Art or Vandalism
Graffiti and its relationship with communities often sparks debate pertaining to its position in the context of art or vandalism. Classifying graffiti as art or vandalism can become a subjective discussion that falls into the realm of opinion that is often a polarizing issue based on an individual’s perception of graffiti. In the discussion of classifying graffiti as either art or vandalism, there are a number of ways to look at graffiti that may help to classify it either as art that is beneficial to society or vandalism which is detrimental to society. Graffiti from the perspective of the mainstream public is often viewed through the lens of mainstream media sources (Weisel, 2011). Be it through television, advertising or online sources, the presentation of graffiti by media frequently spotlights graffiti pieces and productions that are highly artistic. In viewing this style of graffiti there is little room for debate of the artistic merit that is produced by these highly skilled artists. In the context of art, one may conclude that the visual quality makes this graffiti a beneficial or positive social element that actually enhances society (White, 2014). This graffiti is typically created by highly skilled artists who have planned out their work, taking many hours or even days to complete either in isolated low risk locations that provide the luxury of time, or with permission from the property owner or even as paid commissions. Unfortunately, this is not an accurate representation of the majority of graffiti that is found on city streets. Instead of the highly artistic pieces, productions and murals portrayed in the media, the true face of street graffiti is marker pens and spray paintings scrawled on city walls, windows, sidewalks, dumpsters, bus stops, shelters, news boxes, trains, buses, mirrors, or any other surface competing for space with no cohesion and little artistic merit.
Spicer (2005), attributes this to a transitioning of graffiti motivation from artistic expression to performing criminal acts. Although, some taggers may aspire to produce highly artistic graffiti pieces, the majority of street level graffiti writers are either not able to paint at this level, or are not concerned with the artistic nature of the writing they do, preferring to get their tags up as quickly, and in as many places as possible building their reputation for lawlessness (Spicer, 2005).
12.1 Artistic Perspective
Although the classification of graffiti can be a subjective topic, with many people holding vastly differing opinions on its merit, value to society and place in the legal realms of society. The artistic perspective regarding graffiti is often difficult to identify and measure. Some may argue that graffiti, even in the form of scribbled tags, is an art form in itself. From decades of being immersed in many different facets of art on a commercial, recreational, and public platform, I have learned that there are actually technical elements and parameters that can help to identify and define the artistic nature of a painting or artwork. Colour theory, composition, scale, perspective, line quality, and tonality, are tools that artists use to create and enhance the visual quality of their works. Even abstract works that many would consider to be without structure or form contain many of these values in their creation that the viewing audience, artistic or otherwise, subconsciously consider when observing and assessing an art piece. When an art piece is presented, absent of these artistic parameters in its creation, the product becomes less appealing to the viewing audience. This is indicated in the graffiti subculture demonstrated by the levels of respect applied to various types and styles of graffiti by members of the graffiti subculture. Taking the most common form of graffiti, the simple and quickly executed tag and comparing it to the highly artistic graffiti piece or production, the response from the graffiti community is obvious. Pieces and productions that apply components of artistic value in their creation are coveted and held in high regard by the graffiti community who seldom paint or tag over these works.
Simple tags that do not utilize any of the forms of artistic components such as line quality, colour theory, composition, positive and negative space, symmetry, scale, perspective, and tonality receive less appreciation and respect from the public or the graffiti community. The result being tags and throw-ups being frequently painted over by other graffiti writers, leaving a non-cohesive visual element that becomes layered with paint and markers with no semblance of artistry. This chaotic visual product grows and becomes more intrusive to the community as writers compete for space in a community who are now involuntarily subjected to visual distress on a daily basis around their homes, work, schools, and transportation systems.
12.2 Visual Content
Of great importance in determining the social impact of graffiti is understanding the perception of visual content. The feelings generated through the content that people view in their environments plays a significant role in people’s feelings and behaviours. Keiser (2008) states that the thoughts and actions of individuals and the community are greatly influenced by interpretations generated by visual elements that people see and are exposed to. This emotional interpretation of visual content can work in favour of communities or against the wellbeing of the community based on the visual content or subject matter presented. In the case of graffiti, most writers produce tags that are often illegible and non-artistic that invite other tags that can multiply in quantity over a short period of time (Weisel, 2011). With this understanding, graffiti should not be viewed in the form a singular tag, but in plurality and as a collective of the many tags that tend to occupy a location typical of urban graffiti. In this light, the visual content of graffiti in its most common form is an array of tags with no continuity or form competing for space in a publicly viewed area.
For those that live with and view graffiti of this nature on a daily basis the perception is often a negative one that inflicts visual distress on a community. In contrast to presenting community environments that visually indicate order, respect and cohesiveness that promotes feelings of security and care, the visual presentation of a majority of urban graffiti instills feelings of neglect, lack of safety, causing members to withdraw from community (Spicer, 2012). This visual tension results in eroding peoples willingness to engage in community, build connections, foster positive communication. This concept of visual disarray and its negative by-product applies to a vast majority of urban graffiti, but it should be recognized that it does not apply to all. There are some graffiti writers that through their artistic skill and visual messaging can transcend these negative connotations through their work and presented with the right platform, can connect communities and create positive social capital through their work.
12.3 Location
Regardless of the artistic quality or visual content presented in the creation of graffiti, one of the main factors affecting the social impact of graffiti is where it is created. The conflict of graffiti arises most strongly and most often because of its presence in communal spaces. Almost any surface can be a location for graffiti with taggers often hitting school walls, signs, windows, business storefronts, community walls, buses, trains even people’s houses and vehicles (Weisel, 2011). In the eyes of the subculture, the true essence of graffiti is the act of painting or tagging without permission in the most visible public locations possible (Spicer, 2005). This causes a great deal of negative impact on the communities that the graffiti is created in. Property owners endure great frustration, inconvenience and cost in having graffiti applied to their buildings and properties. The presence of illegal graffiti in public places incites assumptions of gang activity, the presence of criminal, or hate based groups, casting feelings of victimization, and lack of security on members of the community (Weisel, 2011). Because of the closeness in proximity to where people live, work, study, and travel, the visual distress inflicted on the community as a result of graffiti, creates tension and fear, resulting in distrust, and community members retreating from the community in self-preservation rather than engaging in their community.