Photographic Display (with text): Analysis

This graffiti seems to lack any form of organisation or thought input - appearing to be more spontaneous in its execution. On first glance, it may not symbolise anything specific, i.e. a name or a “tag”. It appears to have been created simply to be deviant. The fact that it is on the ‘public’ side of the fence, rather than the private side, perhaps represents more encouragement to graffiti as it ‘technically’ belongs to no one. It can also be seen by others on this ‘public’ side as perhaps a marking of territory or a form of status between other delinquents.

                                     

This idea of ‘public’ and ‘private’ could also be applied to these buildings. The block of flats (left) doesn’t necessarily belong to an individual, so no thoughts of potential ‘private’ property may occur. The house (below right) does belong to a single individual. It is a ‘private’ property, but has still experienced graffiti. Therefore, the idea of ‘public’ and ‘private’ may not be relevant.

 

The nature of the graffiti also differs. These seem more thorough and premeditated. The individual has taken more time planning the graffiti, as well as executing it. This graffiti, which is displaying a name, is more likely to be used as a territorial symbol.

Forms of community art and murals are also subject to graffiti. These effectively fill the space on walls not only to promote community togetherness expressed through art, but to perhaps deter individuals from taking part in any graffiti exercises. There are, however, still visible images of graffiti upon these murals – perhaps showing an ineffectiveness of these murals, but also a willingness for individuals to deface other wall visuals to demonstrate their own graffiti handiwork.

These images also document the use of graffiti in displaying territory. The very public nature of this graffiti upon a wall (right) and in a bus shelter (left), both in very bold lettering, aims to establish territorial boundaries between local gangs.

Photographic Display (with text)

Delinquency 

As an act of delinquency, graffiti is very common. Not only because it is easy for an individual to gain access to materials and find a suitable ‘canvas’, but also because – if unseen – it is an act that may not bring about any repercussions, The potential reasons behind these acts are various. Delinquent and anti-social behaviour, in the 50s and 60s, was analysed in relation to an individual’s environment or social class (Humphries 1995: 19). Present day, while this approach may have some relevance (as many of these graffiti were either found in the more disadvantaged areas of Glenrothes, such as Macedonia, or areas where there is an opportunity for juvenile delinquency to occur - for instance, at a school bus-stop or in an area where there is a large juvenile population), subcultural aspects could also be addressed (Cajetan Luna 1987). The skateboarding community, for example, is associated with graffiti in designing their boards. The surrounding area of the skate ramps also included a lot of graffiti, such as drug paraphernalia and skater slogans: "Go Big or Go Home". Graffiti in this environment may not be considered as a deviant act. Graffiti-ing in underpasses and upon buildings which are of little social value to the community, such as abandoned blocks of flats, may also be seen - by the community also - as not being of a delinquent nature.

“Tagging”

There is little doubt that graffiti "tags" are common occurrences - whether it is a child doodling upon their jotters or grinding their initials into a desk at school, or an individual painting or drawing upon public grounds. The use of spray paint in tagging is perceived in a sexual manner, with Othen-Price (2006: 6) describing the use of graffiti by young males as a means of exploring their newly discovered potency while progressing through puberty. This creativity in males is seen as compensation for a female's biological creativity, i.e. becoming pregnant. A number of these photographs display basic tags, such as an individual's name, without any 'criminal' associations. Other pictures display tags used in this manner, particularly by local youth gangs, often using acronyms of gang names - perhaps for territorial means. "Tagging", however, is seen as a literacy act and a subculture with its own sets of rules, using different styles of lettering and colours. This form of tagging is separate from the use of graffiti by gangs (MacGillvray & Curwen 2007).

Graffiti “Art”

This type of graffiti, often known as ‘street art’, is a seen as a reflection of society. As the world changes around us, these pieces of graffiti remain as cultural remnants of by-gone periods, becoming a continuous commentary that evolves with the times (Manco 2010: 8). Many of these murals photographed were created for a purpose: perhaps as a community project; to provide a sense of identity to the area; or maybe just to provide a certain appeal, for example, the use of graffiti around Glenwood Library includes numerous cartoon characters to appeal to young children.

References:

Cajetan Luna, G. (1987) 'Welcome To My Nightmare'. Society 24(6), 73-78

Humphries, S. (1995) Hooligans or Rebels? An Oral History of Working-Class Childhood and Youth 1889-1939. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing

MacGillvray, L., Curwen, M. S. (2007) 'Tagging as a social literacy practice'. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 50(5), 354-369

Manco, T. (2010) Street Sketchbook Journeys. United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson Ltd

Othen-Price, L. (2006) 'Making their mark: A psychodynamic view of adolescent graffiti writing'. Psychodynamic Practice 12(1), 5-17