Threedays Old Graffiti
I’ve laboured the point of this graffiti explanation because it’s such an explosive topic with far reaching effects. After reading the Summary Offences (Tagging and Graffiti Vandalism) Amendment Bill -Third Reading in the New Zealand Parliament I’ve come to the conclusion that many parliamentarians have used the issue to clearly demonstrate their own ignorance and or push their own barrows. It’s been an eye-opener for sure!
“The forms of graffiti art have developed through the years from the mere gestures of tagging to established conventional practices of the graffiti art world such as creating the tag according to a method, like wildstyle, that makes it an integral, flowing element of the overall piece.b In addition, graffiti art is not a spontaneous activity like tagging in the form of fancy scribble. The completion of a piece or a production involves a great deal of imagination, planning, and effort.
The graffitist first does a sketch. Then s/he plans out characters and selects colours. Next, the artist selects his or her “canvas” or surface and does a preliminary outline, followed by a filling in of colors and ornamentation, and then the final outline is completed. Graffiti can also be analysed according to the elements of lines, color, and structures that are present in the work in order to produce a narrative about it.
Another significant reason why graffiti art might be viewed as art is by considering the producer’s intention. Graffitists intend their work to be apprehended as art that can communicate feelings and ideas to the audience. This is in line with Tolstoy’s mandate that art must allow people to express ideas and share in each other’s feelings via the artwork.
Graffiti art has a function (according to those who ascribe to it’s artistic inclusion) of not only communicating to others, but (controversally for my penney’s worth and according to the graffiti fraternity) also believe that it beautifies the community by appearing on areas that would normally be considered eyesores, such as a wall in a vacant lot or an abandoned building.
Furthermore, all of the aesthetic properties and criteria from the base element of color to the complex issue of artist intention which are ascribed to other works in order to characterise them as art can all be found in examples of spray can art. The only difference between those works in a gallery or museum and graffiti art in terms of how and why the latter is not readily accepted as art is due to its location and presentation.
The issues of location and presentation are the most significant obstacles to a wholehearted acceptance of spraycan art as art. Graffiti art cannot be disregarded simply because it is not presented in the conventional location and manner, i.e., framed and placed in a museum or gallery. The location of it on a wall or subway without permission only makes it unsolicited art. As such, it can be called vandalism, but again, this does not disqualify it as art.
Rather the categorisation of graffiti art as unsolicited art that is vandalism only justifies a removal of it from the surface. On the other hand, the vandalism aspect of graffiti art can be considered as a uniqueness and not a detracting feature of the art form because as vandalism, graffiti art is very temporary. A piece which might be sixty feet long, twelve feet high, and take twenty to thirty cans of paint and at least eight hours to produce might be gone in a matter of minutes.
Another challenge to graffiti art is that it is forced upon the public because people have no say in its production despite the fact that public funds are used to remove it. Graffitists counter with the argument that buildings, billboards, campaign ads, and flyers are also forced on the public in a similar manner.
In the USA, spray can art suffers other criticisms because of the generic characterisation of all graffiti as being gang related and simply a matter of tagging. However, only 20% of graffiti is gang related [According to Walsh, who mentions this number in _Graffito_. He used anecdotes from LA and San Francisco to obtain his figures, and it is not known what definition of “gang” he refers to, this number is questionable.], and it should be noted that not all instances of graffiti art are good examples of the art form; just like not all framed artistic creations are good examples of painting or even worthy of being called art.
Graffiti is also criticised for being too hard to understand, but certainly this cannot keep graffiti art from being art anymore than the obscurity of abstract art or Picasso’s cubism prevents either one of those hard to understand art forms from being considered as art. Goldman’s aesthetic theory is of use to clarify the problem of location and presentation in relation to graffiti art.”
It’s that age old story isn’t it, where what constitutes art sidelines the main issue facing communities having to clean up after taggers. The communities can’t see the trees for the destruction and you’d be hard pushed to convince them otherwise! How could you blame them for being upset, it gets beyond a joke after a while. The trouble is when individuals take the law into their own hands to deal with the situation. That’s NEVER a good scenario, EVER!
RELATED
1. May’s Lane Street Art Project
2.JR’s TED Prize wish: Use art to turn the world inside out
3. DVD: Exit through the Gift Shop
* This is 3 of a 6 part blog. The NEXT blog is entitled ‘Fourdays Old Graffiti’
