Street Art is a style and an influence - Essay Example

Street Art is a style and an influence. Street art is among the more fascinating forms of art because of its quicksilver nature of being there and then gone, changing form as it moves. “As an artifact, it is the most ephemeral of all contemporary art forms: surviving only long enough to be documented before it is buffed, painted over and forgotten” (Sadeghi, 2006). An example of this fleeting form of art can be found in the 2006 exhibition “Wooster on Spring” held in New York City, in which 30,000 square feet of interior space was covered with spray-painted graffiti art for a three day weekend event and was then painted over and destroyed. Despite the quick turn-around of the show, it was shown to have a tremendous impact on those who came to see it. “No one could have guessed that people came in and saw the show and started crying. People were moved. They thought it brought back the heart and soul of the city, that it reminded people of why they lived here. It had such a profound impact specifically on the neighborhood” (Apfelbaum, 2007). This surprising strength of impact wielded by street art has finally been recognized not only in the popular culture, but also in the greater world of art and design as it exposes a missing element from the world of commercial art and corporately-sponsored design. To gain a better understanding of how street art has begun to influence the greater world, it is helpful to look at a few examples, such as the graffiti art of the elusive artist known only as Banksy and the street art of Julian Beever. The definition of street art, whether discussing the spray painted graffiti of Banksy or the chalk sidewalk drawings of Beever, changes depending upon who is providing the definition. Although often referred to as art, its artistic merits are frequently ignored or deemed unimportant, as is exemplified in the definition provided by the Dublin City Council (“What is Graffiti?”, 2007) in which only one of the five listed characteristics even mentions its artistic qualities: “Graffiti is illegal and an anti-social activity that creates a negative impression of an area and contributes to people’s fear of crime; … is the most common type of property vandalism; … is often the first element in a spiral of decline; … Its artistic merits are irrelevant. It represents one group of people imposing themselves on everyone else and as such is a form of pollution, like people playing loud music … is also a green issue as it is an attack on the environment.” Because chalk art washes away with a good rain, this is not often considered to be as great a nuisance as the spray-paint-wielding wall painters and is thus not addressed in such specific terms by government agencies. Attempting to present a more objective view, Stowers (2005) says simply “Graffiti is art”, but then follows this with an argument against the establishment definitions with “The reasons, including aesthetic criteria, as to why it is an art form far outweigh the criticism of illegality, incoherence, and nonstandard presentation.” While both the work of Banksy in spray paint and the work of Beever in chalk take on a light-spirited tone in the whimsical scenes they portray, their work necessarily opens the door to consideration of alternative realities by pushing the boundaries of what is considered real. Because of its unsanctioned element, graffiti and other street art is recognized as “one of the strongest assertions of individual identity in the art world” (Sadeghi, 2006) and Banksy is considered to be one of the heroes of the medium. Understood to exist outside of the dominant culture in both execution and content, Banksy’s work reminds people of the human, common, real nature of the world without asking for permission or agreement, but generally resonates with a commonly-held truth. “It was originally placed without consent into the public sphere … This work defies the socially ‘acceptable’ forms of representation and exhibition, preferring a milieu that is at street level, a kind of urban midway” (Sadeghi, 2006). His image of two male policemen holding each other through a tender kiss painted on the side of the Prince Albert pub in Brighton, for example, manages to capture a sense of connection, love and acceptance while also forcing a controversial subject to the fore, subtly subverting the authority of the police department and reinforcing the concept that policemen are people first, policemen second. Unquestionably considered art, the image was nevertheless painted in true Banksy style – in the middle of the night without sanction of the city, the building owner or the neighboring community. Through this medium, the problem of a lack of financing for the art, the exhibition hall or the price of admission tickets was removed as “art was delivered throughout the boroughs … bring[ing] the mountain to Mohammed” (Sadeghi, 2006). Though controversial, the image still managed to find a great deal of resonance among the populace, referred to as having been a “popular attraction” in a newspaper article regarding two men’s convictions of criminal damage for painting over the image (“Graffiti Art Vandals”, 2007). Like the Kissing Policemen, the artist’s work speaks on an individual level with those who live at the street level and perceive that they are being asked to adapt to a world-view that is outside of or in opposition to their own sphere of experience. Journalist Simon Hattenstone (2003) explains the way in which this is accomplished: “When I do come across them [Banksy’s images], surreptitiously peeping out of an alley or boldly emblazoned on a wall, I find it hard to contain myself. They feel personal, as if they are just for me, and they feel public as if they are a gift for everyone. They make me smile and feel optimistic about the possibilities of shared dreams and common ownership.” A combination of inside joke with the realization that just about everyone ‘gets’ the joke is itself a slap in the face of a commonly presented ‘official’ ideal that has obviously failed. While part of this emotional response is due to the content of the images presented, part of it is also contained in the subversive element of creating the art. According to Hattenstone (2003), Banksy fans include this subversive element as a part of their devotion, “they tell me how he comes by stealth in the night, how he has look-outs posted while he works, how his first exhibition will be in a warehouse though only the number of the road (475) is known and not the road itself. They say that Banksy has customised the city, reclaimed it, made it theirs.” The excitement of this art form is more than just capturing the emotions and imaginations of the common people, but is also contained in the act of moving outside of the circles of the officially sanctioned, government approved and corporately supported dominant viewpoint of the fabulously wealthy. The will of the people is captured in Banksy’s ability to capture a sense of the observations, struggles and triumphs of the common man, beginning to re-establish connections and re-enforcing personal observations that strike against the claims of the powers that be. As the fans of Banksy noted, this ability to speak to the concerns of the common man has re-asserted their impression that their voices, while not necessarily agreeing with the dominant viewpoint, are nonetheless valid. Julian Beever is a little less controversial than Banksy perhaps only because of his option to use chalk for his images, which are painted on sidewalks and streets in many major metropolitan cities. His images have a more playful tone and content, exploring the concepts of reality in terms of optical illusion rather than through direct subversion of authority. Although he is more often invited to work his wonders on pavement these days, his art, too, began as a means of freely expressing viewpoints independent of the cost and inaccessibility of the established venues. According to Loat (2006), even now some of Beever’s art is destroyed before it can be captured thanks to issues with organizational control: “During Julian’s last visit to Birmingham, his drawing was swilled away from the pavement due to a mix up with permissions.” However, like Banksy, he describes his artwork as being about the people rather than the establishment: “My art is for anybody, it’s for people who wouldn’t go into an art gallery. … Art shouldn’t be locked away in galleries and libraries and books. Art should be for everybody and not just art boffins, historians and so-called experts” (Loat, 2006). Choosing a plaza or wide sidewalk in a given area, he sets up his camera, digs out his chalks and begins creating a work of art to amaze and surprise the unwary city dweller. More often working out 3D trompe l’oeil images, Beever went from a common street artist to one who is internationally recognized and approached for various commercial projects. Even less lasting than the spray paint of the graffiti artists, Beever’s work is washed away with the first rain or tramped away with the first pedestrian crossing its surface, yet he continues to spend as many as three days on each image, taking away as his prize a simple photograph. Although he does it in a different way using less obvious or controversial characters, Beever also combines different messages within his seemingly innocent images such as can be found in his “Batman and Robin to the Rescue” (Beever, 2005). In this image, Beever himself is seen to be crouching on a small architectural ledge apparently at the top of a tall building that is on fire. The fire smolders behind the windows of the second floor and billows out the top of the third floor windows, reaching up the outside of the building as if hungry for Beever’s feet. A crowd of people can be seen far below, watching the action with a detached interest while the police stand well back from the building as well, effective only in keeping the crowd of pedestrians safely away from the building and blocking vehicular traffic to the streets around the building. No fire trucks are in sight and no one on the ground seems to be able to move a muscle to help the stranded man on the top of the building. However, Batman and Robin, the heroes of comic book legend, have nearly reached the level of Beever as they laboriously climb up a rope that has been grappled to the edge of the ledge on which Beever stands. The rope seems thin as string, disappears long before it could possibly touch the ground and seems threatened to be burned through by the fire coming out the windows, yet still Batman and Robin have eyes only toward saving the man at the top. Like Banksy, Beever presents multi-layered expressions within this single work. Presenting a 3D effect trompe l’oeil, literally fooling the eye into thinking there is an entirely different world below the surface of the sidewalk, he opens up the possibility of alternative realities, encourages his viewers to look below the surface and manages to tie it all into the reality of this world with the inclusion of a physical concrete half-wall that exists above the level of the actual pavement of the sidewalk. He appeals to our desire for heroes to come and rescue us as is shown in the image of the burning building scene, but also manages to convey the need for heroes to come rescue us from the simple dangers of the city streets, the mind-numbing everyday and the danger of losing our imagination. The illusion of the danger as well as the illusion of the rescuers highlights the need for us to stand up on our own and just walk away if we wish to find relief. Finally, and perhaps unintentionally, Beever includes a slight slap to the world of the official authority figures as his policemen stand helpless and away from the fire while the firemen who are intended to be the rescuers are not even present. For both of these artists, focused on delivering quick messages of hope and understanding to the common people of the streets without first gaining the approval or permission of the ‘official’ viewpoint, a desire to express themselves has led to the type of acceptance by the establishment they never expected. Of course, Banksy will still be arrested should he be caught spray painting anything on the side of a building and Beever continues to struggle from time to time with obtaining the proper permissions to chalk an image on a sidewalk, but each have become associated with the commercial world as icons of anti-establishment yet positive role models. Their ability to capture the heart of the people, re-affirming the connections with the common and everyday yet still amazing experience of life has begun worming its way into the establishment conscience as shown through the more commercial means by which they have begun to be expressed. Hattenstone (2003) says, “Banksy has branched out recently – he designed the cover of the Blur album, Think Tank, and tomorrow is the opening night of Turf War, his first gallery show in Britain. He is somehow managing to straddle the commercial, artistic and street worlds,” even as the journalist describes the way in which he had to meet covertly with Banksy and Banksy’s agent to avoid possible legal repercussions. Beever has been commissioned to perform sidewalk art for major city-wide celebrations as well as commercial work for large-scale international companies such as Aveeno. While these two artists work in different mediums, they share several common characteristics that establish street art as a style distinct from other forms of art. They produce art with the intention and knowledge that it will only be available for perhaps two or three days. They work within the public eye, keeping their art free to be seen and in locations where it is likely to be seen by art lovers as well as the general public. To accomplish this last, they don’t always work within the rules and conventions of established law and courtesy, but instead find a likely spot and use it. They concentrate on themes and topics that speak to the common people about their shared experience, poking fun at the fallacies of establishment and encouraging exploration into alternate possibilities. While their alternate realities are different, sometimes hitting very close to the perceived realities of the streets and sometimes more fantastic symbols of these perceived realities, they each manage to demonstrate beyond question that there is no one ‘correct’ vision of reality, reinforcing a sense of individuality that nevertheless becomes included in the connectedness of their art. For each artist, success is determined by the degree to which they are able to excite a reaction from the people, inspiring conversation and debate and bringing true issues to the public discussion. However, each artist has also found acceptance within the commercial and officially sanctioned world as their messages and popularity are recognized and utilized to change or reinforce various ideologies within the business, political and mass audience worlds, thereby becoming in themselves the types of heroes Beever depicts and the floating hopes of Banksy’s stencils. References Apfelbaum, Sue. (17 April 2007). “Ephemeral Art’s Lasting Impression: An Interview with Marc and Sara Schiller.” AIGA. Available 2 May 2007 from Beever, Julian. (2005). “Batman and Robin to the Rescue.” Julian Beever. Available 2 May 2007 from < http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/batman.html> “Graffiti Art Vandals are Convicted.” (12 January 2007). The Argus. Banksy [online]. Available 2 May 2007 from Hattenstone, Simon. (17 July 2003). “Something to Spray.” Guardian Unlimited. Available 2 May 2007 from Loat, Sarah. (2006). “Pavement Picasso.” BBC. Available 2 May 2007 from Sadeghi, Sabrina. (2006). “Exhibition Road Show.” Tour press release. New York: Martinez Gallery. Available 2 May 2007 from Stowers, George C. (Fall 1997). “Graffiti Art: An Essay Concerning The Recognition of Some Forms of Graffiti As Art.” Art Crimes. “What is Graffiti?” (26 January 2007). Dublin City Council. Available 2 May 2007 from Read More