Vandalism & Graffiti the state of the art - Frank Coffield

BOOK BY FRANK COFFIELD

"Second, how many readers thought of vandalism as a solution rather than a problem; a solution to the difficulties experienced by urban, working-class adolescents growing up in working-class cities? In Stan Cohen's own words, "The argument... is that vandalism as a solution to this group's problem is just 'right', both in symbolic, expressive (or emotional) and instrumental terms. That is, in its very senselessness, it makes sense... in terms of what it offers to this group." 11

[...]

"People cannot allow deviation to threaten their picture of what society is about. Part of this picture involves recognising and accrediting certain motives as legitimate; if these motives cannot be found, then the behaviour cannot be tolerated, it must be neutralised or annihilated. Thus vandalism, unlike theft, cannot be explained in terms of the accredited motive of acquiring material gain, so it is described as motiveless. The only way of making sense of some actions is to assume that they do not make sense. Any other assumption would be threatening. We are very much concerned... with restoring meaning to behaviour which has been stripped of it in this way." 11

This section is interesting because it demonstrates an alternative spin on a very formal concept of vandalism. This book takes vandalisation as a broad term for any public destruction, intimidation or damage and here suggests that the popular term 'mindless vandalism' is perhaps so proliferated because to fully consider the cause and effect behind it is troublesome. Stripped of capital gain or motive behind such crime (as it is recognised within the law), is 'threatening' as it defies the normal systems which drive people to typically interact with their world, for better or worse. The idea of this 'threatening' nature within 'senselessness' is very interesting to me, especially in it's anti-capitalist implications and the idea of creating a mischief simply for the sake of standing above the profiteering and monetization of almost every aspect of life. However at it's core my art is rooted firmly in driven ideals of environmentalism, and therefore could scarcely be called senseless in this case.

"Witness the 14 year old girl in Pollard's (1988) study in the Blyth valley of Northumberland of young people's attitudes to vandalism: "Sometimes vandalism looks nice when breakdancers do colourful things under underpasses, at metro stations, railway stations etc" Allen (1984) has summed up the point neatly: "...graffiti can be viewed as art- and as an improvement over the original environment in many cases." 11

I found this small excerpt interesting, particularly in the final quote; "an improvement over the original environment in many cases." Those particularly mentioned were underpasses and metro and railway stations, which in itself suggests areas which are typically associated with transit and are prehaps otherwise overlooked in regard to aesthetics and pleasure experiences. Presumably the links between graffiti and transit spaces is that it is unlikely there will be stationary audiences who would be more likely to report vandalism, or make those involved feel insecure in their act. It also shows how far attitudes surrounding street art have come in the 20 years since the first quote, as I have no doubt at all now that with the prevelence of muralism in the current 'culture of cool'.

"Some researchers define vandalism as anything which "...ranges from arson to graffiti" (Mayhew et at, 1989), but exclude incidents such as letting down car tyres because they are considered to be nuisance only. Others such as Clarke (1978. p2) wish to restrict the term to deal with "deliberate or malicious damage (excluding serious cases of arson)." 27

By this point in the book I was really getting a sense that for the most part it would not be taking as much of a purely artistic standpoint as the title and cover suggested, as it seemed to be discussing graffiti and street art in the same discourse as football violence and bodily harm. Or perhaps it was just a sign of exactly how far street art has come as not only a media, but also a culture since the time of this books writing, as now I feel that street art, postering and street interventions or interruptions are generally regarded on the whole by the public with inquisitive interest and cultural reverence, particularly if in the name of positive progression and change, with fashionable locations such as London and Bristol, Berlin and Melbourne boasting impressive street art scenes as part of their identity and tourism.

"He goes further by arguing that "... destruction can be an aesthetic experience: breaking can be beautiful... Artists as well as psychologists have noted that a close affinity exists between art and destructon - or more generally between creative and destructive arts."

I definitely agree that destruction can be aesthetic, as I find that many of my street pieces actually become more attractive and aesthetically fertile as they decay and truly become enmeshed onto the canvas they sit upon.

I was ironically, satirically disappointed but also amusingly chagrined to find that the major section on Graffiti and Street art within the book had in itself been vandalised and ripped out in it's entirety!! I felt, as part of that culture myself, almost a need to laugh and roll my eyes that the exact person who would be interested in graffiti and vandalism at this uni would also of course find it fair game to take the section for themselves. I vowed to alert the library to this so that they could find a full copy, as I would have been interested to hear what seemed to be building up to a statistical, and (uniquely for most writers on this subject) un-nostalgic recount of the street art scene, especially from a time before it hit the mainstream.