From New York to the rest of the world, Jeff Ferrell’s “Urban Graffiti” aims to show how graffiti serves as resistance to social arrangements and political power for many. The youth use graffiti as a way to provide alternate solutions for oppressions and cultural conditions. Ferrell demonstrates how young artists utilize this art form as a way of raising awareness and resisting social constraints. For example, in London, certain billboards in 1982 were aggressively altered to advocate the voice of the feminists and animal activists. Graffiti writing usually takes place in urban areas where discrimination and division of racial groups are heavily seen. Jeff Ferrell recounts how these young taggers work exclusively during late hours to avoid …show more content…
surveillance and punishment from authority. Youth vandalizes and graffiti architecture to make statements on building alternative communities and beautify what is needed. In many U.S. cities certain structures are systematically constructed by ethnicity or race, hence provoking artists to take measures that rectify the injustice and in other cases tagging city owned items to add variety to the repeated dull systems Although Ferrell provides a strong argument through logical, ethical and emotional appeals his formal tone, single view point on the rebellious aspects of graffiti and lack of assessment for pathos fails to capture the audience of young artists and educate the side of America that sees this art form as a crime. Ferrell’s argument fails to provide a realistic alternative of graffiti being a passionate art form that can create communities and allow artistic expression with recompense for the services. Ferrell builds a forceful case towards the resistant movement inspired by this common crime and the opinions of many legal authorities. However, Graffiti is a therapy for some, release for others and passion for most. The author’s assessment on pathos fails to depict the connection graffiti arts have to their masterpieces, and instead focuses on pinpointing the resistance motive behind a tagger’s actions. In fact, Ferrell consistently reminds his audience that graffiti is a way for young artists to resist oppression and legal/political authority. Ferrell “aims to reveal the various ways in which youthful activities” that correspond to the act of graffiti “shape resistance to existing arrangements but construct alternative arrangements as well” (Ferrell, p.33). Graffiti has become an adjunct to hip hop style, for example, which has been a major influence on taggers, through certain techniques such as “piecing’s” and nicknames on structures which advertise the endemic of ethnic inequalities across the United States. Ferrell reminded us that “U.S. cities today are systematically fractured by ethnic, class, and consumer segregation” (p.35) and we can even see segregation built into skyscrapers, freeway and transit routes. In turn, taggers feel the need to change these existing arrangements and provide others an insight into what they are feeling. But, Ferrell fails to address the young artists of this world and those uneducated on the art behind what graffiti is and the meaningful impact it has on many lives. Within the content of Mr.
Ferrell’s argument, the targeted audience is clearly acknowledged through his uptight, formal language as he addresses those that view graffiti as trash art, as opposed to targeting their counterparts, who recognize this art form as a form of expression. "Graffiti writing not only confronts and resists an urban environment of fractured communities and segregated spaces; it actively constructs alternatives to these arrangements as well" (Ferrell, 1995, p.37). Furthermore, the author does not appeal to the uneducated people and lacks the grasp needed to allow sympathy and understanding to develop in his readers as they follow through the argument. Throughout the article his style, vocabulary and transition into certain arguments is systematically targeted to a class of higher education and in order to amplify his audience he needs to make his writing a lot less formal. Some examples of the kind of language Ferrell employs throughout the article can be seen in paragraph 5: “Its remarkable growth also increasingly incorporates kids from outside the ethnic and economic frameworks of its originators” (Ferrell, p.34). Jeff Ferrell solely focuses on this art form, providing venues for remediation of social arrangements that isolate certain
communities. Consequently, the author ineffectively situates graffiti as simply an art of resistance while blatantly avoiding a counter-argument and providing a positive viewpoint of graffiti, as a means of building communities and allowing people to advertise their artwork. Young artists inspired by music video, film, and magazine depictions of worldwide graffiti have contributed to this developing art form. Nevertheless, the main focus throughout this argument is the cultural criminology of the United States and the disregard most artists have towards any authority, consequently biasing the argument to the extreme of no counter-argument being acknowledged. Ferrell even states how “graffiti writers, of course, counterpunch with new forms of resistance and increased militancy of their own. In the early years of hip hop graffiti, legendary New York City writer Lady Pink said, “Graffiti means ‘I’m here.’ . . . They want to snub us, but they can’t” (Ferrell, p.36). He is constantly reminding his readers of resistant motives behind every spray can that is used by these young artists. Whether it is through the different measures that authority and city official have taken to reduce graffiti or first-hand interviews with taggers themselves. Furthermore, the absence of an opposing viewpoint diminishes the impact of Ferrell’s argument. In a final analysis, Ferrell excludes some of his readers, despite his attempt to appeal to everyone through his detailed argument. Throughout the argument, Ferrell constantly employs strong examples of his persistent viewpoint on graffiti such as “young Palestinian militants in the occupied lands employ wall painting as their primary form of communication and resistance to Israeli authority” (Hedges, 1994; see Ferrell, 1993b). Graffiti is all about reflecting the realities of the youth culture in urban environments, and that’s an audience that Mr. Jeff Ferrell failed to grasp the attention of. Although graffiti can be an expression of art in the spirit of rebellion, many just feel empowered to be able to spread their artwork and allow maximum exposure to their passion.
Within the impoverished urban streets arose a youth culture captivated by infamy and self-pride. A youth culture virtually undistinguishable from members of modern society with a passion, setting them apart from the community. The members of this underground subculture could be your next-door neighbor, your son or daughter, or the contractor repairing your roof, yet you would have no idea that they strive to “bomb” objects and surfaces found in everyday life. It is the subtle differences that distinguish a graffiti artist from the average member of society, such as their, mindset, desires, speech and active lifestyle.
In Style Wars, one sees how social marginalization affected graffiti writers in 1970s and 1980s New York. Firstly, Style Wars chronicles how the city government employed racist policing and propaganda to criminalize writers of color. Secondly, the documentary shows that newspapers and TV networks unequally privileged writers of higher socioeconomic status through front-page and prime-time coverage. Thirdly, the film depicts graffiti writers who conformed to masculine norms as disproportionately visible throughout the city. Although many writers featured in Style Wars minimized barriers against making art, legal racism, classist media coverage, and interpersonal masculinity limited recognition for certain writers.
“This world is but a canvas to our imagination” (Thoreau). The world is quite literally a canvas for graffiti artists, and these two opinion editorials cover the desire for this medium of art to be appreciated and showcased. Eric Felisbret wrote “Legal Venues Celebrate Graffiti as an Art Form” which was published on July 16, 2014 in the New York Times. Felisbret’s article was about creating more legal venues to showcase graffiti. Kathy Grayson wrote “L.A. Graffiti Exhibition, ‘Art in the Streets,’ belongs in N.Y.C.,” which was published on June 26, 2011 in the New York Daily News. Grayson wrote her article to persuade readers that “Art in the Streets” belongs in New York. The articles were simultaneously the same and very different in their content. Even though the specific messages were diverse the purpose was to persuade the discourse community, who value law, education, and their community, into having graffiti displayed as art. These two
The identity of a graffiti artist is hardly ever known unless they want to tag their art with their name or a nickname. Graffiti writers as a subculture are trying to express their political views through civil disobedience by painting pictures that speak out against the government. This subculture developed because they were tired of being oppressed by the government. Graffiti is one of the most enduring acts of protest. It is an important tool for the resistance movement as a way to publicize their protest. It is a visible and powerful form of protest that is going to promote change in the social justice by allowing oppressed groups of people express their viewpoints without being penalized by the
Graffiti has been on the rise in popularity since its beginnings fifty years ago. Danielle Crinnion provides a brief history of graffiti arguing that “Philadelphia
The author makes an appeal to ethos by using a strong academic of use words. This way he can appeal to most intellectuals. He tries to get academically advanced readers be the audience to his article. I think this is the group of people that are most against graffiti. So by having them as audience he can get the people who see graffiti as a low form of art to change their mind about it. To get them to have a better understanding of graffiti, where it came from and why it happens. But by making this article so academic, Jeff Ferrell alienates most readers. He blocks out a lot of potential readers, readers who are not on the same academic level as him will have trouble following his article. His point of graffiti not being a bad thing doesn´t
Urban spaces are not only the physical areas of a city, but they are also places of contested meaning and culture. The normative meanings and practices of places in cities can be controlled when public spaces becomes less public and more private. Jeff Ferrell explores the increasing trend of controlling public spaces and the resulting actions of people who are taking back their cities in his book “Tearing Down the Streets: Adventures in Urban Anarchy” (2001). This book looks at the revanchist city; one that regulates and closes off public spaces, and further marginalizes the marginalized. Ferrell uses examples of direct action taken to reclaim space throughout the book, such as BASE jumping, critical mass, pirate radio, graffiti and street
Looking from the taggers' point of view, one can understand why taggers and graffiti artists draw and do graffiti, but this does not justify the fact that often times this form of self-expression is not acceptable when it is done on other peoples property. Having the opportunity to listen (film, class, talk show) to why taggers and graf...
Ronald, Kramer helps to understand if graffiti is considered as illegal or legal, this article will support my essay because Ronald stress the issues that every graffiti art should be recognized for their work and should be considered as art. I will be using this source to support my idea for my main paragraph Graffiti is also introduced several cultures so they provide a place for graffiti writers to learn and grow their talents.
Many communities considered graffiti art because artists express their words; they have the right to freedom of speech. However, graffiti is not art if it creates violence. Freedom of speech does not extend to inciting violence. For instance, Erika Hayasaki wrote an article, Art Wars on Urban Canvas, that graffiti crew, known as Demented Young Mind, are against street art because street artists are taking over their public wall and drawing their graffiti and tags, so graffiti crew are starting a war by writing “DYM” over street drawing claiming that Demented Young Mind is taking over their territory (Hayasaki). Demented Young Mind causes more trouble than street artists. Hayasaki says, “Much of the public considers graffiti abrasive and difficult to decipher, but street art is often seen as aesthetically pleasing. Anyone caught doing either can be arrested for vandalism” (Hayasaki). Graffiti crew has the right to freedom of speech against street art, but they...
Instead of just mere protesting, people would try and take up more of a physical approach to the message they were trying to convey. At the beginning of the era, graffiti was a rebellious phase when it came to the younger generation backed by the punk-pop scene. It was more of a socialising hobby rather than a means to express a view or opinion, but then there were certain individuals who used it as an artistic outlet. Banksy is the most notorious for expressing his political opinion with out actually saying a political party in specific. According to James Basset ,“Banksy is an avowedly anonymous graffiti artist who has managed to translate underground credibility into massive popular appeal.” (James Brassett 2009). He is the type of artist that shames but never names. There have been many occasion when artists that have tried to mimic what Banksy does but they are never quite as successful as he is at accomplishing it. In Banksy’s very own words he states that “Just doing a tag is about retribution. If you don't own a train company then you go and paint on one instead.” (Banksy
Individual artists became crews who not only had graffiti artists yet also rappers. Rappers were the poets behind the images, they put what you view on the passing trains into words for your ears to digest if your eyes didn’t understand. This form of art displayed such a freedom of expression out of oppression the next generation had a voice, such an influence that it spread across the world inspiring other artists to express the voice of the communities that were and are viewed as “less than.” The constant message graffiti throughout the years has been trying to convey is all these city needs is LOVE just a little
Although street art and graffiti art seem very similar, upon closer examination the differences in technique, function, culture, and intent are revealed (Weisburg.) ‘“Graffiti (sgraffiti), meaning drawings or scribblings on a flat surface and deriving from the Italian sgraffio (‘scratch’), with a nod to the Greek graphein (‘to write’), originally referred to those marks found on ancient Roman architecture”’(Weisburg). Though, it is unknown when or where graffiti first made an appearance; modern graffiti did not come around until the late 1960’s to early 1970’s in New York. The term “tagging” is the modern form of scratching (Weisburg). It also is considered the origin of all modern graffiti, including street art.
Mention the word graffiti and what typically comes to mind is something unpleasant and distasteful like indecent language scribbled on a wall of a store or crude pictures. Most graffiti is characterized as vandalism on property that does not belong to the culprit. Graffiti also displays negative graphics that promote some type of vulgar message such as violence, sex, drugs, gangs, and racism. On the other hand, when the terms “street” and “art” come together, a blast of colorful creations upon blank slates on the street comes to mind. Although street art is technically considered graffiti, it is a type of graffiti with positive qualities, but certain figures in society find street art to be, in some way, disruptive. If used properly, street art can be appreciated artistically and socially. Despite the negative stigma attached to graffiti, street art has emerged as a progressive valuable art form whose vast history, surge in popularity, and urge for social change warrant its classification as a fine art.
Graffiti started in the 1920s when gangs would tag train cars and walls to mark territory mainly in New York City. Graffiti took a different turn in the 1970s when young adults decided to use street art as an outlet to express their political and social outrage. This movement had soon gained the attention of the “adult” world. Graffiti was known as “creation through destruction” and to this day is still considered illegal in most parts of the world. In modern street art the mediums used have evolved past spray paint and now artists are using different methods with spray paint to progress their works past crude tags.