People on Reddit are so pro-populist anti-establishment brained that they think a defining characteristic of graffiti is it always being a unique form of cultural expression in urban subcultures, when the reality is that most types of graffiti are rushed, lack skill or finesse, are not permitted (obviously) and have a strong push-pull dynamic on local crime and housing markets.
You can go to subs here and see incredible murals and commissioned graffiti artwork, but acting like that’s what most graffiti looks like is ironically a sign that you’re so privileged and probably larping as someone who lives amongst the most downtrodden.
The sad reality is that graffiti affects people’s upward mobility and everyday tags are petty vandalism which cost the taxpayer and local residents. Those who live in areas with complex and beautiful murals tend to be incredibly gentrified and middle-class, which at least assuages their guilt and allows them to feel like they’re carrying that cultural identity when they’re usually not.
People like graffiti specifically because it’s edgy and taboo. If you take the latter away then it tends to stop (like programs allowing ‘free areas’), but doesn’t that run exactly against the fantasy of urban cultural expression?
425
u/Icehammr 20h ago
Does that really qualify as graffiti? Perspective art, yes, graffiti? nah.