Anastasija Ganockaja (), 2101060259

Street Art: The Semiotic Revolution

The focus of this research is the complex nature of the contemporary street art due to various implications it asserts viewed from the perspective of semiotics. The purpose of this research is to demonstrate that meanings street art entails is highly related to the social, cultural and even political reality of contemporary world. In this context it is also very important to underline the transition of meaning when street art crosses the borders of the street and in some sense stops being a part of free public space when it is exhibited in the confined art space, such as galleries and museums. The tasks of this research include: explain the peculiarities of what is considered to be street art as well as different practices of it and to pinpoint what different social, cultural and political meanings street art conveys when seen both in the street and the gallery. Material selected for the analyses include various articles, investigating the numerous aspects of street art and the significance it carries in the modern urban environment, as well as articles documenting the particular importance and peculiarities of street art in a particular city (notably Durban in South Africa, Los Angeles and San Francisco in the United States). For the deeper understanding of the meaning street art truly conveys two works have been selected in order to shed some light on the possible social forces responsible for the emergence and spread of this complex phenomena of street art: namely Guy Debords Society of Spectacle and Graeme Turners British Cultural Studies. An introduction. This research could be of use to those interested in the complexity of the meanings of contemporary street art as well as its practical implementation as a visual and aesthetic domain. The research will be conducted in three stages. Firstly, the term of street art will be defined and different practices of what is considered to be street art will be described. Second part of the research will deal with the semiotics of street art, that is the numerous meanings various pieces of street art convey. To be more specific, street art will be viewed as a transformation of the public space, as an expression of symbolic identity, as a means of social literary practice and as a nonconsumerist advertising technique. Finally, the shift of the meaning of street art when it enters the realm of confined art gallery space will be discussed. To begin with, the summary of the literature used has to be given. For the first part of the research is highly descriptive, only parts of a few articles as well as online sources will be used: Street Art, Sweet Art? Reclaiming the "Public" in Public Place (by Visconti, Luca M.; Sherry Jr.,

John F.; Borghini, Stefania; Anderson, Laurel), I like Cities. Do You like Letters? Introducing Urban Typography in Art Education (by Ricard Huerta) and online sources like www.wikipedia.org, http://www.streetartutopia.com/, http://www.unurth.com/, http://www.banksy.co.uk/ will be used. Street art is art, specifically visual art, developed in public spaces that is, "in the streets" though the term usually refers to unsanctioned art, as opposed to government sponsored initiatives. The term can include traditional graffiti artwork, sculpture, stencil graffiti, sticker art, wheatpasting and street poster art, video projection, art intervention, guerrilla art, and street installations. Typically, the term street art or the more specific post-graffiti is used to distinguish contemporary public-space artwork from territorial graffiti, vandalism, and corporate art. In the article Street Art, Sweet Art? Reclaiming the "Public" in Public Place authors acknowledge the following types of street art: (i) tags represent an early expression of street art meant to spread an individual's name, originating in New York in the 1970s and contesting the marginality and ugliness of social life through the repetition of nicknames or words of rebellion on public walls; (ii) highly stylized writing is a pure practice of aesthetic exercise related to the need for self-affirmation within a community of peers; (iii) sticking is the practice of pasting drawings and symbols in public spaces so as to spread short messages to a broader audience; (iv) stencil mimics the marketing practices of advertising and branding by replicating the same form or symbol (e.g., personal logos) in multiple places; (v) poetic assault is one of the emerging practices of street art, consisting in the writing of poetry on dull public spaces (e.g., walls, parapets, rolling shutters, mailboxes) to infuse them with lyrical and graceful content; and (vi) urban design mostly relates to an aesthetic practice applied in favor of the beautification of public architecture and urban style. Street art is intentionally anonymous art practice whose artworks are largely disconnected from the artworld because their significance hinges on their being outside of that world. Nevertheless or precicely because of that it has the power to engage, effortlessly and aesthetically, the masses through its manifest creativity, skill, originality, depth of meaning, and beauty. Street art is neither postmodern, nor postpostmodern. It is the other response to the Modern separation of art and life. The definition implies that street art is likely to be, among other things, illegal (the street is composed largely of surfaces and objects owned by the city and other people; the artistic use of these surfaces is normally an act of vandalism), anonymous (which has to to do with the illegal aspects of their practice), ephemeral (some of it exists for only a couple of hours before it is buffed out, scrawled over, or naturally erased) , highly creative, and attractive (due to the fact that street art does not exist in a designated artspace , it is much more likely that the public will notice these works if they are visually strikingstreet artists are pressured to make their works pop out of the street and call on passersby and other artists to pay attention).

For the second part of the research works by Guy Debord and Graeme Turner will be used to underline the historical, social and political premises on which street art can be understood and discussed, as well as the articles I like Cities. Do You like Letters? Introducing Urban Typography in Art Education (by Ricard Huerta), Tagging as a social literacy practice (by MacGillivray, Laurie; Curwen, Margaret Sauceda), The Business of Getting Up: Street Art and Marketing in Los Angeles(by Damien Droney), Transforming Symbolic Identity: Wall Art and South African City(by Sabine Marschall), Street Art: The Transfiguration of the Commonplaces (by Nicholas Alden Riggle), Street Art, Sweet Art? Reclaiming the "Public" in Public Place (by Luca Visconti et al) dealing will particular meanings of street art. As Guy Debord stated in Internationale Situationist (no. 1, Paris, June 1958): Art need no longer be an account of past sensations. It can become the direct organization of more highly evolved sensations. It is a question of producing ourselves, not things that enslave us. This can be viewed as a premise on which street art finds its theoretical foundation, even without being aware of it. It is useful conceptually to draw an analogy between the stated motives of many street artists and Situationist theory in order to illuminate some themes of resistance. The Situationist International was a multi-disciplinary group of post-Marxist theorists during the 1950s and 1960s who sought to describe and contest what they saw as the inauthenticity of life under image-mediated capitalism. Many street artists believe that image-mediated capitalism generates a worldview in the consumer that mirrors Situationist theories of capitalism. Many modern-day street artists have an understanding of society and its forces similar to the Situationists of a media-crazed world that creates a crazed mentality of consumerism. One of the terms utilized in Situationist literature is the Spectacle[Debord 1994: 12]. Like Marxist false consciousness, it is the outcome and the goal of the dominant mode of production which appropriates the natural and human environment The Spectacle is simultaneously a worldview and a social relationship between people that is mediated and epitomizes the prevailing model of social life [Debord 1994: 13]. This particular form of nonlife, as Guy Debord [1994: 12] calls it, is related to late capitalisms emphasis on image, and on the production of image as a commodity [Debord 1994: 26]. This explains the culture of consumerism (Debord [1994: 32]). The street art thus is in some sense demystifying: it causes clarity of thought and a more authentic understanding of the individuals media environment through the presentation of conspicuously meaningless images. One more important term used in the writings of Debord which can be applied in the interpretation of street art is the concept of dtournement. Dtournement refers to the reuse of pre-existing artistic elements in a new ensemble, resulting in the loss of importance or devaluation of these elements. Another similar point of view can be found in the writings of theorists of CCCS (Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies). In the CCCS approach,

street art, as a part of subculture movement, represent noise as opposed to the teeth gritting harmony between the state and the dominant ideology. Subcultures and their visual styles are thus imbued with a subversive potential [Turner, 2005: 167]. Street art as a transformation of public space is a very important notion when speaking about street art. The city presents itself to us full of messages, of elements that can turn out to be very attractive if we observe them from new, interdisciplinary, suggestive or creative standpoints. Big city streets are filled with graphic documents in which letters and symbols occupy a central place, not only as verbal texts, but also as a privileged graphical and visual register. Also posters, signs and graffiti constitute a powerful typographical ensemble peculiar to the environment of the city. In contrast to the traditional imposition of the museum space, where it is usually forbidden to take photos, the urban environment is revealed as an open landscape, without aesthetic restrictions. Digital devices easily allow us to turn whatever we perceive into images. While we capture a living moment or a discovered territory, we also decide the way of doing it, the composition we wish for it, and certainly what we overlook or emphasize. Beyond the verbal meanings of words, letters hide a graphic and symbolic code that connects directly with our cultural heritage. On the other hand, namely, from an economic point of view: Collectiveor publicgoods are produced by and on behalf of the public. While public goods have been mostly defined in economic terms it can be regarded as a supra-economic definition according to which the public sphere is the realm in which people define themselves as publics, through ongoing communication, definition and negotiation over their shared concerns. Thus, goods become public whenever a collectivity of citizens attributes itself a shared ownership over them. Very important here is the meaning, reclamation, and consumption of a ubiquitous public good, public space. While individuals may choose to opt out of the consumption of other public goods, it is impossible not to consume public space at all. Given that architecture and urban design are among the very few truly inescapableand therefore publicart forms, the street art practices transforming them highlight the difficulty in representing what public space is or should be, that is, of an ideology of public space. Dwellers, art experts, and government officials may actually look at street interventions as acts of beautification or even public art (the examples of Banksy or Haring) but also as the ultimate defacement of urban order. The history of street art movements is a fascinating tale of evolution fueled by political and aesthetic ideologies in constant cross-cultural hybridization. Over time, street art movements have incorporated multiple and sometimes conflicting forms of marking, accounting for a variety of views, intents, and actions. Street art, as a form of participation draws spectators in as participants and brings about discourse. The action component is devoted to achieving some social result. Street artists seem to be in the vanguard of this trend, and their work helps to deny the perceptions that the 'environment' is

something 'out there' and that cities are not as deeply connected to other ecosystems as they are to global trade networks. In addition, street artists proclaim urban buildings covered by ads and other commercial stimuli violate the spirit of the law by imposing the market ideology upon city dwellers (Banksy, 2006). This phenomenon can be discussed with regard to Europe: as European towns have usually been developed around historical downtown centers and have a tradition of public congregation in squares. Public spaces like squares which used the be the most public space in the city has become the most popular attraction for street artists to do their work and that caused a serious confrontation and sparked numerous theoretical and philosophical discussions around the nature of public space in most European countries. Deploying art in unexpected or forbidden places to stimulate reflection and social action, street artists and active dwellers create an aesthetic commons that invites belonging and participation. They operate as "curators" who enhance the public character of a site and empower its diverse stakeholders. An urban curator is an "independent cultural worker" who is able to sidestep the constraints imposed by the "myth" of the architect, by bureaucratic building law, and by market economics, to create relationships of "greater connectedness" between people and environments. One of the most important subjects when discussing street art is the subject of identity. In this case it is very important to examine the role that public wall art has played in the transformation of the cities. Street art is a part of urban regeneration process that speak to the changing socioeconomic and political visions of the cities. Street art actively contributes to the transformation of the urban landscape and the expression of a new symbolic identity. Artists and grassroots community activists take the initiative to transform the city's identity through street murals. The artists appropriate and (re)claim public spaces for those previously marginalized from the urban arena. They bring visual art into the streets and make it accessible for new, vastly broadened audiences who may never have visited an art gallery. Visual images of this kind can be very powerful. They can negotiate new group identities and symbolically "regulate" the urban environment by indicating who "belongs" there, who has the right to be in specific places and use them in specific ways. Public art has become an integral part of urban regeneration, promoted as a means of alleviating a range of environmental, social, and economic problems, and expected to stimulate city economies. Art and culture, fuelling the city's symbolic economy, have become more and more the business of cities; the basis of their tourist attractions and their competitive edge. Public art or art on public display assumed an increasingly important role in establishing a marketable identity for the city. Critique of public art in the urban environment focuses on its aesthetic mediocrity and lack of meaning; public art is entertainmentdriven, uncritical "minimum-risk art," which attempts to be "accessible," pleasing and placating to everyone. However, such criticism often suffers from overgeneralization.

Tagging, one of the practices of the street art, can be viewed as a social literacy practice of the modern city. Tagging has its own rules and codes, it is a literacy practice imbued with intent and meaning. Alphabetic style, colors, and lettering script are of high value in this particular segment of youth culture. While often viewed as merely graphics, tagging functions as a language not just as a generic sign system [MacGillivray 2007: 358]. Most people would agree the defacing of public property is highly problematic. But unfortunately, in vilifying the practice of tagging, society too easily overlooks its evolving symbol system and the complexities of the phenomenon. Youths, in general, are a segment of the population whose ability to use literacy tools to navigate their complex social world is underaddressed in literacy research. A social literacy practice refers to the general cultural ways of utilizing literacy which people draw upon in particular situations . Furthermore, local situated literacies are valuable because they provide illumination into the complex webs of actors, words, deeds, beliefs, and values comprising and constituting them. By engaging in socially relevant literacy practices, adolescents apprentice to a particular way of behaving, talking, acting, and thinking. Viewed from the perspective of any street art practice, one can notice an interdependent connection between the individual, activity, and social world. Tagging, a practice engaged in by youths and young adults who often live in low-income communities of color, can be conceived of as a local literacy practice and as an avenue into the construction of youth identity and group affiliation. Literacy and language practices, particularly nonmainstream practices, contribute to ones construction of identity and representation. One purpose of tagging is to sustain social relationships; it is a form of dialogue and conversation This purpose has several nuances. In one sense, tagging has deliberate meaning and intent. Another purpose of tagging is the desire to be known or to achieve fame and recognition within a particular community. Thus, tagging is a collective experience of youth. Another purpose of tagging can be to provide commentary on larger societal issues. The last part of the research will deal with the change of the meaning of street art when its moved to a confined art space. For this purpose a few articles and interviews will be used to shed light on this relatively new development in the art world. In the interview with artist and curator Fred Brathwaite he claims that some art circles might argue that "street art"whether this loaded term refers to straight-up graffiti or more interpretative acdvities like skateboardinghas no business being in a museum. The whole point of street art in the first place was as a radical act of dissent, a rebellion against the very forms of art sanctified within museum walls. Street art has an essendal element of criminality to it and if that outlaw spirit is institutionalized, doesn't the very substance of the art disintegrate before the eye? These arguments only make sense if the museum is regarded as an elite organization split off from the rest of the community. However, some curators in favor of

street art being moved into gallery space argue that the wall between street and the museum is not so rigid anymore. Some street artists nevertheless believe that gallery is not their space and prefer making art for the public inits broadest sense. They argue that when moved to a confined gallery or museum space, street art instantly looks and creates a feeling of inauthenticity in a spectator. When a work is moved into an artspace, the one thing that changes is the very thing that made it street art; at best it looks like street art. One could experience it as street art only by imagining what its use of the street might have been. Street art is deeply antithetical to the artworld. That is, for each part of the artworld, street art resists to some appreciable extent playing a role in it. It is impossible to employ solely formalist principles in a critique of street art. The very thing whose use contributes essentially to the meaning of street art, the street, itself has meaning. The doorways, windows, alley walls, dumpsters, sidewalks, signs, polls, crosswalks, subway cars, and tunnelsall have their own significance as public, everyday objects. These are shared spaces, ignored spaces, practical spaces, conflicted spaces, political spaces. To make sense of street art, the critic is forced to discuss the significance of a works use of these inflected spaces. This violates the formalist principle, derived from the principle of aesthetic autonomy, that to appreciate a work of art the critic must attend to its aesthetic features alone.

References:
1. Bollen, Christopher. Street WISE, Interview 41, 2 (2011): 148-214. 2. Debord, Guy. The Society of Spectacle, translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith, New York: Zone Books, 1994 (translated from Guy Debord, La socit du spectacle, Paris: BuchetChastel, 1967). 3. Droney, Damien. The Business of Getting Up: Street Art and Marketing in Los Angeles, Visual Anthropology 23, 2 (2008): 98-114. 4. Huerta, Ricard. I like Cities. Do You like Letters? Introducing Urban Typography in Art Education, International Journal of Art & Design Education 29, 1 (2010): 72-81. 5. MacGillivray, Laurie; Curwen, Margaret Sauceda. Tagging as a social literacy practice, Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 50, 5 (2007): 354-369. 6. Marschall, Sabine. Transforming Symbolic Identity: Wall Art and South African City, African Arts 41, 2 (2008): 12-23. 7. Riggle, Nicholas Alden. Street Art: The Transfiguration of the Commonplaces, Journal of Aesthetics & Art Criticism 68, 3 (2010): 243-257. 8. Turner, Graeme. British Cultural Studies. An Introduction. New York: Routledge, 2005. 9. Visconti, Luca M.; Sherry Jr., John F.; Borghini, Stefania; Anderson, Laurel. Street Art, Sweet Art? Reclaiming the "Public" in Public Place, Journal of Consumer Research 37, 3 (2010): 511-529.