Public Art, Street Art, Graffiti and Consent

Following on from having previously looked at the street art of Shepard Fairey, I wanted to take a closer look at how street art is viewed.

I read an interesting article called "Street Art and Consent" by Sondra Bacharach who pointed out the difference between graffiti and street art as well as public art. Public Art isn't something I considered but it is still, like street art, art that is in the public space. The difference being that Public Art is sponsored, supported or funded typically by the government and generally has protection from the government from the likes of vandals.
It also generally disregards the opinions of the public (which also reminds me of a lot of galleries). 'Tilted Ark', installed in 1981 by Richard Serra, is an example of not taking into account the opinions of the public in the area.

Source: Tate

It was erected in the Federal Plaza in New York and the government office workers of the area did not appreciate this huge sculpture dividing the square. It was seen as ugly and oppressive and after petitions and public hearings, the work was removed in 1989. 

Street art and graffiti however are not funded or supported, if anything the government funds the removal of street art. It also often takes people around the area of the work into account. For example, street art commenting on poverty might be placed in an area where it has the most impact.

JR, a french street artist and photographer is a good example of keeping a the public in mind when placing his work. It was interesting to read that he started off with graffiti (The Culture Trip) to self promote himself around the city. This being one of the differences between graffiti and street art. Since then he has become well known for his huge black and white photographic paste-ups. 

"Separation wall, Bethlehem, March 2007" Street Art, The Graffiti Revolution

"In 2007, JR started a joint-project called Face2Face, which may be considered the biggest illegal photo exhibition ever in amongst the most unexpected of urban canvases – along the wall separating Israel and Palestine. JR and a team from the local community posted huge portraits of Israelis and Palestinians who work the same jobs as taxi drivers, lawyers, cooks, etc. They were asked to make a face as a sign of commitment. These large-scale photographs were pasted in eight Palestinian and Israeli cities, and on both sides of the security fence/separation barrier. According to JR, “Most of the people in the cities could not tell who was who.”- The Culture Trip

This would have been subversive to the people of Israel and Palestine. It is an undermining of the authority that keeps the wall there. This could have different meanings to either side. 
Israel considers the barrier to be a defence against terrorism while Palestine sees it as Israel's visible elements of their occupation and control over Palestine (ProCon.org). This work is undermining all these things, breaking down barriers if you will.

Let's take a step back and look at the differences between Street Art and Graffiti.  

The reason for creating the work varies and in turn so do the subversive elements. The main subversive aspect that develops creativity, is the fact that they are done illegally on the street. What differs them is the reason and intention behind the work. 

graffiti

ɡrəˈfiːti/

noun

1. 1.

   writing or drawings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on a wall or other surface in a public place.

   
   

   "the station was covered in graffiti"

verb

1. 1.

   write or draw graffiti on (something).

   
   

   "the graffitied walls"

Graffiti, along side hip hop, was born in urban communities such as the South Bronx. it came out of urban renewal schemes which was justified by the desire to improve the lives of the community but was really just to make money.  

'In Street Art, The Graffiti Revolution' by Cedar Lewisohn, Henry Chalfant explains that this goes much deeper, it's about hostility towards urban poor. Planners wanted to destroy already standing buildings to rebuild and renew. After the Second World War, a political idea to "isolate and break up potentially rebellious communities, to prevent the formation of a critical mass of unrest" drove focus onto economic developments in the United States. In this era of neglect towards now displaced communities, bought about the birth of graffiti. 

Youth in these areas developed a creative response to what was happening in the surroundings, something that couldn't be tamed, thus started graffiti and hip hop. Graffiti was disturbing for the forces in charge and the people renovating areas as the symbolised that "society had lost control" according to Nathan Glazar, an American sociologist. 

Since then graffiti has spread from these urban communities, from trains, from the underground of New York to the rest of the world. So much so that it became part of something bigger than simply being recognised in your own community. It became world wide and infiltrated other areas of creativity such as writing and film. What was once seen to be gang related was now becoming multicultural and multi-racial which reflected the diverse and real population of NY. 

Lewinsohn, C. writes "Ten years ago, 'graffiti' was a dirty word, denoting an activity that was seen by the majority as containing little artistic merit or social consequence. Today, it is still a dirty word in some contexts, but our understanding of it has developed." (2008, p.9). 

Lewisohn also writes "By 'graffiti', it is generally understood that we mean any form of unofficial, unsanctioned application of a medium onto a surface. Although it has come to be used as a singular noun, it is in fact the plural form of 'graffito', which means an image or text scratched onto a wall. 'Graffiti writing', which is separate from graffiti, is the movement most closely associated with hip hop culture (though it pre-dates it), whose central concern is he 'tag' or signature of the author." (2008, p.15)

Mind map from Street Art, The Graffiti Revolution

street art

noun

1. artwork that is created in a public space, typically without official permission.

   
   

   "many people I know don't even notice street art"
2. 
   

Lewinsohn explains that "'Street art' is a sub-genre of graffiti writing and owes much to its predecessor. Though there is a good deal of cross over between the genres, they are distinct and separate in their own right. The difference between graffiti and street art is as great as that between, for example, jazz and techno music." He goes on to say that the two may be similar pastimes "but they are different in terms of form, function and most importantly, intention. In strict academic terms, it is neccessary to differentiate btween them in order to correct some of the mistakes of art history,which has mislabelled as 'graffiti art' a very important and influential group of works made in recent years. When art-historians talk about 'graffiti art', they are usually referring to a small number of artists associated with street art and graffiti from the 1980s including Keith Haring, Jean-Michel Basquiat and Kenny Scharf, who would never have considered themselves 'graffiti artists', and would certainly not be considered as 'graffiti writers' by genuine graffiti writers of that period." I have been looking at Basquiat's earlier work as his alias SAMO and can see how his form of graffiti would not have been accepted by graffiti writers at the time, making it subversive to those who where subverting.        

Through graffiti and the widening of social acceptance came street art, guerrilla art or you might also call it urban art. Depending on where you are in the world, there is a different perception of what you might view street art as, is it art or is it vandalism? Attitudes are for ever changing and once subversive ideas have become more acceptable. Magazines, galleries, shop windows can feature elements of street art or graffiti without it causing a stir. It has become somewhat 'a la mode'. But while the work is on the street it is up to the viewer and the viewer alone to decide if the work is art or vandalism. Or neither. Or both. 

Lewisohn writes that "It's important to note street at's break with the tradition of the tag, and its focus on visual symbols that embrace a much wider range of media than graffiti writers would use. When street artists work figuratively with 'characters', as they often so, they are likely to use materials and techniques commonly associated with street art such as stencilling or pasting. This is not a water-tight rule, since there are many street artists who primarily work with figuration and who also use spray paint as a medium."  

Sondra Bacharach (2015) sums up nicely how subversive street art can be:

"Making street art is also defiant in virtue of the fact that it constitutes an attempt to undermine authority— the owner’s authority over the property on which the street art appears, the government’s inability to enforce rules about public spaces, the social norms that street artists reject, the ethical codes that street artists oppose, the political or socio-economic difficulties facing a particular location, people or community."

Lewisohn (2008, p.63) pulls a quote from The Wooster Collective that I think sums up the difference between graffiti and street art: 

"Graffiti is a code. Graffiti isn't easy to decipher unless you're in the world of the artist. The whole point of doing graffiti is to encode your name in a very unique style that  not many people can decipher. So that polarises people. You either understand graffiti and you're like, 'That's fucking awesome', or you're like 'I don't get it'. The people that don't get it aren't necessarily not interested, they just can;t decipher what graffiti is about. Street art doesn't have any of that hidden code; there are no hidden messages; you either connect with it or you don't. There's no mystery there." 

Subvertising

Mustafa Hulusi- Street Art, The Graffiti Revolution

I wont go in to this too much at this stage but I came across this in 'Street Art, The Graffiti Revolution (Lewisohn, 2008, p.115): Subvertising. It caught my eye unsurprisingly because it has subversion in the name. Subvertising "involves the détournement of an advert to turn it's meaning back on itself." (Lewisohn, 2008, p.115). Lewisohn also link it to guerrilla advertising, guerrilla marketing and explains that it is a primary form of 'culture jamming' or 'culture hacking'.  

I found a book called No Logo by Naomi Klein in which she writes:

“Culture jamming is enjoying a resurgence, in part because of technological advancements but also more pertinently, because of the good old rules of supply and demand. Something not far from the surfaces of the public psyche is delighted to see the icons of corporate power subverted and mocked. There is, in short, a market for it. With commercialism able to overpower the traditional authority of religion, politics and schools, corporations have emerged a the natural targets for all sorts of free-floating rage and rebellion. The new ethos that culture jamming taps into is go-for-the-corporate-jugular.” (2005, p. 287).

Bibliography 

Book

Klein, N., (2005). No Logo (2nd ed.). London: Harper Perennial 

Lewisohn, C., (2008). Street Art, The Graffiti Revolution. London: Tate Publishing.  

Articles

Bacharach, S., (2015). Street Art and Consent. The British Journal of Aesthetics, Volume 55 (4), 481-495.