Feb 25th Reading Response: Art Within Conflict

One of my favorite things to document when traveling around a new city or country is the graffiti or street art. Graffiti is illegal in almost all cities and countries and therefore, there is a risk associated with making this sort of public statement. There is something about graffiti that is more honest than any other type of art you might see. It seems to be the art of the people and expresses a larger sentiment held by others in the specific area. Many people seem to think that graffiti is a way for artists to just "____ was here", and for one to downplay it to that level would be ignorant and entirely false. Not to say that all graffiti is profound or has deep intent behind it, but it is worthwhile to at least question the intention and what the artist or creator may have had in mind.

Julie Peteet's description of the virtually empty streets lined with angry graffiti gave me chills. Graffiti is such a powerful tool because it makes the strongest statement and can create chaos without every making a sound. I think Peteet's statement that Palestinian graffiti was used as a way to make a political statement to Israelis in order to demonstrate or regain an element of power. The graffiti itself is a non-violent act, but it represents something much deeper and angrier beneath the surface. The messages are strong ones, but they themselves do cause any physical pain, only psychological. In the case of the intifada, people graffitied stones, which served as weapons. The act of putting political statements onto the physical objects used for violence made the messages that much clearer. I had no idea that graffiti during the Intifada was taken down just as quickly as it was put up. The fact that someone would take the time and energy to display something personal which may be destroyed within a few minutes, shows the intention behind it. I understand why Israelis could think the graffiti would be potentially harmful, but constantly removing it only creates more friction. It is just another struggle between Israelis and Palestinians.

Peteet's point about censorship within most types of art really resonated with me. Graffiti during the Intifada was a resistance movement and strove to create the statement through civil disobedience. This is a public way to express anger and emotion without it being filtered through censors, which sometimes lasts for mere minutes before it is hidden. Graffiti helped fuel events of the Intifada, but it was just one way in which people contacted each other. It did act as a sort of bulletin or way to spread news. The graffiti addressed issues of gender and other struggles that existed long before the Intifada. It was just another way to get the messages across, in a format that was relevant.

In New York City this summer I stumbled upon my favorite graffiti to date. When reading these articles I could not help but think of this while walking around SoHo in early August. I don't know if it has been covered up since, but I sure hope it is still there.

And right next to it I found this: