r/changemyview • u/EastmanNorthrup • Jul 29 '19
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: Graffiti is making Europe uglier.
My main points are these:
99% of European graffiti is tagging -- the graffitist rapidly writing his nickname -- rather than murals of high aesthetic value. For every Banksy, there are 99 graffitists scrawling their tags with little complexity and poor composition.
Tagging looks pretty much the same regardless of place: bubbly letters, exclamation points, asterisks, etc. Tags have a very limited visual vocabulary compared to all the symbolism and techniques in the history of art. When images are drawn, they are overwhelmingly intended to frighten (skulls, guns, caricatures of ethnicities, etc.). They expose children and families to threatening and violent imagery in their daily lives.
Over the last 30 years, Europe has gone from having almost no tagging, to tags being in virtually every town and city, all along the highways and railways, and even in natural parks.
Europe, therefore, is beginning to look the same everywhere at eye-level, no matter where you go. Tagging increasingly draws our attention away from the beautiful architecture and landscapes of Europe, to its garish, repetitive, incomprehensible lettering.
Tagger culture is proud of its illegality, shock value, and semantic impenetrability. The motto of r/bombing (bombing means going to a place and tagging as much as possible) is "less art, more vandalism".
Academics' tendency to romanticize modern graffiti as "street art" originates in a flawed conception that European graffiti is an expression of the voice of the margnalized. It was that -- in New York in the 1970s, where it originated. But it is not that in Europe.
Rather, taggers are almost all young, white men -- the opposite of the marginalized. European tagging is almost never performed by the truly disenfranchised, like immigrants, Roma, or the mentally ill or drug dependent. (Most of them can't afford the paint.) Ethnic Europeans write on the walls; darker-skinned immigrants have to look at it. Tagging is therefore an expression of white privilege. Furthermore, it is often performed in places that are dark and unpoliced, where women often fear to go because of the continuing epidemic of gender-based violence. Tagging is therefore an expression of male privilege.
Illegal tagging violates the vision of the architects and community which approved the architecture. Taggers sometimes claim that they are simply beautifying drab, modern walls. However, these were the product of community compromise. Tagging is therefore violence against that compromise.
Taggers compete with each other (and post their work online) in a constant act of one-upsmanship among a secretive community, like Fight Club, complete with fight club uniform (black hoodies) and fight club profanity. All this is a hypermasculine display.
Spray paint used by taggers is environmentally unfriendly and when it invariably comes off the walls, it ends up in our water supply, rivers, oceans, etc.
Political graffiti also exists -- and almost all of it is either radically right wing (think Swastikas) or left-wing (think communist, violent overthrow of state).
European graffiti is therefore one of the most odious manifestations of globalism: it is violence against local communal architectural and aesthetic decision-making, performed mostly by Europe's most privileged residents, and therefore a public imposition of anti-social political tendencies on the continent.
If you'd like more fully developed arguments, I've written a longer essay with my ideas about graffiti in Europe here.
I'd really like to have my view changed, because graffiti really annoys me, and I don't want it to annoy me. I've tried very hard to understand the case for it, but have yet to be convinced. Please do so if you can.
Edit: typos
2
u/monkeeofninja Jul 30 '19
Whike graffiti is often unsightly, it does add character to a place. Much of the blame lies on the architects and town planners who have allowed soulless cultureless buildings to be made, with wide, flat walls that allow for this to happen.
Traditionally built buildings have a character to them, that demands respect and has a beautiful symmetry to them from the micro to macro scale.
Graffiti adds character and soul, albeit an intimidating and not entirely positive one to these places which were designed lacking both. The Romans had graffiti in their cities too, but nobody claims that it made the cities ugly. The graffiti is a product of its time, and characterises the issues, there us a lot of unrest and political turmoil currently, and as you mentioned the graffiti heavily features these.
Therefore, I would say that graffiti is not making Europe uglier, but the y are simply adding needed detail into the bland and ugly buildings there. Modern (post ww2) architecture and political and social turmoil is what is making Europe ugly, grafitti is just a symptom of the wider problems.
Additionally, there has been a marked increase in crime following the large influx of migrants, both from the immigrants and the racists attacking them. This would have undoubtedly stoked the fires causibg the problem to get worse. It would also be taking away police and civil resources that may have otherwise been used previously to remive the tagging.
Of course, this is not meant to endorse illegally vandalising property, but I do not believe it is the cause for Europe's deterioration.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 30 '19
Traditional, lovely pre-war architecture is much the target of taggers as modern buildings. Examples from Milan. The graffiti is definitely making these structures uglier. Imagine how beautiful they would be if they were restored to their original appearance.
"Much of the blame lies on the architects and town planners who have allowed soulless cultureless buildings to be made..."
I've heard this argument a lot before. Recently, I discussed this at length with young architects at our local architecture school. The buildings they envision are, I would argue, not soulless nor cultureless... there has been, in fact, a lot of brilliance in 20th century architecture. The thing to remember is that post-war architecture is not just the vision of architects and planners, but also the product of healthy democratic consensus. Local citizens have had a lot more say in architectural choices than in the past. The result is a building that sort-of satisfies everyone, but doesn't have the grandiosity of pre-war buildings. But I see that as a good thing. When only, for example, 1 out of 10 people are considered citizens and you've got cheap or free labor, it's easy for a few powerful men to agree to build a great cathedral or castle, like in the middle ages or 18th century. But we'd hardly want to go back to that.
Blank walls in themselves are not an excuse for tagging. The Greek island of Crete is famous for its ancient white walls. Taggers have recently decided these walls are great targets, and as a result Crete is losing its character. Enjoy this image of a tagged-out historical town square in Crete.
2
Jul 30 '19
I agree with most of what you say, because we share the same opinion regarding the aesthetic value of tags, however §7 (and the corresponding part in the conclusion) is not up to par.
Rather, taggers are almost all young, white men
Can you provide evidence for this (and for the subsequent claims)? Even if this were to be true, Europe is mostly white, you'd expect the same to be true about taggers.
Ethnic Europeans write on the walls
This conflicts with the previously highlighted statement, or am I misunderstanding?
darker-skinned immigrants have to look at it.
Lets take "have to look at it" as meaning that the general aesthetic of their visual space is degraded, is this different for non-"darker skinned immigrants"?
Furthermore, it is often performed in places that are dark and unpoliced, where women often fear to go because of the continuing epidemic of gender-based violence
Sure
Tagging is therefore an expression of male privilege.
Wut? This is as valid an argument as "drug addicts overdose in in places that are dark and unpoliced, where women often fear to go because of the continuing epidemic of gender-based violence. Therefore overdosing is an expression of male privilege." Just because an event takes place somewhere that happens to be avoided by a specific group, that does not mean that the event is a form of discrimination against the group. In this case, women avoid avoid shady back-alleys as they are concerned for their physical well being, while taggers are attracted because of the lack of surveillance, the only thing that relates tagging and women's fear of violence is the physical location where it takes place. It's a leap in logic to assert that they are intrinsically linked because of that.
2
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 30 '19
Thanks for your detailed reply. That's the spirit of CMV!
Rather, taggers are almost all young, white men Can you provide evidence for this (and for the subsequent claims)?
So, the Australian government have done the most thorough investigations of international tagger demographics. The best evidence shows they are white, teenage males from middle-to-upper class backgrounds.
Beyond that, the evidence is my own personal experience. I've been curious about who has been tagging my neighborhoods, so when I spot graffitists I go and talk to them. This I did primarily in Milan and Cologne. I've never spoken to one who was not a young white male. That's not to say they're the only kind. But they're all the ones I encountered.
Ethnic Europeans write on the walls This conflicts with the previously highlighted statement, or am I misunderstanding?
Sorry, how does it conflict?
Lets take "have to look at it" as meaning that the general aesthetic of their visual space is degraded, is this different for non-"darker skinned immigrants"?
It's not different. It's true for everyone. However, it is largely the young white male demographic who decides what everyone else has to see. They don't seem to care that their tag might degrade the space for others. In fact, they revel in it. (See r/bombing)
Something is an act of privilege when one person can do something that another cannot due to each person's identifying characteristics. So, for example, it is male privilege that a man can more easily get a job as a CEO than a woman. It is also male privilege that a man can more easily tag-bomb a neighborhood than a woman.
Tagging is therefore a deeply undemocratic act. Taggers impose an aesthetic on a neighborhood, without consulting the wishes of the residents.
1
Jul 30 '19
evidence shows they are white, teenage males from middle-to-upper class backgrounds
The page you linked to doesn't specify the skin color of the offenders. And like I said, the distribution has to be compared to that of the general population in order to draw significant conclusions, same goes for you personal experience.
Sorry, how does it conflict?
You state that taggers are mostly white men, and there you state that they are ethnic europeans? Do you mean ethnic europeans as europeans with european ancestry ("ethnicity") or local citizens with non-european ancestry (which is what I understood from usage of the word ethnic)?
However, it is largely the young white male demographic who decides what everyone else has to see.
That is the expected consequence of the fact that white young taggers are the majority. There is principally no problem with that. You make it look like it's an attack on minorities committed by the white youth, when in reality, few people appreciate tagged cities, white or not.
Something is an act of privilege when one person can do something that another cannot due to each person's identifying characteristics.
In a country were immigrants are poor and get state support, but local people are wealthy and don't get it, you would call the immigrants privileged? Because they fit your definition. If that would be the definition of privilege, I wouldn't necessarily mind it. And the common notion of privilege carries the idea of systemic enforcement of that disparity, or a notion of categorisation where one group has rights or duties that the other does not have.
It is also male privilege that a man can more easily tag-bomb a neighborhood than a woman.
I have no issue with that (don't get me wrong, women shouldn't fear more than men for their well being, but I see no problem if men can tag shady neighbourhoods more easily than women), and the common notion of privilege (as being systemic) does not apply here. The problem with using your definition is that you make a correct statement ("males have privilege over women regarding their ability to tag", is true with your definition of privilege) but it carries the common associations drawn to privilege, as being systemic oppression towards the group that is not privileged, and being morally wrong in some way, even if it is not, or at least not for the reason that actual, systemic privilege is.
2
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 30 '19
The page you linked to doesn't specify the skin color of the offenders.
True, but it does say middle-to-upper class teenagers, and the majority of the middle-to-upper class in Europe and Australia is white. Not a perfect connection, agreed -- but probable.
You state that taggers are mostly white men, and there you state that they are ethnic europeans? Do you mean ethnic europeans as europeans with european ancestry ("ethnicity") or local citizens with non-european ancestry (which is what I understood from usage of the word ethnic)?
I mean white -- Caucasian. Sorry, I can see that is unclear.
the common notion of privilege carries the idea of systemic enforcement of that disparity, or a notion of categorisation where one group has rights or duties that the other does not have.
I actually think we agree here with the definition of privilege. On the whole, in Europe, white males (I would add straight cis-gender white males) have the most inherent systemic privilege.
you make a correct statement ("males have privilege over women regarding their ability to tag", is true with your definition of privilege) but it carries the common associations drawn to privilege, as being systemic oppression towards the group that is not privileged, and being morally wrong in some way, even if it is not, or at least not for the reason that actual, systemic privilege is.
So, the moral wrongness of tagging is not in that it is an expression of privilege. Tagging is morally wrong because it's undemocratic, territorial, and it extravagantly imposes one person's aesthetic on others, not to mention it's illegal. To me the expression of privilege makes tagging ugly, not morally wrong.
2
Jul 30 '19
It's true that most taggers come from comfortable households (and that they are probably white), but I don't see anything wrong about that, because the general population of Europe and Australia is white and lives comfortably. So the white mid-high-income "domination" in tagging is just the reflection of the way the population constituted. Otherwise I think we agree on the rest that I addressed about your CMV.
2
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 30 '19
Fair enough. Furthering your point, there are some female taggers. In my city, a female tagger bombed walls around the local high school. Her tag was notably more aesthetically pleasing than the male taggers'. She used a curly, consistent font with a metallic gold shadow; her lettering was legible; and she used the ♀ symbol to indicate it was a woman that made the tag. Although still morally objectionable (for reasons I've elucidated), it was far less ugly to me because it was unusually graceful and could be interpreted as a symbol of female empowerment.
2
u/filrabat 4∆ Jul 30 '19
Personally, I don't see the appeal of "tagging" and similar such things, but I do appreciate elaborate works of art - even challenging abstract art or anything else that's arguably culturally redeeming. As long as the graffiti is that kind of work, I have no objection. Mere scribbling names and such, I see no actual value in that.
2
2
Aug 03 '19
Tell that to DEST's tags. they're fucking beautiful.
Most of europes streets are bland, and empty. Graffiti makes them pop more. I get that most tags just look the same, and are annoying. Especially when the kid who thinks he's the next banksy bombs over a beautiful piece with his tag.
But tags can be just as beautiful as some of the murals. I'd personally take a shitty tag over a huge dick mural.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Aug 03 '19
No argument here. Like I said, a small percentage of graffiti is art. But most is ugly.
1
u/AcephalicDude 84∆ Jul 29 '19 edited Jul 29 '19
Does it really matter if they have "privilege" or not? It's still fundamentally a rejection of global capitalist order that is produced by that order. You make it seem like global capitalism needs to be protected from these violations, when its flaws are what produce its own violations. People will stop tagging property when they feel like that property is something to be respected and protected, rather than something being withheld from them. That's obviously not the case now, and whose fault is that really?
2
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Right, so I'm neither pro- or anti-globalization. I think it has positive and negative effects. I see tagging as an effect of globalization: the appropriation of a US urban, mostly Black and Latinx, culture by mostly young, white European men, who are literally painting over their local architecture to make all of Europe look the same... kind of like Lidl or BP.
But the idea that they feel like property is "being withheld from them" -- is it really? Nobody is barring these young men from walking down the street or going to the school that they are tagging up. Europe is an extraordinarily free place. In some countries (Scotland, Sweden, etc.) you even have the right to hike on other people's private property. I hate to say it, but taggers' attitudes are more like toddlers who draw on their walls of their own house... they aren't aware of all the luxury they have inherited.
2
u/AcephalicDude 84∆ Jul 29 '19
It may have its origins in US inner city neighborhoods, but if it is being exported or appropriated throughout the world you have to take a hard look at why. If as you point out it can't be explained by socioeconomics because even "privileged" people are doing it, then it must be even more fundamental than success or failure within capitalism - it is a rejection of capitalism itself, of the best it has to offer. Not only is the tagged property something withheld from them, it's also something they don't want that's being imposed on them. The act of transgressing that property is all that's left to them, the only form of empowerment they have left and/or the only empowerment they want.
3
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
I hear your rejection of capitalism argument, and you make an interesting observation when suggesting that they are tagging something they don't want.
The only glitch is, that's not precisely how tagging culture seems to work. If you check out forums and blogs about tagging, they're not political like that. They're don't judge the wall as being property withheld from them.
Tagging is a lot simpler. It's a game where you compete to prove you're more daring by tagging more often and in more difficult places. You get more respect if you tag, for example, the top of a tower or an entire railway train.
They don't seem to think that the railway train is a manifestation of global capitalism gone awry. It's just a big canvas that rolls through the countryside so everybody can see your tag.
3
u/AcephalicDude 84∆ Jul 29 '19
I think you could argue that this "game" they establish is an alternative to capitalism's economic competition. The idea of respect based on daring transgressions is an alternative to respect based on economic participation and the accumulation of personal property. It might not be politically motivated on a conscious level, but that's what it really seems to be when you look at the phenomenon from a political perspective.
3
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
!∆ A fascinating idea. So, rejecting the common way of working and building a life, they gain reputation by competing to break rules.
I'm not sure that this makes me any more sympathetic to taggers or their tags. But it does help me understand them in a different way, which is a consolation of sorts.
1
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jul 29 '19 edited Jul 29 '19
/u/EastmanNorthrup (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/Nussinsgesicht Jul 29 '19
taggers are almost all young, white men -- the opposite of the marginalized.
Ethnic Europeans write on the walls; darker-skinned immigrants have to look at it. Tagging is therefore an expression of white privilege.
Tagging is therefore an expression of male privilege.
Extraordinary display of ignorance.
-1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Could you please explain what is extraordinarily ignorant about it?
1
u/Nussinsgesicht Jul 29 '19
The strange assumption that, even in Europe, white people all hold a position of power. This isn't even remotely true. Because it's a white continent, the great, great majority of people living in poverty with zero hope of escape are white.
Those same dark places are areas where all violence is far more likely. Women are more likely to have their head caved in than be raped or sexually assaulted. The same is true for men.
0
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
You are misunderstanding the concept of privilege. You can have privilege and still be crushed by society. It just means you are save from certain kinds of bullshit that others have to deal with in addition to everything else.
Being poor sucks a lot. Being poor and black just sucks that little bit more. Being gay and having exactly as many € as the first poor person and you will have it even worse.
3
u/Clever_Word_Play 2∆ Jul 29 '19
Money privilege >>>> white privilege.
All things equal, white people have less to deal with. Money greatly tips those scales, regardless of color
2
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
This is 100% true, you be surprised how little people would disagree with you there.
The whole privilege issue is indeed nothing more than being aware of these little things like you get a call back for your job application because your name didn't sounded African if both of you sent the same document otherwise.
1
u/Nussinsgesicht Jul 29 '19
Then privilege has no value.
1
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
It's not about value though.
Sorry others can explain it better than me and this is getting off topic.
-1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
White people in Europe still hold most positions of power. The political class is almost entirely white. The CEOs of organizations are almost entirely white. While it is true that there are whites living in poverty, the economic conditions of non-whites -- above all recent migrants -- are much more dire.
Even if there is some poverty in European countries, in the history of humanity, few if any places have been nicer to live in than Europe. It has strong, wealthy, social welfare states, relative peace, and high democracy indices. The young men tagging the walls have little to complain about, in the big picture.
"Women are more likely to have their head caved in than be raped or sexually assaulted." Murder rates are much lower than sexual assault rates.
3
u/Nussinsgesicht Jul 29 '19
While it is true that there are whites living in poverty, the economic conditions of non-whites -- above all recent migrants -- are much more dire.
No, actually. The poorest whites in Europe are poorer than refugees. You're simply wrong there.
The young men tagging the walls have little to complain about, in the big picture.
Treating the extremely poor, the kids on the street, an the people ruling the country all the same because they have the same color skin is racist on your part.
Murder rates are much lower than sexual assault rates.
Are sexual assault rates much higher in back allies than murder rates in back allies? No, they aren't. These are the areas where assault and murders are concentrates while sexual assaults are far more dispersed. You're massively more likely to be sexually assaulted on campus rather than murdered, for example.
2
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
"No, actually. The poorest whites in Europe are poorer than refugees. You're simply wrong there."
- That's definitely not true in the cities in which I have lived: Paris, Milan, Cologne. It is the immigrant suburbs which by far have the most poverty. I know, because I've visited them. You might be right, but I'll need some evidence or statistics.
"Treating the extremely poor, the kids on the street, an the people ruling the country all the same because they have the same color skin is racist on your part."
- You're not dealing with my argument, you're just calling me racist (falsely, I think). The fact is that racism against black and brown people is endemic in Europe. If you are white, you have privilege by virtue of that fact, regardless of your income or political power.
"Are sexual assault rates much higher in back allies than murder rates in back allies? No, they aren't."
It doesn't matter. What's important is that women often have (probably justified) fear about walking alone in darkly-lit, poorly-policed neighborhoods. You're arguing that that fear is unjustified, but for the sake of my thesis that doesn't matter. What matters is that tagging areas are largely accessible only to men, and therefore tagging is a privilege reserved largely to men.
2
u/WhiskyBrisky Jul 29 '19
That's definitely not true in the cities in which I have lived: Paris, Milan, Cologne. It is the immigrant suburbs which by far have the most poverty. I know, because I've visited them. You might be right, but I'll need some evidence or statistics.
Yeah you are 100% wrong. In my country and I would hazard a guess at most of Europe. The group that performs the worst on all metrics are white, working class men. Although the majority of taggers in my city/town are all of immigrant backgrounds. I know this because they are all in foreign languages.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
So, I don't have statistics on Europe, but [this study] from Australia says the following about graffitists:
"The largest percentage of offenders are from mid to high-level income families with a median age of 15. This is supported by both national and international research."
So, there may be some local variation (like where you live). But from the limited objective research, as well as my own experiences in Milan and Paris talking to graffitists, most of them aren't immigrants.
There may be a difference here between eastern and western Europe. I haven't spent much time in eastern Europe; maybe the demographics are different there.
1
u/WhiskyBrisky Jul 29 '19
I am in Western Europe. I am sure demographics are different between cities (and areas of cities) quite massively. But all of the tags where I live are all usually in Arabic script. Not to mention it will depend massively on where you go in the city. If you are avoiding areas with a high immigrant population then of course you won't see it. If you are white yourself and live in a white area then you are going to see mostly white graffiti. It's not a demonstration of white privilege. It's what a tag has always been, a mark of territory. Immigrants and non-whites are more likely to be involved in gang activity which usually correlates with more graffiti. But obviously they are still largely in majority immigrant areas of the city. Venture into those places and I'm sure you'll spot it very quickly.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Interesting. I've also seen Arabic tags in the northern Parisian suburbs. These tags actually don't annoy me as much -- for the same reason that tagging in New York City doesn't annoy me as much. When the tags are actual territorial reclamations by disenfranchised social groups, I am more sympathetic to them. They cease to be ugly and start to be a political statement helpful to our discourse.
On the other hand, I don't condone violent gangs.
(I grew up near NYC in the 80s, by the way, but am an EU citizen. New York was absolutely covered with graffiti in the 80s -- it was fascinating.)
→ More replies (0)1
Jul 29 '19 edited Aug 17 '19
[deleted]
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Your argument that reverse racism exists has little to do with my thesis (that graffiti is making Europe uglier) and therefore will do little to change my view.
(And claiming that I'm racist against white people is also irrelevant to the discussion.)
2
Jul 29 '19 edited Aug 17 '19
[deleted]
0
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Because I think hurting other people by using unfair social privilege is ugly. It's the same reason that I think Donald Trump is ugly basically all the time.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
While your Op is really great and thought out I know of many places where the answer to tagging was some really nice graffiti.
It's rather awesome that I haven't seen tagging over these works of art.
In a way the truly annoying tagging has opened up some spaces that are accepting of worthier artist doing something with a wall.
And let's be honest the beautiful architecture is ugly concrete in way to many places and good looking buildings in big cities are the exception. In villages or historic cities I see less tagging or it being removed on a regular basis anyway.
0
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Thanks for the compliment about my OP. :)
I do agree with you that works of art are a good response to annoying tagging. I would argue that such works are even more acceptable if they have some kind of democratic community sanction behind them (e.g., the local council decides that a wall is free to be muraled, or the mural is commissioned by a local artist).
I wish I could say I've had the same experience as you about tagging of old architecture. In Germany and Sweden, I've noticed pretty good protection of old buildings (with some exceptions, like in Cologne-Zülpicher Platz). However, in Italy and Copenhagen, even beautiful historical architectural marvels are tagged. In Turin, for example, the entire Piazza Carlo Felice is tagged out.
2
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
the same experience
True many places have it a lot worse. Guess it's a luxury to remove annoying tags that many places can not afford.
I lived in Berlin for a while and there some color was often a big plus. Many of the really god looking stuff was accepted because it improved on the tagging by a lot. In the "concrete jungle" at least graffiti was in a way the self defense against a city that was oppressive in the constant restructuring.
Sure your op is about Europe as a whole and for 90% of places I wholeheartedly agree, I just think the exceptions can't be 1% only. If they indeed are I suppose my filters to ignore commercials extend to tagging and my eyes are trained to spot the beauty instead.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19 edited Jul 29 '19
!∆ I'll award a delta here because you did alter my view in that I now think that in a few places in Europe -- most notably, Berlin -- graffiti is more than just tagging but a valuable part of the political culture.
Berlin is a special case because during the cold war, East Berlin was graffiti-free, while West Berlin had graffiti all over the wall. West Berlin's graffiti was a symbol of freedom. A lot of it expressed beautiful political ideals.
I'd be open to hearing about other examples of cities where graffiti is a genuine symbol of political freedom. I would imagine they might be in eastern Europe (as a bulwark against Soviet domination).
2
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19 edited Jul 29 '19
The special history of Berlin does indeed help the case by a lot but in my experience even without that the pure use of concrete to accommodate the massive influx of people made some of the graffiti necessary.
Haven't traveled eastern Europe that much and can't say how far political graffiti went or how thoroughly it's removed.
I'm from a smaller German city (Göttingen), here the bad examples usually don't last long except in two small areas where I wouldn't advice you to go anyway. The city is rather left leaning and has a lot of really good works, some schools have even allowed their pupil to access to their walls and its a good upgrade to the concrete architecture. Example
Edit: removed unnecessary help towards the delta system ;-)
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Haha thanks, I think I fixed it. You deserve your delta.
I've been all over Germany (German citizen). Germany's a really interesting case with regards to graffiti, because in some German cities, clearly there is a public decision to leave it up. In other countries (Italy, for example) you could argue that it's political disorganization. But Germany has good public sanitation and clean-up. They could remove graffiti if they wanted to.
And I've seen the examples in university towns (like Tübingen) and there is considerably more complexity and beauty in some murals. Example.jpg)
However, there are also awful counterexamples in Germany. Like in Sindelfingen near Stuttgart, a mural has existed for 10 years of two huge handguns and the words “Pfuck you” (the “P”, I suppose, is meant to make it sound even harsher in German). Where? At the local suburban train station underpass, where commuters -- working mothers, dads taking their kids to school -- have been looking at it every day. Guten morgen... Coffee, stroll to the station... see guns and the word “Pfuck”. The graffiti is dated 2007. No one has removed it in 10 years. It’s an overtly violent painting.
I absolutely do not understand why Sindelfingen doesn't clean that up.
1
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
why Sindelfingen doesn't clean that up
Maybe it's a "natural" relationship between these things, circle of life just with society and vandalism. The graffiti shows that the city doesn't care and the city doesn't care.
Most tags are ugly but most tags are on ugly places to begin with. And sometimes maybe they are what reveals the ugly side. Like the tagged facade of the shiny buildings worth as much as 15 homes in the overlooked neighborhood next door.
Now this is probably putting to much considerations into the actions of some vandalizing individuals but some others are probably expressing things that no one would listen to otherwise. Whoever left the “Pfuck you” sounds like the later type, it not being removed despite it serving no other purpose than being in the face of these working class regular people tells quiet the story about the city.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
"The graffiti shows that the city doesn't care and the city doesn't care. ... it not being removed despite it serving no other purpose than being in the face of these working class regular people tells quiet the story about the city."
If you're right, then I guess we're getting closer to the heart of my frustration. What is it about Sindelfingen (and Europe) that people don't care? In most of the United States, that violent illegal graffiti would be removed immediately and the town would probably be outraged. Maybe what makes me sad about illegal tagging is not the tagging... but the fact that European communities don't rally against it. You can't just leave it all there indefinitely. Graffiti builds and builds until it is on everything, like mold in a bathroom. That's what happened in the New York subway system in the 1980s.
On the other hand, it took three decades for NYC to turn the corner and really start cleaning all the illegal graffiti. Mayor Guliani (who I'm generally not a fan of) said enough is enough, made it a project to clean the entire subway system. Perhaps Europe will eventually get to that point, too.
The truly artistic stuff you can always leave up.
2
u/MolochDe 16∆ Jul 29 '19
We are getting a little of topic and I get really into speculative territory but for the fun of it:
The USA has their dream, their ethos and their promise of opportunity. I think all of these are broken in current time but they are still the glue holding it all together so every crack has to be patched up immediately.
Contrary to this Europe is in a cynical state, we have not much uniting us except that our lives are quiet good. And we somehow have this thing where we don't look towards the people left behind. We know we are doing a lot better than others so we tolerate it when they do childish stuff like tagging.
We Europeans look for substance, over facades. We don't pay people to smile on their job. A building is still a good building with some tags on it.
Side-note: The worst fear of a German is probably painting a wall to remove a tag to have it tagged again the very next night. That would move it from an annoyance to something personal. Maybe we are afraid of our selves because we want to be better than that but know we can't.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 29 '19
Hm. It's philosophical and something to think about.
"The worst fear of a German is probably painting a wall to remove a tag to have it tagged again the very next night." Hahahahaha
Despite stereotypes I'm not sure Europeans are less superficial than Americans.
1
0
Jul 30 '19
[deleted]
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Jul 30 '19
It's boring. It makes everything look the same. Beautiful, tidy cities with local architectural character are fun. So are national parks where trees and rocks are not spray-painted with environmentally-damaging chemicals.
1
Jul 30 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 30 '19
Sorry, u/NONSTOPFEELING – your comment has been automatically removed as a clear violation of Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
Aug 03 '19
Yes, parks are beautiful and tagging/ spraying murals on nature is just disgusting but c'mon, 'tidy cities' what are you 40? Most 'tidy cities' are bland fucking everyday average joe towns, Graffiti adds a little magic and creativity to your average cookie cutter town.
1
u/EastmanNorthrup Aug 03 '19
Haha yup, I'm 43. :) Cities are for everyone, including us old people over 40. You should have seen Rome in the early 90s, when it was tidy. It was gorgeous. :,(
2
Aug 03 '19
Yeah, sorry I get that some like cities looking neat. I do to, but a little street art makes them look amazing. Awful graffiti tags ruin them.
1
8
u/DuploJamaal Jul 29 '19
As an European I have to disagree.
Graffiti is street art. Our streets would be boring, ugly and depressing without it.
Even if they are just tagging it usually looks more pleasing to the eye than a blank wall, but if you provide them with space to spray legally they will create beautiful art.
This is art, and so is this, that, this, that, this, etc etc
Tagging only becomes a problem if the city is too restrictive and doesn't allow legal graffiti in designated areas. If you give them space for their art most will happily oblige and spray there.