Installational Art

Art that is or has been installed — arranged in a place — either by the artist or as specified by the artist. It might be either site-specific or not, and either indoors or out. The term became widely used in the 1970s and 1980s, and continues to be employed by many people. Installations may be temporary or permanent, but most will be known to posterity through documentation. As a consequence, one aspect of installations is often the difficulty with which they can be commodified. Artists identified with installations include Walter De Maria (American, 1938-), Nancy Holt (American, 1938-) and Mary Miss (American, 1944-).

Abstract Expressionism

Abstract Expressionism

Abstract Expressionism is a modern art movement that flowered in America after the Second World War and held sway until the dawn of Pop Art in the 1960's. With this movement New York replaced Paris as the center of the art world.

Abstract Expressionism has its roots in other earlier 20th century art movements such as Cubism and Surrealism that promoted abstraction rather than representation. The psychoanalytic theories of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung provided the intellectual context in this quest for new subject matter.

The major players in Abstract Expression were:
Jackson Pollock,Willem de Kooning, Clyfford Still, Arshile Gorky, Franz Kline, Robert Motherwell, Mark Rothko, Barnett Newman, Philip Guston, Lee Krasner, Ad Reinhardt and sculptor David Smith. These artists formed what is known as The New York School. Some were Americans by birth, but others came from Europe to the United States as a result of pre-war & wartime upheavals.

The Abstract Expressionists' goal was a raw and impulsive art. What mattered were the qualities of the paint itself and the act of painting itself.

Concrete Art

Theo van Doesburg: "A work of art does not derive from nature but is an autonomous reality composed of colour and form, an object for intellectual and spiritual use."...Art "should receive nothing from nature's formal properties or from sensulaity or sentimentality. We want to exclude lyricism, dramaticism, symbolism..."“

The concept concrete art,” or in French, “art concret,” was brought into language about art consciously in 1924 by Theo van Doesburg as the opposite of “abstract art”.

“Concrete art” does not of course mean figurative art; by the term “concrete” is meant rather an art that is not abstract in the sense that that it does not abstract or distort natural models. In this way, concrete art differentiates between abstract and immaterial art. Concrete art means much more an art that is based on lines, surfaces and colors and that for the most part follows a clear geometric principle. For this reason, important art-historical preconditions were de Stijl and Bauhaus. Concrete art materializes the mental, but does not have any kind of symbolic meaning. "Painting is a means of realizing thoughts in an optical way," is how Doesburg explained it. Max Bill wrote in 1947: "The goal of concrete art is to develop objects for mental use, the same way people make objects for material use. (...) Concrete art, as a last consequence, the pure expression of harmonious measure and law." In addition to the group, van Doesburg published the journal Art concret in 1930. Concrete art had an important influence on Colour Field Painting and on Op Art.

Rococo Art

Rococo art is art produced in the Rococo style, a style of artistic expression which emerged in France in the early 18th century; people also refer to this as “French style” art, in a reference to its nation of origin. Rococo art and architecture are characterized by very ornate, fanciful themes and a light air which sets this work apart from earlier pieces produced in the Baroque period, which was both ornate and heavy. Rococo art gave way to the neo-classical school, and many critics of that school dismissed Rococo art as frivolous work without depth, which explains why some people use “Rococo” as a derogatory word for frivolous artwork and architecture today.

The term is a portmanteau of rocaille, the French word for “shell,” and barocco, the Italian word for “Baroque.” Rococo artwork is characterized by very ornate curves and shell-like shapes on a wide range of scales from ballrooms to side tables. Rococo art also typically includes elaborate foliage, animal figures, scrolls, and fanciful design elements. In a marked contrast with the dark, heavy colors of Baroque art, Rococo art and architecture featured a lot of pastels, gilding, and other elements which made works from this period very light and lacy.

Like most schools of art, Rococo has ardent fans as well as die-hard detractors. Detractors often dismiss Rococo art as being light and fluffy, without depth or texture, despite the fact that this is clearly belied by the complexity of Baroque homes, which featured immensely detailed and ornate interior design. Like art from earlier periods, Rococo art integrates many symbolic plants, animals, and themes, as someone who takes the time to closely examine Rococo art will learn.

While Rococo originated in France, it spread to other parts of Europe, and was adopted with great enthusiasm in Germany, where some excellent examples of Rococo art and architecture can be found today. Many religious structures incorporated Rococo elements in their architecture as well. The playful art and design which distinguishes Rococo art was often used on a smaller scale, in things like individual pieces of furniture and paintings.

The flourishing of the Rococo period was brief, as social critics pointed to Rococo art as an example of the general degeneration of art and society. The more staid Neo-classical style certainly integrated Rococo elements, however, and in some parts of Europe Rococo fashions endured into the late 1800s, especially in England.

Anti Graffiti

The list of arguments for and against graffiti is endless.Graffiti protesters include numerous authority figures, politicians (such NYC mayor Giuliani and Chicago mayor Daley), web based groups (such as nograffiti.com), and various community members. Dissidents claim that graffiti in public areas disrupts and visually pollutes communities. Graffiti opposers claim that graffiti related vandalism costs the public millions of dollars per year to clean and control. People that oppose graffiti have started a wide chain of petitions to get bills turned into laws, and to say that it is a gateway crime.

The nograffiti.com website clearer states its mission statement: The NoGraf Network is an anti-graffiti company that is to contribute to the creation of safe and clean communities, the healthy development of youth, the improvement of quality of life, and the prevention of graffiti vandalism. Using web-based technologies, NoGraf will enable information exchange between individuals and groups involved in supporting these goals. Building upon the experience of NoGraf members, the Network will identify best practices, current issues, challenges, best graffiti removal techniques and courses of action, by facilitating and harnessing dialogue amongst professionals from the fields of law enforcement, prosecution, community-based organizations, abatement practitioners, educators, and vendors. NoGraf will promote civic participation as a dynamic and meaningful experience derived from focused participation in reducing the blight of graffiti vandalism, Thereby improving the quality of life for all citizens.

Graffiti vandals believe their actions harm no one. The reality is graffiti hurts everyone�homeowners, communities, businesses, schools, and you. And, those who practice it risk personal injury, violence, and arrest. "Graffiti contributes to lost revenue associated with reduced ridership on transit systems, reduced retail sales and declines in property value. In addition, graffiti generates the perception of blight and heightens fear of gang activity" reports the U.S. Department of Justice. The appearance of graffiti is often perceived by residents and passers-by as a sign that a downward spiral has begun, even though this may not be true. Patrons of buildings, parks, or public facilities where graffiti vandalism has occurred may feel that if graffiti is tolerated, then other more serious crimes, such as theft and assault, may also go unchallenged. In schools, 52% of public high schools and 47% of middle schools reported incidents of vandalism during the 1996-1997 school years. Data shows little difference between cities, towns, and rural areas. Additionally, about 36% of students saw hate-related graffiti at school. Although the cost of graffiti vandalism in the U.S. has yet to be definitively documented, for many communities, private property owners, and public agencies the cost is rising each year. Figures from a variety of cities across the U.S. suggest that graffiti cleanup alone costs taxpayers about $1-3 per person each year. For smaller communities the amount dedicated to graffiti cleanup annually may be less than $1 per person. A 2006 survey of the 88 cities, Caltrans and Metro in Los Angeles County on graffiti removal found the cost was about $28 million. With a population of close to 10 million, the per capita cost is about $2.80.With a population of just under one million, the City of San Jose, CA spent approximately $2 million in 2006 fighting graffiti. For communities with smaller populations, per capita costs are typically under $1.00. Pittsburgh, PA (population just over 300,000) spends around $350,000 annually for graffiti clean up. Omaha, NE spends about $100,000 a year on graffiti removal (population just over 400,000). In 2006, the Tennessee Department of Transportation spent more than $240,000 on removing graffiti along its roads and bridges.Denver, CO and Milwaukee, WI, with similar populations-just over 550,000-each spend about $1 million annually. This is a per capita cost of about $1.80. In Houston, TX (population just over 2 million), the city earmarked $2.2 million for cleanup of existing graffiti in 2006. Chicago, IL budgeted $6.5 million in 2006 for graffiti removal and Graffiti Blasters, the city's removal program (population a little over 2.8 million).This is a per capita cost of around $2.30. Las Vegas, NV with a population of about 1.7 million spends more than $3 million each year cleaning up graffiti.

In the UK, it is considered an Anti Social Behaviour (ASB) and subsequently is associated with crimes like mugging, begging, drunken disorder and criminal damage. This has created an idea in the public mind that graffiti is dangerous. The Home Office claim that people feel unsafe in areas covered with graffiti, one official described it as "visual mugging". The irony here is that most areas that have a high concentration of graffiti, usually lack the funds to clean it up and are typically places where there is already a high level of crime. It is also important to note that it was born in areas of New York and Philadelphia that were already very delapidated and dangerous; its practitioners usually poor and frustrated youth. Surely graffiti was artistist expression carried out by kids who had no other means to do such things.

Graffiti: Art or Crime?

When someone say they do they graffiti, they quickly add the word art to the end. Is it because they have a passion in their talent or because they know what they are doing is illegal? In the label-loving society we live in we commonly hear how graffiti is a crime. If you write (or destroy) on something that does not belong to you then it is called vandalism. When we see "graffiti art" it is commonly on something that is seen daily by the public, ie a building or on the sidewalk. It is kind of like the saying, "beauty is in the eye olf the beholder;" we cannot say something is not art because we do not appreciate it.

Suppose that Leonardo, Monet, Picasso, or any of the recognized artisans of Western European culture were alive in the present day. Then, suppose that one of these famous artists decided to paint a masterpiece on the side of your house or on your front door or on a wall in your neighborhood. Would Picasso or Monet's markings be graffiti or art or vandalism or graffiti art? The answer may vary across people, but I would claim that those markings are art in the form of graffiti. Their markings would qualify as vandalism only if they appeared on private or public property without permission. The same answer holds for the present day, genre of graffiti known as graffiti art.

However, it is not readily accepted as being art like those works that are found in a gallery or a museum. It is not strictly denied the status of genuine art because of a lack of form or other base aesthetic elements. Most of the opposition to graffiti art is due to its location and bold, unexpected, and unconventional presentation, but its presentation and often illegal location does not necessarily disqualify it as art. In this paper, I elucidate how some forms of graffiti can be accepted as art. This type of graffiti is known as graffiti art, subway art, or spraycan art. The arguments of vandalism and unconventional presentation as negating the ability of some graffiti to be art is usurped by an explanation of those properties apparent in some forms of graffiti that do qualify it, aesthetically, as art.

Both the tag or individual mark have little or no aesthetic appeal. While they might suggest a flair or style of writing, these forms fail to qualify as example of superb graffiti art because of a lack of aesthetic qualities and inability to produce a maximal aesthetic feeling in the viewer. In fact, the tag or individual mark is not produced for artistic purposes. It is basically a means to indicate the writer's presence, i.e., the age old statement of "I was here." Gang markings of territory also fit the definition of graffiti, and they mainly consists of tags and messages that provide "news" of happenings in the neighborhood. Murals for community enhancement and beautification are also a form of graffiti even though they are not usually thought of this way because most murals are commissioned. These are more colorful and complex. They take considerable amount of skill to complete, and murals can be done in a graffiti art style or a traditional pictorial scene. The last form of graffiti is graffiti art which is the creative use of spraypaint to produce an artwork that is graffiti or done in a graffiti-like style, and this the is the concern of this discussion

Political Graffiti

When you think of graffiti and street art, politics is probably one of the last things that comes to mind. There seems to be a complete disconnect between the two realms.

Because of the illicit nature of graffiti, a can of paint and a brush are impractical while spatial considerations may make a pen or pencil ineffective. To accomodate the need for size, visibility, speed, and convenience, the ideal vehicle is the sray-can, which combines medium and applicator into one relatively small parcel that is easily concealed, transportable, easy to use; spray-paint may be applied to most surfaces. Different sized nozzles are used to achieve various effects, for example, a thin line as opposed to a wide band of paint. Where spray paint is not used or available, almost anything may serve as substitute: the aforementioned pen, pencil, paint and brush, as well as chisels, knives, felt-tip markers, blood, or even a finger on a dirty wall or window. Most media used for etching, sketching, painting, marking or writing can be adapted to such a purpose.

Because it is impossible to limit or regulate the resources that are available, graffiti as an art form and expressive medium is expandable, flexible, and difficult to control. The graffiti medium constitutes an open channel for its users to manipulate and mould to suit their needs. It represents a type of discontinuous communicative strategy through which people can engage in a visual dialogue which does not rely on face-to-face interaction or necessary knowledge of the writers' identities.

Individualized or popular graffiti include bathroom wall marking (latrinalia), signatures, proclamations of love, witty comments in response to advertisements, and any number of individual, political, or social commentary (folk epigraphy). In general these graffiti have no affiliation beyond the scope of the individual. It is close to impossible to locate their source.

Communities that produce graffiti (as opposed to the individual "scribbler") may target cryptic messages toward their own closed community, producing a seemingly confusing and unreadable product. The writers may not sign their real names; they instead employ the use of nicknames, codes, and symbols within stylized aesthetic systems. This type of graffiti is geared toward people who already understand the messages and may act to enhance group solidarity. Such graffiti can easily be elevated to the category of "art form" because the symbolic codes, generalized content, and aesthetic features of community-based graffiti usually outlast the duration of an individual's membership within the community. If a community's ideological focus is geared toward the larger society or the politics of the larger state, graffiti messages usually lack cryptic symbolism, make use of the national language, and retain a more straightforward aesthetic style.

An example of this cross-culturally prevalent genre of graffiti, political graffiti may combine with other artistic and expressive forms, such as poster and comic book production, mural painting, newspaper and pamphlet production, and political art exhibitions. The marks may represent the work of unrecognized or underground political groups, radical student movements, or simply dissatisfied individuals. Political graffiti may also arise from sudden emergency situations (e.g. riots) or in response to concurrent political legislation and party politics. Although concerned with state politics, the groups that produce this type of graffiti generally comprise some"subcultural" elements and may make wide use of symbols to further internally relevant quests for power and solidarity.