The Value in Graffiti

Historically, graffiti has been an artistic site of resistance, often associated with poverty, crime and areas of low socio-economic status. Graffiti first came to public attention in the late 1960s mainly in New York City and as an outgrowth of political radicalism and of black and Hispanic empowerment and identity (Ferrell 101). Contemporarily, graffiti is generally accepted or rejected depending on the space where the graffiti exists. Let us compare the graffiti present on the UBC campus and graffiti on the downtown east side. On campus, it is fairly rare to see graffiti. If one does encounter graffiti, it is often removed or painted over within a week. During the summers, I work for UBC’s Student Housing and Hospitality Services. Graffiti is certainly always prioritized over other tasks, often including pests and building heating. On the DTES however, graffiti is everywhere – store fronts, sidewalks, alley ways, garage doors, garbage disposals and so on.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hopeinshadows/3368096459/in/set-72157615639597344/

© Pivot Legal Society, 2003

Photo Credit: Bronwyn Elko

This particular example was part of the Hope in Shadows project in 2003. Photographers on the DTES entered a photo contest to have their photos featured in the Hope in the Shadows calendar. Then, homeless or low income street vendors sell the calendars in order to make a living.

Graffiti is regulated differently within various social spaces. If a space is represented to have a specific societal value, the space is usually regulated more heavily, such as the case at the UBC campus. On the other hand, spaces such as the downtown east side which Vancouver apparently values less, are less strenuously regulated for the presence of graffiti.

In recent years, we have begun to see a shift in the understanding of graffiti. While previously, graffiti was viewed as a crime, the artistic value within graffiti is slowly gaining recognition. Ferrell argues;

Graffiti has attracted both artistic and moral entrepreneurs. The former sought to entice graffiti writers to paint on canvases and be sold in galleries; the latter used graffiti as a sign of urban disorder and argued for its suppression as a first step in reasserting law and order against unrestrained youth and assertive members of minority groups (Ferrell 101).

It is important to consider the struggle between the artistic and moral entrepreneurs. Essentially, moral entrepreneurs desired to continue to use graffiti as a site of resistance, a sort political stance. Artistic entrepreneurs on the other hand, aimed to appreciate graffiti, but only in condoned and acceptable places, for example on a canvas to be displayed within a gallery. In this realm, graffiti loses its essence of resistance.

Recently, I have begun to notice condoned forms of graffiti on the sides of buildings, often guised as “murals.” The following example is a picture I took while traveling through Germany.

Photo Credit: Chelsea Ousey

This mural/graffiti was located on the side of Wombat’s hostel in Berlin. As graffiti, this piece loses its currency of resistance but rather is valuable in its artistic styling. Located in a young and trendy area of town, the hostel contracted out local artists to do this work, in order to discourage the impromptu graffiti that would have otherwise taken place. Similar pieces can be seen along East Broadway and Commercial Drive and surely other places within Vancouver that I have yet to seen.

Graffiti is slowly coming to be valued within Vancouver’s society. While I appreciate the artistic value in graffiti, I find it problematic that it is only valued by the greater society when it is continuously and heavily regulated. As “condoned” or artistic entrepreneurial graffiti as Ferrell calls it, becomes more popular within Vancouver, it loses its currency of resistance by operating within the realm of social acceptance.

Works Cited

Elko, Bronwyn.

2003. Hope in the Shadows. Vancouver: Pivot Legal Society.

Ferrell J.

1993. Crimes of style: Urban graffiti and the politics of criminality. New York: Garland.