Recently, a legal wall in lower Manhattan got buffed. I’m referring to a wall that is part of the Little Italy Street Art (L.I.S.A.) project and was painted by the artist duo Mirf and the PPP collective.
What does it mean that local residents adore a street art piece like Shok1’s rainbow, whereas Mirf and PPP collective’s graffiti piece, in the words of a local businessman, “…makes my shop look like a junkyard” (from an article by Bucky Turco in Animal New York. Also see it for images of both pieces)?? Regardless of this or that personal opinion about the quality of the particular pieces in question, what can these events tell us about graffiti and street art in NYC? Are memories of New York in the 70’s and 80’s still too fresh for a graffiti tribute on our streets? Do these memories impede a true embrace of this original and thriving art form at its birthplace?
The “writing movement” (more commonly known as “graffiti”) that emerged in the late sixties/early seventies was associated by governing forces here in NYC with high levels of crime, and as a result quickly viewed by the public as a menace. This artificial association between graffiti and crime was in the interest of wealthy property owners, and City Hall manipulated the public’s dismay at the high levels of poverty and crime in NYC to galvanize support for its anti-graffiti campaign. It’s important to remember that whether consciously or not, graffiti in its essence questioned private ownership and challenged the skewed distribution of wealth. Graffiti was the voice of the people that challenged authority, and therefore was regarded as a threat by those in power and was blamed for the ills in society. This is a typical and easy tactical move: instead of assuming responsibility and attempting to solve the problems at hand- kill the messenger.
The sentiments conveyed yesterday by the shop owner in Little Italy may illustrate that these negative associations – between crime and disparity and graffiti art – are still alive and kicking. Whereas it is evident that graffiti has developed into a true modern art form that has dramatically affected the art establishment and global popular culture, it seems like in NYC the association between disparity, crime and graffiti dies hard. On the other hand, pieces that are more abstract, i.e. in the realm of “street art”, are more easily accepted in the public domain. In light of this it is understandable why graffiti is perhaps more easily celebrated as a true contemporary art form elsewhere in the world.
There is hope though, as appreciation of graffiti is slowly seeping into mainstream consciousness in NYC. The “City as Canvas” show, the first of its kind celebrating graffiti and street art in a major museum in NYC, is proof of that. I strongly believe everyone should visit this exhibit and it should perhaps be somehow integrated into the curriculum of schools citywide.
The mural by Mirf and the PPP collective is a great tribute to graffiti art in its birthplace, and it’s a big shame it had to be buffed. Thanks L.I.S.A. Project for making it happen, even if short lived.
7 Comments. Leave new
I love the rawness of graffiti but I think that piece was ugly and needed to be buffed. just because Mint and Serf are legendary graff artist does not give them a pass to do something that looks very toy. maybe there was some poor planning involved but i think they could have done a lot better. maybe the buff is a wake up call that it ain’t always good.
Royce I agree in essence but those are matters of taste- does one like a piece or not. I suspect, especially in NYC, that tastes regarding graffiti are affected by the negative image it’s gotten. I believe the shop owners comment on the piece kind of shows that.
That said, definitely a good point you raise
I appreciate your piece on this and I can feel the energy and conviction behind your words. You are asking some great questions here. They bring awareness and help us re-shape our perceptions as the energy is still pulsating. I believe that we always have to ask who we are in relationship to what we are experiencing. I really loved the piece that Mirf put up. I feel it was a great moment for the artists, the L.I.S.A project, graffiti writers, fans and NYC. It induced my graffiti nostalgia from way back, and this was through the photo documentation as I did not get to see the piece in person. That alone says something to me about how works of art are being experienced today. I can chat with you for hours about why I love the piece and why I feel this way but will my response here change the minds of those who wanted it buffed? Would they be open to join us for a beer or a coffee to discuss it? (I would like to connect with you and have this conversation about the piece if you are up for it?) It sucks that it got buffed, but I’m not surprised one bit. I loved the piece, and my love for writing graffiti, learning about graffiti, and how it has transcended through my work as an artist for over 25 years is what fuels my interest. I am seeing and feeling it from the perspective of someone who resonates 100%. So the exercise that I must be open to consider is putting myself in the shoes of someone who owns a business or residential property in the area where the piece was put up. I think about how I might react if I did not have any interest or experience in understanding what graffiti is, or how and what birthed its existence. It’s a tricky spot, and I resist even the consideration, but I’m visualizing a scenario. Trying to evoke and install the importance graffiti contributes to art as a whole will continue to take time, but I do believe we have broken through in many ways. As you mentioned, the City as Canvas show is a perfect example and it’s a great place to start for sure. I’m curating a street art and graffiti exhibition this coming January of 2015 in NY at the Steinberg Museum of Art. The exhibition features 25 artists who’s work display a technical and stylistic evolution over the last 25 years. From aerosol marquee pieces to GIF animations. Exposure = Awareness, but what one does with the knowledge and awareness in his/her personal internal space is a whole other can of worms. NYC in the 1970’s and 80’s have sadly blamed and left a series of negative sociological and psychological memes about graffiti. As you mentioned, why do people accept this outdated stigma? Sometimes things will not change simply because they are never questioned, even when the something is big and right in your face. The Mirf piece is a fantastic example of that. I saw it as an activation portal. I believe that we always get to be right, and we get to stay right where we are, for both good and bad.
This particular piece was painted with full permission, and the public was aware of this, plus the previous piece was perhaps a bit more visually accessible, even though it got tagged over. Mirf’s piece induced the impression of time for me. I love how the piece looked as if it were tagged over for years and years, and you would instantly think that if hadn’t any previous knowledge of what the piece was. I also get a sense of how quickly things can be manufactured and meant to look like something that has been around for a much longer time. This opens another awareness about the art market, but these are my own personal impressions. And thats what the whole experience itself is, art.
So many great points you raise here, looking forward to taking the time to respond to this tomorrow.
Thanks for your thoughtful response. Let me start with saying I just saw your works in Welling Court- love em! I’m a fan of Cake’s work and loved seeing your pieces together. In general Welling Court is probably my favorite event of its kind, bringing together art and community in a very beautiful, thoughtful and inspiring way.
Also- The show you are putting together sounds fascinating, and I will certainly try my best to attend.
You raise some great points, which I’ll do my best to address.
I agree that us debating this here will certainly not change the mind of those who wanted it buffed, but I would never presume so in the first place. However, I believe it is important to be idealistic when possible, always attempting to crystalize an idea through discourse, and striving, within the confounds of reality, as close to it as possible. If one accepts that an ideal can never be attained and therefore does not even pursue it, mediocrity will reign. Perhaps my blog post will inspire someone to ask him/herself some important questions. I hope so, but regardless as a writer its a creative spark that drives me to write and the results are never the impetus, just an occasional perk and inspiration. I’m sure you can relate to that as a visual artist.
I can only speak from my own experience with change and how its come about for me in different facets of my life, and project those processes onto other situations and people. For example– I went through a transformation/maturation in my political beliefs, from those fed by mass media and hearsay, complemented by false convictions and unsubstantiated confidence, to a more educated and modest approach, though more idealistic and truly confident. The change occurred first and foremost from outside- someone breaking my false confidence, asking me the right questions. Once I realized my beliefs were not based on facts, I felt great guilt and shame which pushed me to conduct research on my own, and make claims only when I can back them with facts. People often get challenged on their convictions, but still do not budge from their beliefs/prejudices. I feel its due to intense fear of confronting both guilt and shame, as well a general lack of motivation/fear of change.
As a neuroscientist for the last 10 years, I’ve studied traumatic memory formation. It is relevant here! For example, Pavlov’s dogs were conditioned to fear a neutral odor that was paired with an aversive stimulus. Are we humans much different than Pavlov’s dogs? No! In this blog post I mention the association between graffiti and crime/disparity. How does one “recondition” an animal/human? How does one help a child stop fearing dogs after that child was bitten by a dog years back? How does one reverse the fear Pavlov’s dogs feel when presented with a neutral odor (lime, for example) that was paired with a shock? How does one change people’s negative associations to graffiti? The answer is: repeated exposure to the stimulus (dogs, graffiti etc.) without the negative association. With time, the negative association will disappear and a true appreciation can emerge. However, this takes time. Hence, my question- are average, every day New Yorkers (who are not graffiti fans/artists that are immersed in the culture) truly ready for a graffiti tribute, or do they still have those negative associations? I claim the Mirf and PPP collective affair suggests these associations still exist. That’s why the activity of the LISA Project and others like it is so important- re-exposure to graffiti, without the crime and disparity. This time it took X amount of days for the community to ask for its removal. Perhaps next time it will take longer (X+2), etc. etc. until finally it’ll be fully accepted and celebrated.
Of course this is just the tip of the iceberg and there are so many other considerations here- Yes, I would be glad to continue this conversation in person. I’m at info@yoavlitvin.com – let’s coordinate.
Thanks so much for checking out the collab at Welling Court, we had a blast!
This is a fantastic response and indeed we need to connect. I believe that most people in NYC are not ready for graffiti as a celebrated art movement, nor do yet want to see projects like this last longer than a few hours. You are so right about false beliefs often never getting questioned, as well as making associations to outdated physical negative reactions. I have always had a great interest in the physiology and psychology process behind how this occurs. Heck, are the masses ready for that level of consciousness? It takes a lot of awareness and inner work, bit by bit though, change will prevail. We have that in common, we bring the awareness.
Shooting you an e-mail!
Best,
SLOW