Lefebvre's Ideas about Social Space Imply a Re-Evaluation of the Graffiti Role in the City Politics - Essay Example

?Lefebvre's Ideas about Social Space Imply a Re-Evaluation of the Role of Graffiti in the Politics of and Urban Life Since the beginning of time, man has always used public walls as a surface for the formation and communication of different concepts. ‘Graffiti’ or ‘writing on walls’ is not something that was started by the youth in the 21st century. There exists a long history of various cultures leaving symbols and writings of their experiences from the age of the Pharaoh’s Pyramids to Hadrian’s Wall, the Byzantium Empire, and the middle ages. However, it is only half a century ago when graffiti started being linked to the culture of the urban youth as well as the political beliefs of the social movements of the 1960s. Graffiti writers from New York and Philadelphia began to create new and innovative styles with new materials and writing styles. They also made use of increasing spaces in the urban areas. Graffiti soon grew to be a global phenomenon. It is now a common sight in numerous urban areas all over the world. It adorns or disfigures public areas, depending on the viewpoint of the person analysing the works. Graffiti has sometimes been viewed as a disfigurement of the city walls. However, many people simply consider it is a modern way used by the youth to express their viewpoints. Henri Lefebvre separated space into three groups: representations of space, spatial practice, and representational space. According to his ideas, every piece of art that is included in the public space will slowly integrate itself into that space, and frequently ends up being a part of that very public space in such a way that it cannot be separated from that place. The import of public art lies in the fact that the more it is integrated, the more effectual the public space will be made, and then both its functional and representative aspects are confirmed. Its importance is also found in its political as well as activist functions, since public art usually denotes the significance of public space. Any work of art that is in the public space tends to acquire its significance when it is recognised as a part of the public. The art works that created in and for the public space, for instance graffiti, are the types of artwork that take into account the framework of urban. They are deemed to be a part of the civic realm as they are meant for the public spaces as well as the citizens of the location in which they were created. In that sense, they cannot be differentiated from their public spaces, where by integrating themselves in the public space, they create the identity of that area. It is a common thing for citizens who live near areas that are filled with graffiti start to identify the area by the different drawings on the public walls. The aspect of the ‘lived’ dealt with the third branch of Lefebvre’s triad in comprehending the social space, where he associates it with the representational space. The representational space speaks to the more unstructured and intimate interactions of citizens in its surroundings. Whereas human interventions such as graffiti are delineate the connection that the citizens have with their capital, the theory of Lefebvre’s triad goes further in illuminating that the notion of ‘lived’ has an inclination of going to the scheme of non-verbal symbols. In that sense, Lefebvre affirmed that this concept stimulates the imaginations that citizens who view them have about themselves (Zukin, 1995). Lefebvre’s theory explored new methods of comprehending of the prevailing procedures of urbanisation, as well as the conditions and outcomes on any scale of the public reality; whether from the operations of daily life, through the municipal scale, to the international flows of capital, people, ideas, and information (Lefebvre, 1996). Concurrently, this premise has the potential to connect urban design and research operations because of its programmatic investigation of the connection between the critique of urbanism, the urban study, and the visualisation of a new kind of social space in the modern city. De-industrialisation has changed key urban cities of the Western world in a remarkable way. Other procedures have proven to be more transformative of bigger divisions of physical spaces, and effortlessly capture the everyday existences of more citizens in a more direct way. These ways include suburbanisation, and the function it has had in shifting demographics and the role it has had in affecting urban space to be a potential element of the techno-conflict. On an international scale, these ways could improve technological proliferation, and the function that technological innovations have had in eradicating old restrictions, resulting in a redefined and individuated existence. These three processes extend form to aspects of urban life and influence the way cities are experienced by their citizens. The ‘urban’, as asserted by Lefebvre, “relies on the characteristics of the society as it was during the process of industrialisation” (Lefebvre, 1996). This means that it is the location formed for and by a society of that produces on a regular basis. Lefebvre was concerned with enhancing and extending Marx’s idea of dialectical materialism to include not just time but space (Smith, 1984). Lefebvre pointed out that Marx’s theory on the then political system translated to the current urban developments. Lefebvre also spoke of how the real estate and land investments had control of a particular area of the economy, but was also quite detached from the normal comprehension of capital in the process of production as Marx would argue. Hence, Lefebvre asserted that there is a need to examine the outcomes, such as class issues, inequality, race, gender, and housing which are compound and numerous in the urban context. These consequences are addressed in Lefebvre’s ‘The Production of Space’. Lefebvre’s theory contributes towards defining the way space is exhibited in daily life and why it is distinguished by ‘multi-centred regionalism’ and ‘specialisation’ (Gottdiener, 2000:97). The Lefebvre’s Spatial Triad Representations of Space This refers to visualised space, which is space that is visualised by town planners, architects, and mathematicians. It is conceived on the Cartesian scheme of ordered and geometric spaces, which is methodical and, therefore, reliable (Lefebvre, 1996). This is due to the fact that science is viewed as the reality in society. Representations of space contribute to abstract concepts regarding how space should seem like, and be made use of. This space is psychologically created for the specific purpose of categorising space in the way that architects imagine them. Lefebvre observed that it is these mental spaces that determine how space is viewed, and that influence how citizens relate with those spaces (Lefebvre, 1996). This kind of information threatens to extricate the social space, and separates the material space from the lived experience. Spatial Practice This is the type of space in which there is social interaction that is based on how citizens interrelate in that space. Spatial practice produces and replicates its own value as well as function, in conjunction with depictions of behaviour, and space that is used in the daily living experience. Representational Space/Spaces of Representation This is third and last constituent of the triad. It overlays the other two constituents by generating a space that is experienced (Lefebvre, 1996). Representational space describes the space “as directly lived through its connected symbols and imagery, and, therefore, the space of “users” and “inhabitants” (Merrifield, 2006). This space has the capability of contravening the normative or ordinary function of space, and, therefore, is deeply connected with the political quality of space. This space embraces individuality as well as alternatives which can go beyond the standard status quo, and is viewed as the linchpin for altering society as well as space. However, (Dear, 2000) mentions how Lefebvre asserts that it is the relations of all three spatial basics that generate a space, and it is when one governs the other that disparities or a particular kind of space is the outcome. The domination of different interpretations of space can clarify why so many metropolitan environments are characterised by unequal as well as dichotomous interactions with space. Urban Space and Everyday Life Urban spaces are in a constant state of change. In actual fact, permanence is not viable. The populace, their existences, and their territorial limitations are transitory. The urban regions of the world are constantly being rewritten without the slate being clean. The ‘messages' rooted in the landscape can be perceived as symbols that are concerned with beliefs, values, and practices. In recent times, geographers have started to perceive the potential in reflecting on landscapes. Michel de Certeau saw numerous similarities in cities, their populations, their activities, and the function of speaking and writing. He perceived the urban inhabitants as ‘markings on an urban text' as they travel through it. Even though the graffiti writers usually document content in a factual sense, there is a lot more they wish to express than just their words. They write as part of their daily lives. As Henri Lefebvre asserted, there is a strength that is hidden in the banalities of daily life. He came up with the presumption that space is not an impartial or reflexive geometry, but that it is created and recreated, and therefore represents the locality of the struggle. New York’s Graffiti in 70s initially emerged as the city started to undergo ‘a swift and highly discernible decline of its objective fabric (Low and McDonough, 2001). Grafitti merely illustrated a city in the throes of a struggle. The ‘Situationists’ were deeply influenced by Lefbvre's theory and were determined to infiltrate the external, impressive, commercialised symbols of New York’s mass culture and investigate its interior by exploring daily patterns of human existence, and specifically people's use of urban space as well as buildings. By exercising the methodology of the Situationists and mapping ‘symbols that are regularly unseen, such as unlawful expressions like graffiti instead of the omnipresent coca cola neon signs or the golden arches, one may possibly start to read a passage of a less homogenous, universal quality (Lefebvre, 1996). This is a quality that is more domestic in its viewpoint but one that is, however, still able to bring insights that extend further than the physical boundaries of the city. Geography has generated an option to its homothetic approach, which basically forms patterns in space. This ideographic method defines the specifics of different localities, the distinctiveness of places, as well as their distinctive ambiences. The ideographic approach also brings a genuine sense of place that goes beyond the ephemerality of the continuously shifting contemporary world. This approach, thus, is that of the ethnographer or anthropologist, amassing studies of an empirical quality (Lefebvre, 1974). The ideographic approach is concerned with the search for meaning, and not regulations. It proposes that one can only go for the search of meaning by being in the midst of events as they occur. As a location shifts from being a residential to being an industrial one, it becomes evident that the amount of graffiti starts to reduce, and the variety of graffiti alters. In the industrial regions there exists a prevalence of ‘tags'. There could be two grounds for this. One of the biggest motivations for this kind of graffiti is ‘establishing a presence' in a district or neighbourhood that is viewed as being dangerous. Industrial regions that are perceived as being as controlled may encourage a type of challenge (Gottdiener, 1994). In addition, the industrial area is less peopled by the writer's companions, and so personal and direct references are less prone to being discovered by their subject. Graffiti is a daily practice in many areas of the urban cities of the world. It is a subculture that alters the way people around the world view, read about, and experience the urban centre (Harvey 2000). Graffiti also alters how people think about who has the authority to design, map, construct and standardise the city impacts, or who can shape daily settings through their own contributions and uses. This function of ‘reading the urban centre’ through the symbols and signs that are written and tinted on a city’s structures and streets are an indication of demands and claims for a more comprehensive appreciation of the urban experience that values a more inclusive as well as egalitarian ‘right to a city’, and one that stresses on aesthetics such as humour, rather than acts of anti-social defacement. Power is also acquired when a Graffiti writer or squad acquires ‘figurative possession’ over geographic localities such as certain neighbourhoods. This would be realised by systematically ‘piecing’ or ‘tagging’ the location. By creating such a weighty impact on their environs, graffiti artists can actually let power infuse the collective. They actually assist in bonding or unifying the group. Graffiti work constitutes of artistic expression that performs a public function by affecting the communal actions of people the fact that it is formed to be noticed or used in principally public situations ...describing collective characteristics of daily life as opposed to personal or private types of experience (Friedland, 1992). The way graffiti authors tour, and cooperate with space is categorically different from the ways in which non-Graffiti writers do. Graffiti artists often look for derelict or abandoned regions, looking for hazardous or physically challenging locations in the metropolis to paint. They then create living depictions of their towns, which they have experienced in the course of their travels. It is probable for another Graffiti writer to decide the local writers of a specific area by examining the walls, and to map their personal trajectories in a sequence of successive nights. A graffiti writer can trace a plain route for blocks, while escaping into doorways, and lingering while searching for non-grimy surfaces on which to print and colour their messages. The graffiti writer's utilisation of space can also include their remarks or opinions on various issues that are affecting their society (Eagleton, 2000). While some walls are effortlessly accessible and contain the works of every passing graffiti artist, there are other walls that are more sought after because of their inaccessibility. In challenging the ideas governing private property, city graffiti’s makes use of the idea of “socialised sharing” and not private possession. It also confronts the sense of estrangement that is frequently associated with contemporary urban spaces. It does this by cultivating a reformulation of the person in accordance with the material potential of the constructed environment. This operation assists in changing the citizens’ experience of the city’s environment, transforming it from being one of disenfranchisement and alienation to being one of a combination of ‘respect and attraction’. Graffiti usually also discounts many leading facets of urban spaces, while concentrating on apparently inconsequential elements. Another purpose of graffiti leans more towards the political. It has been stated that the graffiti’s spatial politics, particularly in the projects, must be appreciated within the framework of the erection of the ghetto as a space of internment. Graffiti artists from the underprivileged areas of the world’s cities may not have the opportunity to benefit from programs that are created to cater for people who feel frustrated with their lot in life. Many Graffiti writers are immensely talented individuals who do not have the means to realise their dreams. Graffiti writing provides a perfect chance for them to express their talents and exhibit their artistic skills. Contrary to what most of the established artistic institutions assert, Graffiti artists are actually immensely gifted people. They actually realise their talents without having had the benefit of training schools or artistic schools. The art that is depicted on public walls is actually art in its rawest form, with all the elements that the artist wished to express being starkly present. Graffiti is also used by people as a way to challenge their limitations. Many people feel imprisoned in circumstances that they did not wish on themselves. Graffiti seeks to undermine and oppose the invisibility and incarceration forced by the ghetto spaces on people. Through the writings of inner city youth, the assumed false identities of poor people are rendered invisible. Through graffiti’s literal representation of the metropolitan spatial arrangement, it seeks to depict the unfairness that are imposed on the underprivileged. Appreciating that graffiti comes from a background and place of powerlessness, and recognising the messages it tells regarding the connection between social exclusion and spatial confinement is one way in which people can appreciate its functions and purposes. Conclusion One of the most evident demarcations of wealth, power and influence in the municipal landscape has always been the capability to invest and adorn one's surroundings. Therefore, the emergence of graffiti can be viewed as being an effort on the part of the marginalised people to carve their living space with a sense of meaning. This is in spite of the high odds of them not being able to realise their goals. Street corners and empty areas may be seen as places where people who feel abandoned by their society, in some sense, can go to form their own identities. These areas then become permeated with cultural meanings and values, thus affording a sense of distinction and a feeling of being extraordinary. References Dear, M. (2000) The postmodern urban condition, Blackwell, California. Eagleton, T. (2000) The idea of culture, Blackwell, Oxford. Friedland, R. (1992) ‘Space, place and modernity’, A Journal of Reviews: Contemporary Sociology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 128-167. Gottdiener, M. (1994) The production of urban space, University of Texas Press, Austin. Harvey, D. (2000) Spaces of hope, University of California Press, California. Lefebvre, H. (1974) The production of space, Basil Blackwell, Cambridge. Lefebvre, H. (1996) Writings on cities, Blackwell, Oxford. Low, S., & McDonough, G. (2001) ‘Re-mapping the city: Place, order, and ideology’, American Anthropologist, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 5-16. Merrifield, A. (2006) Henri Lefebvre: a critical introduction, London, Routledge. Smith, N. (1984) Uneven development: nature, capital and the production of space, Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Soja, E. (1989) Postmodern geographies: the reassertion of space in critical social theory, Verso, London. Zukin, S (1995) The cultures of cities, Blackwell, Cambridge. Read More