Ask anybody their view on graffiti, and you’ll receive views of love and hatred : some individuals see it as vandalism, others a subtle artform. On the “good press” side, talented graffiti artists such as Banksy have made graffiti an artform that is pleasing on the eye, applying stencils to produce technically difficult artworks loaded with political points attached. This kind of graffiti was certain to get trendy with the public and the likes of The Guardian pressroom : visually pleasing and intellectually satisfying. This form of graffiti is even bought as graffiti prints, and hung in middleclass households and corporate meeting rooms.
Yet, when it comes to your down and dirty graffiti – the scally, the tagger, the gangbanger type – this sort of graffiti is frequently seen as antisocial, an offence committed by the untalented. But is graffiti only an artform? To many people, it’s not just an artform, but a means to put your stamp on a district, or even a rejection of society altogether : anti-establishment, anti-social, even anti-art.
Spraying has forever been a secret activity, although the results are very much public facing. The intended audience is often unknown. Is it for a rival gang? A message to an individual? To the public? Or….possibly it’s simply uncalled-for and out of boredom.
Whatever the reasons may be, there seems to be some kind of enduring demand to spray graffiti. Some town councils have acknowledged that graffiti isn’t going to go away, so they’ve marked off areas where graffiti is allowed – usually derelict areas, but from time to time more civic areas like boarding around inner city buildings under construction.
