Graffiti: Challenging Our Notions of Art

For centuries, cultures worldwide have struggled with the idea of art, and the precise definition of “art” in particular. Societies have privileged certain forms of art over others. The Western culture, for example, has distinguished “high” art forms, which include things such as paintings and sculptures, and has given these a superior level of value over other forms. Along with their celebrated status, these art forms are generally placed in venues that are separate from daily aspects of life, such as museums. Essentially, we have been cultured to expect art to come in certain styles and mediums, with specific features. We also, do not expect to encounter it unless we specifically go looking for it ourselves in the designated arenas that are known to hold art. However, with the pop-art movement, we have seen a shift in the ideas surrounding this topic. In his article, Riggle states that art has transformed and can “no longer be distinguished from nonart by its visual properties” and that instead, it “could look like, or be anything” (Riggle, 243).

Since the 1970’s, the spread of graffiti and street art throughout cities has resulted in mixed reactions ranging from pure aversion to a strong appreciation for this non-constrictive expression. Modern definitions of art have placed emphasis on the notion that art should be judged and appreciated on an individual scale as is depicted from the phrase “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. However, as Riggle puts it “street art is deeply antithetical to the artworld” (Riggle, 248). It is a category that challenges our cemented or normalized ideas of how art should look, and where we should find it. For this reason, graffiti has often been classified as vandalism and has held strong negative connotations as an illegal act. Graffiti artists, as well as those who appreciate this form of art will contest this idea and claim that through this practice, they are “bringing the everyday into the artworld” (Riggle, 255).

The purposes of different graffiti styles can range from purely aesthetic, to claiming of territories, or to the spreading of politicized messages. This last form of graffiti has become very common and is thought to have the power to create “conversational commons wherein city inhabitants can confront one another” (Visconti, 521). In general, graffiti addresses the issue of public space and who has the rights to decide what is done with this public space. It challenges authority while the artists attempt to “claim entitlement to and sharing of city walls and thus question the boundaries of appropriation in public contexts” (Visconti, 518). One particular piece of graffiti that I have chosen to comment on is a piece that was found on the beach near Spanish Banks. It is simply the word “Vandalisn’t” in bold letters, placed on top of previous works of graffiti. It is a strong and eye-catching statement against the oppression of art in terms of who is allowed to produce it, what it should be, and where it is constricted to, spatially. Quite obviously, it is spreading the idea that graffiti defies these norms and should be appreciated for its artistic value rather than misinterpreted or devalued. In his article, Visconti shares the thoughts of graffiti artists and their desire to have an input on the way their city is presented, as they feel that this is their right as citizens, as well as artists. By sharing thought-provoking messages with the public, whatever the content may be related to, they feel as if they are engaging the citizens and making them more aware of certain issues. As one graffiti artist states in this article, street art “has a huge impact on culture” and “if we don’t like the world as it is, well then we need to step up to the canvas and paint a better picture and inhabit it” (Visconti, 522).