The public has had a love/hate relationship with graffiti. On the plus side, artists like Banksy have made graffiti an artform that is pleasing on the eye, applying stencils to create technically tricky artworks with political messages attached. This sort of graffiti was certain to grow trendy with the public and the likes of The Guardian pressroom : pleasing to the eye, and the intellect. This form of graffiti is now even acquired as graffiti on canvas, and hung in middleclass households and office reception areas.
Nevertheless, when it comes to your down and dirty graffiti – the tagger, the gangbanger type – this is just seen as antisocial, a crime perpetrated by the untalented. But is graffiti merely an artform? To many people, it’s not only art, but a way to put your stamp on a district, or even a two finger salute : anti-establishment, anti-social, even anti-art.
Graffiti has always been a clandestine pursuit, even though the results are public. The intended audience is often unidentified. Is it for a rival gang? A message to a single person? To the public? Possibly it’s merely gratuitous and out of nothing to do.
Whatever the causes may be, there seems to be a enduring need to spray graffiti. Some town councils have acknowledged that graffiti isn’t a fad, so they’ve designated areas where graffiti is allowed – usually unoccupied areas, but now and again more civic zones like boarding surrounding urban buildings under construction.
