Street art in the pedestrian tunnel leading to the University of Cape Town (Photo – Tao Varty)
Street art has long been a contentious movement within the art world. Due to its historical run-ins with the law as well as its physical inability to be presented in art galleries, street art has often found itself somewhere between a rock and a hard place. Throughout its short lived history it has been associated with acts of ‘rebellion’ and ‘vandalism’. These are not adjectives you would associate with art, a form of expression that seeks to create rather than destroy. Hence, the question remains; where do you draw the line between what constitutes street art and what constitutes vandalism?
It is significant to note that it is always a matter of perspective when looking at the legality of street art. This is due to the fact that art is subjective. It is incredibly hard to define and very much open to interpretation. If one was to look at the street art that ordained the west side of the Berlin Wall during the Cold War, it could be said that it would have been deemed criminal by the government of East Germany. However, the government of West Germany would have viewed it as a beautiful form of expression that belonged in the public domain. Of course street art has changed since those days but this example serves to highlight that the topic is not straightforward and perspective is everything.
Carrying on however, we must now look at street art in its definitive form (look at me contradicting myself). In perhaps the most famous documentary on street art ever created, titled Exit Through the Gift Shop (2010), it is quite nicely encapsulated by the narrator Rhys Ifans.
Street art, this hybrid form of graffiti was driven by a new generation using stickers, stencils, posters, and sculptures to make their mark by any means necessary. With the arrival of internet these once temporary works could be shared by an audience of millions.” - Rhys Ifans
Exit Through the Gift Shop – A Banksy Film (2010)
The documentary is approximately an hour and half and was only attached for reference and definition. However, if this article is becoming a bore and you want to move onto greener pastures be my guest (I won’t blame you, it’s a damn good documentary). Either way, I will have achieved my goal of providing you with some knowledge on street art so it is a win win situation.
Jokes aside though, with a broad establishment of what street art is I delved deeper to understand the line between street art and vandalism and what characteristics separated them. I sat down with an anonymous authority, a director of art at a prominent museum within Cape Town, to get more clarity. In response to the question, “Where do you draw the line between what constitutes street art and what constitutes vandalism?” He responded with the following, “Street art that appropriates private homes is vandalism whereas street art that adorns public spaces is okay if it adds value.”
More examples of street art in the UCT tunnel. (Photo – Tao Varty)
Getting another, yet more neutral perspective (one outside the art world), I spoke to a current UCT student by the name of Emma. Her response to the same question was a thoughtful one and I quote, “I would say that the line between street art and vandalism is the point at which one starts destroying things that don’t belong to them. In my eyes making something that is public beautiful and more interesting is not vandalism but art, making people think about serious issues by looking at beautiful pictures should not be against the law. However, if going into a situation and/or place and destroying someone’s property with the intention to break or destroy in a malicious manner then that I would consider to be vandalism.”
The legal stance on street art was sourced from ‘The City of Cape Town’ municipality website. They are the main authority through which artists go to have their works approved for public display. In their 4 step application process for public art approval it is stated that ” Your application must include: signed permission from all affected property owners”. (http://www.capetown.gov.za) They repeatedly expressed that permission must be granted by all affected parties before a work can be displayed. It is therefore apparent that the authorities of Cape Town hold the stance that street art is only street art if consent has been given by all affected parties. This creates friction however as much of the culture that is street art is built around spontaneous creation. It aims to express what is important to the artist regardless of what anyone thinks. Street artists often create murals without the consent of the building’s owners yet at the same time put out work that raises serious social issues (as seen below). On the one side consent creates structure and reduces actual occurrences of vandalism yet on the other it restricts art that needs to be seen and talked about.
A Banksy work titled “Mobile Lovers” (2014)
Ultimately the debate will continue to rage on. To many street art will always be considered vandalism while to others a beautiful form of expression. It is indeed a contentious topic but one thing is certain in my mind, true street art (such as Banksy’s work above) needs to be seen and heard regardless of what property owners think. Although the legality of it will always be up in the air, its righteousness is a little bit closer to the ground. Street art is indeed the vigilante of the creative world just like Batman is the vigilante of Gotham city. His existence is perhaps not legal but who is to question his righteous morality?
Comments