*This is an adapted snippet of a research paper that discussed the varying dominant perceptions and definitions of graffiti, with its endless underlying connotations, stereotypes and associations with youth and crime. I hope by publishing extracts I can share my observations and findings and especially invite others to present their thoughts on the topic, their observations or experiences with the graffiti world.
Graffiti, as seen in inner-cities and urban areas, is an emerging phenomenon from the mid-to-late twentieth century. However, the understanding, perception and social significance of graffiti continue to remain unclear within this twenty-first century. It is very much an open field. An initial issue is that the term ‘graffiti’ is one fuelled by ambiguity. Additionally, the associations that are attributed or made with this one word vary extensively amid different people. Expressions such as ‘public art’, ‘street art’, ‘tagging’, ‘vandalism’ or ‘social crime’ all relate to graffiti in some way. These blurred perceptions also extend to those who undertake this practice: the graffitists.
