Conclusion
Visual aesthetics in communities plays an important role in the wellbeing, vitality, and culture of cities. This influence can impact the social fabric of communities in both positive and negative ways by either enhancing the visual environment, resulting in an uplifted and inspired population or by providing visual tension that detracts from the social, cultural and economic value of the community (Pusca, 2008). Although, there are many factors to be considered in understanding community visual aesthetics, particularly in the realm of graffiti and public arts, there are clear points of differentiation that imply either benefit or detriment to communities. Most graffiti that is created and resides in urban environments is not created with artistic ability, with positive intention, or with the motivation to create something that benefits society, but is created for the purpose of self-promotion and destruction of property. Even though graffiti in rare cases can be created in an artistic way that carries positive aesthetic value, a vast majority of graffiti poses a detriment to not only the community in which it is created, but to those that are involved in creating graffiti.
Beyond the glamorization often generated through mainstream media, creating graffiti, participating in graffiti or emersion in the graffiti subculture typically leads to an overwhelmingly negative outcome for the young people that engage in this lifestyle. Experts such as Spicer (2005), (Weisel, 2011), Martin (2003), and Taylor (2012) have documented the impact on those immersed in the lifestyle surrounding graffiti with consequences ranging from drug addiction, serious non-graffiti criminal activity, risk of bodily harm through injury and assault, emotional and psychological trauma, and future legal repercussions that may limit future opportunities for these young people. Graffiti for many young people often progresses beyond stages of experimentation (Spicer, 2005) to fully encompassing their lives, and depending on the level of emersion, can be difficult to disengage from, negatively impacting many writers for their entire lives (Taylor, Marais, & Cottman, 2012. P. 165).
Although there are several classifications of graffiti writers with different motives for creating graffiti, Bandaranaike (2001) asserts that the root of youth graffiti involvement strongly reflects the environmental and social situations in which these youth exist. Bandaranaike (2001) states “While the physical environment may determine the place of crime the social environment explains it” (p.11). Attributing graffiti writer’s need for recognition and acknowledgement, developed through living in societies that have failed to provide assuredness, inspiration and confidence to youth, the abundance of graffiti found in many cities is an indicator that the social systems of our communities needs to be addressed. Bandaranaike attributes the changing value structure of families that fail to establish, build or maintain close bonds to their children as a large contributor to youth engagement in graffiti. Increased divorce rates, single parenting, excessive working hours, daycare, and general decreased prioritization of time spent with children, deteriorate the family value system, leaving children with a lack of grounding and vulnerable to negative influences like graffiti and other anti-social behavior (2001). Paralleling this decrease in family structure, Bandaranaike believes that school systems are not adequately providing opportunities for expression, and positive inspiration to youth that are at risk of finding negative sources to be inspiring and attractive (2001).
Although graffiti negatively impacts many communities and the youth engaged in in this lifestyle, there are effective strategies to not only reduce graffiti but to transform communities through positive visual aesthetics. Canadian cities like Burnaby are focusing on programs using public art and murals to not only beautify their communities, but to create opportunities for young people, including those in the graffiti subculture to become involved in positive visual aesthetic initiatives. The City of Burnaby puts strong emphasis on the involvement youth in their mural program allowing them to express themselves artistically, while working with other community groups in changing the appearance of their city. Providing them with a creative outlet that places them at the forefront of the community, while engaging with groups of youth outside of their own social circles allows them to gain recognition and accolades through positive means.
With the goal of creating strong, vibrant and engaged communities, lies the potential to create programs that offer a positive alternative to young people in the various stages of graffiti involvement. Moving forward in addressing the problem of graffiti, opportunities exist to leverage the principles of Social Capital (Putnam, 1995) with initiatives in positive visual aesthetics (Pusca, 2008) in the creation of more community programs that engage a wide spectrum of community members including those involved in graffiti, in creating engaged, vibrant communities that uplift and inspire.