Graffiti is the bane of Tucson residents. It is generally ugly and
costly, and can often be an indicator (like broken windows) of a
crime-ridden neighborhood.
I’ll take it a step further and claim that it is bad for the
perpetrators. It is a tool for minors to develop antisocial, even
solipsistic tendencies.
Few parts of Tucson are untouched by graffiti; certainly no part of
midtown is. Individuals and neighborhood groups are engaged in an
endless campaign to clean up after these proto-vandals. The city of
Tucson assists residents in this effort by offering classes in graffiti
abatement, and providing removal services. In fact, before the city of
Tucson started experiencing budget constraints, it used to hire a
contractor with two paint trucks to professionally color-match and
paint over graffiti. A telephone call would dispatch a team to the
scene of the crime.
Meanwhile, in another part of the municipal government, a
how-to-do-graffiti class was both facilitated and subsidized. You may
recall the mural spray-painted on the side of a Tucson Water building
downtown. It was the product of a class taught by “graffiti artist”
Rocky Martinez. Mr. Martinez teaches a graffiti-art program for the
city of Tucson called Arts in Reality. According to the Arizona
Daily Star, the program is funded in part by $8,000 from City
Councilwoman Regina Romero’s discretionary youth fund.
Here’s a money-saving idea: The city of Tucson should decide whether
it wants to discourage graffiti or promote it; then it could
discontinue either the abatement efforts or the how-to classes.
Does that make sense, or am I missing something? The reaction of the
public, particularly those who live in the vicinity of the “mural,”
might have provided some direction to the city, but no, it went
directly into silk-purse-from-sow’s-ear mode.
Everybody got together and talked with everybody else and decided to
repaint the wall with more-pleasing imagery. Everybody spoke of the
community coming together and about what a great learning experience it
was for the kids. However, all of this wishful thinking pointedly
avoided the problem: The kids were still being taught how to deface
buildings. I know, they were told that it must not be done illegally,
and a bunch of other cover-your-keester crap, but the promoters of that
line are only fooling themselves. The new “mural” was slated to be
unveiled in a ceremony on Aug. 25.
The situation is Kafkaesque. It reminds me of his short story “In
the Penal Colony.” The story tells of a traveler who visits a penal
colony where he witnesses an execution. The method is brutal: The
prisoner is put in a machine that carves the name of his offense in his
back, repeatedly, until he dies. It is an all-day affair. The traveler
sees this as barbaric, while the operator of the machine sees it as a
good thing that brings the community together (there was a large
gallery), and it really is art, you see, since the offense is written
in beautiful swirling calligraphy. The prisoner himself figures out the
message about 10 to 12 hours into it, and seems to achieve a certain
peace, according to the operator.
If you guessed that the traveler is the people, the prisoner the
kids and the operator Regina Romero, move to the head of the class. At
this point, I must say that it is important to understand that the
operator was not bad or evil; he just missed the larger point.
Everybody needs a hobby, especially kids, especially kids
with too much time on their hands. There are lots of private groups and
organizations that provide positive activities for children. I know of
none that teach “graffiti art.” What do they know that the city does
not?
This article appears in Aug 27 – Sep 2, 2009.
“The city of Tucson should decide whether it wants to discourage graffiti or promote it.”
Reminds me of the Woody Allen film where he is on a CIA airplane to South America to fight in the revolution. He asks the guy next to him, which side are we fighting for? The seatmate says, we couldn’t decide, so we’re fighting for BOTH sides.
Make sense? How about we all head down to their mural with cans of spray paint?
Dolly Spalding wrote a nice piece for Zocalo about how these classes are created to deter graffiti, not encourage it. The kids participating have found the classes to be a steppingstone to art, an inspiration to create, not to destroy and vandalize.
http://www.thezmag.com/article-53-urban-art.html
Here’s a thought….for less than 8,000 dollars you could expose these kids to actual ART. (And I am not talking about the Tucson Museum of Art, that is another whole sad topic).
For less than 8,000 dollars you could load the kids on a bus, take them to Vegas (whooo hoo Vegas! They would love that.) You could unload them at the Wynn Hotel and Casino, buy tickets for all of them to the Wynn art collection, and show them real art. On the way, you could even tell them about REMBRANDT and how he mixed his own paints from BUSHES and perhaps throw in a little Van Gogh, and don’t forget Andy Warhol.
What would this accomplish? It would shame these would-be-artists into either going to art school or permanently giving up their brushes and spray cans until they actually could produce something that looked like TALENT!!!!
No “master” of art just started slapping paint on any canvas, they all stand on the shoulders of the previous ability of other artists.
There’s a reason why there is a cliche that says, “It’s like a Rembrandt.” But how can you expect the city council to know about that, since most of them have probably never seen one.
Suzy
This is what you get when government thinks its job is to “manage” the society, to guide the culture, etc. etc. Is this what we citizens are asking for? Or is it “fix the roads, deter crime, put out the fires, etc?” I propose a REAL “Back to Basics” campaign in which the Council handles the infrastructure of the city and protects the citizenry. I suspect the rest of us can manage our own culture just fine, thank you !l
Just looks like another way to throw Tucson taxpayers money down the drain and laugh in the face of our city. Sounds like Ms. Romero needs to find another job! As far as spending our money she doesn’t have a clue!
Suzy,I completely disagree with your statement that these “would-be artists” show no talent in their art. Graffiti artists use an immense amount of talent and creativity to produce such works of art. They show far more creativity and talent than Andy Warhol. Andy Warhol had painting techniques down, but was majorly lacking in creativity and imagination. He took an existing image such as a soup can or Elvis Presley and simply filled it in, left some negative space, and duplicated the image. Graffiti artists use their developed techniques and creativity to produce a whole work of art out of a blank wall. They don’t take an existing image and just color differently, they take an empty wall and use their imagination to turn it into art.
Don’t get me wrong, not all graffiti is art. Graffiti artists are the ones doing murals and pieces, not the ones just spraying their gang name around. The majority of Graffiti art is unseen by the public, down in the tunnels and washes of our fine city. I believe that Graffiti artists should be considered artists much much more than Andy Warhol. Just because Graffiti is illegal does not disqualify it from being art.