Graffiti and Censorship

Definition: Uninvited—and often unwelcome—writing and drawing on public surfaces, such as walls

Significance: In some communities, efforts to stop or remove graffiti have been called censorship

As a form of public art, graffiti has existed for thousands of years, and both ancient and modern examples can be found throughout the world. It has appeared in caves and pyramids and on vehicles, buildings, walls, and other surfaces. Often it is a form of cultural production reflecting the ideas, values, beliefs, and experiences of peoples and cultures. It frequently contains images and information regarding a social system and its relationship to specific cultural groups. Graffiti also can reflect the identity of individual artists. Accordingly, it can be positive to the extent that it affirms an artist’s individuality or reflects the cultural identity of its creators as members of a particular community. Graffiti can be either socially approved or condemned, depending on its message and the elements used, as well as the edifice on which it appears.

Modernism

Some observers have associated the gradual devaluation of graffiti with societal values related to capitalism. A greater emphasis on financial interests and materialism gave rise to the presentation and exhibition of art that increased its profitability as a commodity; accordingly, graffiti, with its focus on social values, became deemphasized. Graffiti and other forms of public art became replaced with galleries and museums.

During the 1960s and 1970s, murals were widely accepted and supported by the US federal government. Governmental support of public art was evidenced by the Art in Architecture Program, administered by the General Services Administration. The government’s sponsorship of public art was primarily related to the desire to place art in federal buildings. Consequently, the government adopted various art forms in its facilities, including murals, lightworks, kinetic art, and so forth. Much of the public art during the 1960s and 1970s reflected social issues related to the demand for social equality inherent in the civil rights movement, as well as other themes of social protest related to US involvement in the Vietnam War. Other public artworks reflected unity among diverse peoples and urban issues for which government intervention was sought. For example, in the 1960s, a group of African American artists, among them William Walker, Wadsworth Jarrell, Jeff Donaldson, and Norman Parish Jr., came together to create a mural featuring portraits of more than thirty significant black historical figures, including Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali, and Marcus Garvey, on the wall of a building in Chicago's South Side. Unfortunately, the mural, which came to be known as the "Wall of Respect," was destroyed by fire in 1971.

Public art, or graffiti that conforms to Western culture’s definitions of suitability, is frequently funded by the government or receives support from individuals who reside within the community in which the graffiti is presented. When graffiti fails to engender social approval due to its content, its medium, or its projected location, efforts may be undertaken to prevent its production.

Censorship

Public disapproval and censorship of graffiti is common, particularly within the inner cities of major metropolitan areas. Many people view graffiti that appears on public buildings, subways, bathroom stalls, and billboards as inappropriate, unattractive, and unwarranted. When graffiti takes the form of angry insults, profanity, or social commentaries that challenge or fail to conform to social norms within the larger society, it is usually considered unacceptable.

Public and government opposition to graffiti increased greatly in the United States during the 1980s. The efforts of authorities in New York City to prevent graffiti received national attention. The local government in New York used what some considered extreme measures to prevent graffiti on public structures and transportation vehicles. Graffiti artists were subject to arrest and in some cases were chased by dogs. As legal sanctions and efforts to prevent graffiti artists from expressing themselves increased, the artists often developed ingenious and surreptitious methods of producing their work. Defenders of graffiti have charged that the notion that some forms of public art are socially acceptable while others are not is based on cultural value judgments. Such arguments raise the question of which groups’ values should define acceptable public art in a given community.

Many graffiti artists live in inner-city communities, which are characterized by declining resources, substandard housing, poverty, and other forms of marginalization. The powerlessness of their existence and their isolation from America’s mainstream often mean that they have limited opportunities to be included. It might therefore be argued that their graffiti represents significant forms of self-expression.

Graffiti or public art can contribute value to society by expressing the collective and personal identities of various cultures. It can also inform the public of the status and experiences of peoples who are marginal to society.

Bibliography

Barthelmeh, Volker. Street Murals. New York: Knopf, 1982. Print.

Cockcroft, Eva Sperling, and Holly Barnet-Sánchez, eds. Signs from the Heart: California Chicano Murals. Albuquerque: U of New Mexico P, 1993. Print.

Gastman, Roger, and Caleb Neelon. The History of American Graffiti. New York: Harper, 2010. Print.

Redstone, Louis G., and Ruth R. Redstone. Public Art: New Directions. New York: McGraw, 1981. Print.

Robinson, David. Soho Walls: Beyond Graffiti. New York: Thames, 1990. Print.

Saafir, Qimmah. "Art Institute of Chicago Celerates the 1960s 'Wall of Respect' Mural." Colorlines. Race Forward, 17 Apr. 2015. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.

Schacter, Rafael. The World Atlas of Street Art and Graffiti. New Haven: Yale UP, 2013. Print.

Young, Alison. Street Art, Public City: Law, Crime and the Urban Imagination. New York: Routledge, 2014. Print.