While many might not recognize this, this graffiti is a reference to the popular video game Half Life. I initially found it amusing; the dichotomous mixture of gaming to the rogue medium is an awkward combination. However, the more I analyzed it, the more I realized it actually serves as a testament to both the mainstream popularity of geek and graffiti culture.

Recently, graffiti has gained a wider appreciation of the public and participation. According to Richard Lachmann, graffiti is no longer solely by underground political activists, and has since become a collective medium shared by a wide range of artists. (Lachmann 239) Nonetheless, the symbolic themes of graffiti still hold true: freedom of expression, rebellious portrayal and the essence of breaking the cultural norms of society. (243)

 Through graffiti, geek fans are sending a message, but one that is less politically motivated and more grounded in a social validation for their video game fandom. Tagging and graffiti in public areas is not merely art, it carries the prospect for wider public recognition and appeal. (Tadai 11) Through graffiti, geeks are demonstrating that their fandom not only deserves public display, but additionally gives the work street credence and a genuine “coolness”. (14) By cementing an iconic video game symbol on an abandoned house with the rebellious and socially deviant medium as graffiti vandalism, these graffiti geeks demonstrate the rebellious nature of their culture.

Using graffiti, these geeks argue their love is not something simply for socially distant intellectuals but should be respected by anyone.

[Citation Needed]

Lachmann, Richard. “Graffiti as a Career and Ideology.” American Journal of Sociology. 94.2 (2010): 229-250. Print..

Tadai, Mindy. “The Clashing of Culture and Capitalism in Graffiti.” Beautiful Losers. Ed. Aaron Rose. 2cd ed. Chicago: 2004. 10-15. Print. <http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/xv/beautifullosers.pdf>.

Image provided to me by a friend in CA

There are different kinds of graffiti; some are beautiful and/or creative images, while others are simply names scrawled on public surfaces. Whatever the context, all graffiti holds a political message, whether explicit or implicit. The very act of ‘defacing’ public space is rebellious, an act of resistance to or defiance of authority or tradition.

This kind of resistance informs us of wider constructs of power. Public space, while theoretically belonging to everyone, is under the control of government. Marking a public surface can be perceived as an act of resistance to the authority of local government, a real or imagine class of elites, or the entire economic-political system. Because of its defiant tone, graffiti is often characterized by anonymity, affording the author to express themselves in ways they would not otherwise (Islam, 2010). There are instances, however, where the authors feel comfortable exposing themselves, and these often occur when they are famed individuals, already renowned for their defiance of the hegemonic state. They may be members of minorities, whether ethnic or ideological, but they typically have connections to the regime they are resisting, whether through influence or affluence, or else they would probably not feel secure revealing their names. Lord Byron was infamous in his time for participating in Romanticism (MacCarthy, 2002), a revolt against aristocratic social and political norms, and his name can be seen carved in stone in buildings across Europe. While the type of graffiti is not particularly scandalous—they are minimal and usually on foreign soil—I would argue that the political importance of graffiti is the act itself.

References

Islam, Gazi

2010 Backstage Discourse and the Emergence of Organizational Voices: Exploring Graffiti and Organization. Journal of Management Inquiry 19(3):246-260

MacCarthy, Fiona

2002 Byron: Life and Legend

Rafferty, Pat

1991 Discourse on Difference. Visual Anthropology Review 7(2):77-84

This image of graffiti is one I took of my friends standing beside the John Lennon Wall in Prague. The graffiti on this wall was started in the 80’s by Czech youth who used it as a way to demonstrate free-speech (Kruse, 2005). Graffiti was used as a tool for a non-violent rebellion against the neo-Stalinism at the time (Kruse, 2005). According to Bren (2008) it is this youth who painted on this wall during the last year of communism, who became central to the Velvet Revolution. John Lennon strongly advocated freedom and peace in his music, and Kruse (2005) believes this is why the youth praised him. His lyrics were written in english which was essential to their resistance, it helped to define a boundary between them and the government ( Ferrel 1993). Lennon provided an way in which they were able to protest the government and promote the need for a peaceful change. 

This wall used to be whitewashed by the authorities (Kruse, 2005) but now it only changes because of the new graffiti overlapping the previous. This graffiti is a monument for it marks how people were able to create change. The wall still has politically fuelled graffiti but a difference is a global audience can add to it. This graffiti is an example to which other politically driven graffiti strives for because it succeeded in creating a change.

Follow this link to see the variety of  graffiti this wall has had. 

By: Kate MacMillan

Bren, P. (2008). Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall … Is the West the Fairest of Them All?: Czechoslovak Normalization and Its (Dis)Contents. Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. 9(4):831-854.

Ferrel, J. (1993). The World Politics of Wall Painting. Social Justice. 20(3/4):188-202.

Kruse II, R. (2005). Contemporary Geographies of John Lennon. Critical Studies in Media Communication. 22(5):456-461

Alex Cynader

I have walked past this trio of tags well over a hundred times; it is right across the street from my house, where my car is parked, where I walk to catch the bus, yet it never caught my eye until two days ago when I thought to look. Many people raise the idea that graffiti is a type of modern art, with a meaning behind it (c.f. Rafferty, Discourse on Difference), but by taking no notice of these squiggly lines it beg the question, is graffiti causing any social effects when its existence is going unnoticed? The distinction must be drawn, then, between the three ‘tags’ pictured above, and the arguably more organized and socially-influential medium of ‘street art’ done by ‘writers’. Faye Docuyanan raises the interesting delineation between graffiti artists in an essay on its illegality, Governing Graffiti in Contested Urban Spaces. She notes that, “taggers, often emphasize quantity over quality, and write primarily to obtain fame among their peers. Writers, on the other hand, place more emphasis on the development of skills and style and spend significant amounts of time planning and creating elaborate productions” (Docuyanan, 103). While this helps distinguish the two types, it arguably produces more questions of whether either types should be legal: does the method Docuyanan describe not sound the same as any respected artist? In Vancouver, it is difficult to see the harm in any graffiti, indeed, the most you see are small tags. Yet, every now and then you will stumble across a beautiful mosaic of street art, ought this be illegal? Who is it harming to have a free mural painted in an otherwise gritty area of town? It seems graffiti is an area in which more and more questions are popping up, and while the answers are not obvious, it is hoped that neither are decisions on its legality.

PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review. Volume 23. Issue 1. May 2000 (Pages 103 – 121). Docuyanan, Faye: Governing Graffiti in Contested Urban Spaces.

The phrases “love your ghetto” and simply “love” might not seem like resistant or political language, but they do disrupt the stereotypes often placed on the community of the DTES.

Graffiti is a tool that has been used by minority groups to attack other minority groups with sexist, racist, or homophobic language, which often uphold privilege and inequality in society rather than resist them, a way to “enact or react to hegemonic conditions” (Rodriguez 1999:1). However, these images of graffiti reflect a different message being written in the DTES, home to many of the social tensions addressed above. Rather than tearing down other minority groups or directly criticizing authoritarian control, a message of loving your community is scrawled on the wood and in the pavement, and is done so anonymously and freely, without factors such social class, education, access, or position which so often dictate which members of society get to speak and be heard (Rodriguez 1999:2).

These words challenge hegemonic order, which often frames the neighbourhood as a place of crime, chaos, and society’s waste. The messages seen here begin to write out a new discourse among residents living in poverty that disturbs the dominating perceptions centred around the Eastside of addiction, violence, and disease. It’s a new message written by the community and for the community inviting radical peace in the face of societal barriers, inequality, and unjust systems, as is seen by the word “love” written amongst the barbed wire.

By: Sharlene Petigara

Rodriguez, Amardo, and Clair, Robin Patric.
1999   Graffiti as Communication: Exploring the Discursive Tensions of Anonymous Texts.The Southern Communication Journal 65 (1): 1.

Whether it is racism, sexism, homophobia, or just about anything we deem offensive, it can be found on the wall of a bathroom stall.  Bathroom graffiti has become a prominent method of sharing explicit and often unacceptable ideas or words in our culture.  As these words or ideas become less acceptable in our daily conversations, they begin to appear more frequently in public bathroom stalls (Gonos et. al. 1976:42).  Bathroom stalls provides the level of anonymity required to give graffiti artists full freedom to express all their thoughts that are often suppressed or considered taboo by the general public (Gonos et. al. 1976:42).  Various unacceptable words are expressed in this graffiti image (found on the lower floor or Koerner Library), one may note the use of the words “fag” and “chinks” which would not openly be stated in public by anyone without anonymity due to their offensive nature.  Another form of expression found in this image is an attempt to arrange sexual contact by providing a phone number and offering a service.  This type of advertisement is common in bathroom stalls across America (Gonos et. al. 1976:43).  One may also note an anti UBC statement in the middle of the image.  All of these statements support the idea that bathroom stalls have become a forum for the expression of words and ideals that are suppressed in public (Gonos et. al. 1976:48).  Regardless of their offensive nature, bathroom stalls provide an important place where those who disagree with social norms may anonymously state their controversial opinions without consequences.

Gonos, George, and Mulkern, Virginia, and Poushinsky, Nicholas
1976  Anonymous Expression:  A Structural View of Graffiti.  The Journal of American Folklore 89:40-48.

By Terry Cole (63724082)

Often associated with disenfranchised youth, graffiti art has been making waves in today’s public sphere. Many consider graffiti to be a jumble of colorful vandalisms designed to attract the passive bystander. To others, it is a sign of resistance, loaded with political messages. Graffiti art emerged in the late 1960s as a battle against the New York neo-liberalization forefront. Contrary to the upper-middle class, predominantly white New York, graffiti practitioners considered the activity as “multiracial, multicultural, multilingual, [and] multidimensional,” (Miller, 2002: 32). Today, graffiti continues to evolve and is found on all corners of the globe, principally in urbanized settings that are associated with the hip-hop culture.

A single stencil of Noam Chomsky’s portrait in black spray paint is found carefully tucked in a discreet, yet visible area of the UBC Rose Garden. By choosing this setting, the artist is sending a message of defiance by “vandalizing” this pristine (at least during the summer) tourist attraction within the campus grounds. The artist’s choice of Chomsky’s image asserts their opinion regarding the “social disorganization and urban decay [of today’s world],” (Kane, 2009:10). Chomsky is known for his work in media criticism, particularly with his book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. His book utilizes the propaganda model by analyzing the way in which media is organized. Chomsky depicts the majority of today’s media as controlled by privatized institutions, relentlessly influencing and shaping social agendas. One can speculate that the graffiti’s significance is to raise awareness within the UBC community- to expand on our personal beliefs and philosophies. After all, UBC is supposedly a place of mind.

By: Jenina Singian

Miller, Ivor L. (2002) Aerosol Kingdom: Subway Painters of New York City. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.

Kane, Stephanie C. (2009) Stencil Graffiti in Urban Waterscapes of Buenos Aires and Rosario, Argentina: Crime and Media Culture 5(9): 10.

Boswell, Katie. “Rose Garden in Winter.” Photo. Flickr.com 10 Jan. 2012. 08 Feb 2012

<http://www.flickr.com/photos/55654533@N02/6739326211/>

Although this photo was not taken by me personally, I thought that it should be shown as it portrays the debate that is commonly had over the use of graffiti. The picture was posted on the news, revealing a brand new invention coined “Graffiti Bot.” Showcased in an art gallery, the robot glides along the wall using various colours to paint “graffiti,” or rather, random scribbles, onto the canvas.
But can this be considered graffiti? Can a robot, programmed simply to paint be considered as creating graffiti? Or must graffiti have a motive – some kind of statement?
In Jeff Ferell’s book, “Crime of Style: Urban Graffiti and the Politics of Criminality,” he describes graffiti as a medium through which different meanings are portrayed. Specifically, in his case study of Denver, Ferell situates graffiti in relation to marginalized individuals, and even goes so far as to say that individuals participating in graffiti “participate in a process rooted in young black cultural,” (Ferell, 1993). Ultimately, he portrays the idea that graffiti is not just paint applied to a surface, rather it is the message that lies within the process that is important, and which links individuals within a larger culture of conversation. For some marginalized individuals, graffiti is a way to anonymously create a statement that reaches the larger public, giving a voice to those who often go unheard.
In contrast to this message, the photo above portrays how the dominant society appropriates this medium of communication and controversy, and devalues it to a simple process of applying paint to a surface. By reducing the art form to a simple computer program, devoid of human feeling, the meaning and culture traditionally behind graffiti is lost.

By: Natalie Adams

Bibliography:

Ferell, Jeff. (1993). Crimes of Style: Urban Graffiti and The Politics of Criminality

Graffiti Bot Photo. (2011). <http://hackaday.com/2011/11/17/double-pendulum-spray-gives-this-graffiti-bot-some-style/>. Accessed Feb. 8th, 2012.

Our city funds graffiti and fines owners of buildings which display unsanctioned graffiti to try to eliminate its presence. It has been argued that Graffiti acts “as its own form of erasure”, if it is sanctioned since the purpose of graffiti is to speak about the politics of nonconforming (Halsey and Perderick 2010:97). My problem with this view, is that if  these forms of graffiti are at war than what is the prize, how is it won, and why does it excluded the viewers from its consideration.
In the streets I found examples of coexistence, and graffiti incorporated into the interior of a salon in close proximity. Research on these specific pieces yielded no information about the artists of the unsanctioned, and instead found city sponsored tours which appropriated these pieces. Thus, it was hard to understand the unsanctioned piece as a product of politics due to the lack of information provided, and their incorporation into businesses, but what these pieces did evoke was subjective empathy.
Similarly, there was no explanation of the sanctioned pieces or their location as being proximal to the unsanctioned. Additionally, I wondered whether the owners of the  salon believed in the power of their Graffiti piece to take away from unsanctioned pieces. Ultimately, the complex layering of politics at work around these displays enhances the confusion started by a lack of information, allowing for only limited sets of meaning to emerge to the viewer based on the artistically conveyed themes and subsequently induced empathy for both types of pieces.

-By Alice Bardos

Graffiti 1

Graffiti 2) Same building as Graffiti 1, but different wall

Salon Graffiti

Eastside Mural Tour
2011 The City of Vancouver, Electronic Document,
http://muralsvancouver.ca/muralism/

Halsey, Mark and Ben Pederick
2010 The Game of Fame, Mural Graffiti, Erasure City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action 14(1-2):82-98.

The City of Vancouver
2008 The City of Vancouver: Graffiti. Electronic Document,
http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/graffiti/