Colorful Youth: An Examination of how Graffiti Emerged in the 1970s New York
What is graffiti? Graffiti: pictures or words painted or drawn on a wall, building, subway car or other place for public display. Graffiti itself is easy to define but it’s the movement associated with it that is complex, intricate, and, to some degree, mystifying. This type of creative expression reflects many things from an artist’s personal identity to political movements.
Graffiti slowly emerged from the late sixties to its full train-car-rollin’ glory in the 1970s. What you’ve got to understand is that during this time the Bronx was in complete squalor due to a large-scale financial collapse of New York City’s infrastructure (Berman 127). Many minority families lost their jobs, were unable to pay their rent, and became even more disenfranchised. This disintegration then led to constant theft, the burning of buildings and other crimes, causing the area and its citizens to go into a downward spiral (125). The youth were heavily influenced by the issues going on around them. Some joined gangs but others -- they joined graffiti.Throughout my research, I will examine how graffiti captures one particular artist's motivation, graffiti’s relationship to political protest, including feminism, as well as graffiti’s overall effect on people living in the Bronx, New York during the 1970s.
For these young people, graffiti was both a creative expression and a shout-out to the world: “Something is wrong with what is happening to our neighborhoods!” These emerging graffiti “taggers,” as well as the rappers who were developing hip hop, began to react to the socio-economic devastation around them. Marshall Berman, a social critic who also grew up in the Bronx and witnessed this period personally, said that these “kids” were “going through an outburst of creative energy and inventing a whole new thing, a thing called hip hop” (130). This first generation of taggers wanted to change the bleak, dismal atmosphere around them into something more colorful. At the time, graffiti writers would tag their names around the city in big bold colorful letters. Berman states that “the vortex where all these activities converged . . . was the subway. The taggers and rappers “filled its grim cars with dazzling color” and “gave New York just the kind of energy we needed to survive the crap that was being dumped on us” (130). Berman, living through this period and looking back on it, seems to be saying that graffiti was in part a quest to survive. One artist, Sandra Fabara, or more commonly known as Lady Pink, was among one of the first women to make graffiti art back in 1979. Starting on the train cars in the South Bronx and Queens, she transitioned at an early age into showing her art in galleries. She now works on commissioned fine art paintings and murals in New York (Lady Pink).
The artist’s motivation to create graffiti is a tricky subject with many opposing views and points pertaining to the issue. One stance is that each graffiti writer seeks fame and is intent on getting it. A tagger with this motivation may try to tag as many spots as possible in hopes of becoming acknowledged and maybe even famous. This desire for fame may be hard for some to understand. If graffiti artists do not consider themselves artists, then what would they become famous for? The number of “locals” (i.e., subway cars) one can tag without getting caught by the law? Fame does not seem to completely answer the question of why graffiti emerged as such a powerful force at this particular time, in this particular place.
Some researchers who have studied graffiti and its significance have suggested that the writers/artists’ motivation is a form of political protest. In his study “Urban Graffiti,” researcher and social critic Jeff Ferrell states,
The writing of hip hop graffiti disrupts this orderly latticework of authority, reclaims public space for at least some of those systematically excluded from it, and thus resists the confinement of kids and others within structures of social and spatial control (35).
Ferrell sees graffiti as a form of protest and rebellion by a generation of kids who felt “less-than” and disempowered. For these young people, graffiti was “a way as to make clear their resistance to urban control” (35). The kids doing graffiti were poor, black or Puerto Rican, and were resisting the white establishment. In this way, graffiti does seem to be a form of political protest. However, even Farrell seems to say that politics cannot be separated from the personal. He says, “Although writers tag and piece against the controls of the city, they also tag and piece for one another, and in so doing build alternative structures of meaning and status” (37).
When I spoke with Lady Pink, she said that as teenagers she and those she knew from the Bronx were not necessarily thinking of politics when they were tagging. As Lady Pink said, “At the age of 15 politics is not even a factor….it was all for kicks and giggles and adventures with your friends, for being down with the popular crowd, being cool”(Lady Pink). Today, young people tend to express their opinions on politics, and it surprises me that during Lady Pink’s time expressing political beliefs was not as present. However, I think it’s important to understand graffiti’s impact over time. Perhaps Lady Pink was speaking purely personally about her experience and memory of tagging, not fully recognizing how she was part of a movement.
So is graffiti personal or political and can the two really be separated? It could be that the artist’s motivation sparks from their desire to express their personal identity. Lady Pink has said that when writers create graffiti, they are really saying, “I’m here” (Mizrahi 20). She feels that in a big city like New York, teenagers feel as small and insignificant as ants -- that they do not matter in the grand scheme of things. As Lady Pink says,“ it's a way of bringing attention to yourself” and by controlling the image you give out to people. By using graffiti to define their personal identity, they can say that they are someone and that they are worth something, even though there are thousands of other someones and somethings all around you doesn't mean that you are not.
Graffiti empowered women in the 1970s on a lowkey scale of rebellion against “the man.” As Lady Pink said, “Feminism was in the air.” She and her girlfriends strived to prove men wrong, while stirring up riots and “burning their bras.” However, it is unclear whether, as a woman graffiti artist, Lady Pink identified herself as a feminist at the time. It is clear that she supports women's rights and believes in equality for all, which makes complete sense. Yet, during my interview with her, I confronted her, asking,“Do you consider yourself a feminist?” and she immediately responded with “No.” She believes people have put that “label” on her over the years (Lady Pink). This is a perplexing statement mainly because the very definition of a feminist is someone who believes that women are equal to men. It is unfortunate that even someone like Lady Pink doesn’t want to be labelled with the so-called “negative” representation of what every feminist is. Many women, including people like Lady Pink and even my friends, think that if you’re a feminist that makes you decidedly aggressive and in people’s faces which is not true. All it takes to be a feminist is a desire for equality between boys and girls and that’s pretty much it. You don’t need to go screaming about it but you don’t need to deny what is so obviously true. In her contribution to the web discussion “Graffiti and Street Art Can Be Controversial,” feminist critic Laura Shillington said this about the relationship between feminism and graffiti:
[In] many cities across the globe, graffiti is produced predominantly by men. In this sense, graffiti -- both the art and the act -- are generally perceived as masculine. Why? To create graffiti requires placing one’s body in risky places at precarious hours (e.g. at night). Women in most cities are still far more vulnerable than me, especially in certain places and at night. Women graffiti artists experience street harassment by men, including sexual harassment by police officers. Indeed, the women that create graffiti face more challenging situations, making their graffiti more significant to urban spaces. . . Putting themselves at risk to produce art (much of it political) is a claim to the right to the city: a demand to be safe and to be able to engage in producing urban space (1).
I think that Lady Pink’s art, regardless of how she identifies herself, is feminist.
Graffiti art was and still is part of a vibrant, world-wide cultural and artistic movement that will always contain a political message. The fact that it is considered illegal to tag shows its power -- and also to the powerlessness that the graffiti artists still feel. These early artists, including Lady Pink, paved the way for many young and old people living in poor, underserved neighborhoods in the south Bronx and elsewhere to have a voice and a presence. Graffiti represents a lively expression of optimism and hope coming out of the slums, and it remains alive -- perhaps not on subway cars -- but in tunnels, overpasses, and in any public place that is seeking attention.
For these young people, graffiti was both a creative expression and a shout-out to the world: “Something is wrong with what is happening to our neighborhoods!” These emerging graffiti “taggers,” as well as the rappers who were developing hip hop, began to react to the socio-economic devastation around them. Marshall Berman, a social critic who also grew up in the Bronx and witnessed this period personally, said that these “kids” were “going through an outburst of creative energy and inventing a whole new thing, a thing called hip hop” (130). This first generation of taggers wanted to change the bleak, dismal atmosphere around them into something more colorful. At the time, graffiti writers would tag their names around the city in big bold colorful letters. Berman states that “the vortex where all these activities converged . . . was the subway. The taggers and rappers “filled its grim cars with dazzling color” and “gave New York just the kind of energy we needed to survive the crap that was being dumped on us” (130). Berman, living through this period and looking back on it, seems to be saying that graffiti was in part a quest to survive. One artist, Sandra Fabara, or more commonly known as Lady Pink, was among one of the first women to make graffiti art back in 1979. Starting on the train cars in the South Bronx and Queens, she transitioned at an early age into showing her art in galleries. She now works on commissioned fine art paintings and murals in New York (Lady Pink).
The artist’s motivation to create graffiti is a tricky subject with many opposing views and points pertaining to the issue. One stance is that each graffiti writer seeks fame and is intent on getting it. A tagger with this motivation may try to tag as many spots as possible in hopes of becoming acknowledged and maybe even famous. This desire for fame may be hard for some to understand. If graffiti artists do not consider themselves artists, then what would they become famous for? The number of “locals” (i.e., subway cars) one can tag without getting caught by the law? Fame does not seem to completely answer the question of why graffiti emerged as such a powerful force at this particular time, in this particular place.
Some researchers who have studied graffiti and its significance have suggested that the writers/artists’ motivation is a form of political protest. In his study “Urban Graffiti,” researcher and social critic Jeff Ferrell states,
The writing of hip hop graffiti disrupts this orderly latticework of authority, reclaims public space for at least some of those systematically excluded from it, and thus resists the confinement of kids and others within structures of social and spatial control (35).
Ferrell sees graffiti as a form of protest and rebellion by a generation of kids who felt “less-than” and disempowered. For these young people, graffiti was “a way as to make clear their resistance to urban control” (35). The kids doing graffiti were poor, black or Puerto Rican, and were resisting the white establishment. In this way, graffiti does seem to be a form of political protest. However, even Farrell seems to say that politics cannot be separated from the personal. He says, “Although writers tag and piece against the controls of the city, they also tag and piece for one another, and in so doing build alternative structures of meaning and status” (37).
When I spoke with Lady Pink, she said that as teenagers she and those she knew from the Bronx were not necessarily thinking of politics when they were tagging. As Lady Pink said, “At the age of 15 politics is not even a factor….it was all for kicks and giggles and adventures with your friends, for being down with the popular crowd, being cool”(Lady Pink). Today, young people tend to express their opinions on politics, and it surprises me that during Lady Pink’s time expressing political beliefs was not as present. However, I think it’s important to understand graffiti’s impact over time. Perhaps Lady Pink was speaking purely personally about her experience and memory of tagging, not fully recognizing how she was part of a movement.
So is graffiti personal or political and can the two really be separated? It could be that the artist’s motivation sparks from their desire to express their personal identity. Lady Pink has said that when writers create graffiti, they are really saying, “I’m here” (Mizrahi 20). She feels that in a big city like New York, teenagers feel as small and insignificant as ants -- that they do not matter in the grand scheme of things. As Lady Pink says,“ it's a way of bringing attention to yourself” and by controlling the image you give out to people. By using graffiti to define their personal identity, they can say that they are someone and that they are worth something, even though there are thousands of other someones and somethings all around you doesn't mean that you are not.
Graffiti empowered women in the 1970s on a lowkey scale of rebellion against “the man.” As Lady Pink said, “Feminism was in the air.” She and her girlfriends strived to prove men wrong, while stirring up riots and “burning their bras.” However, it is unclear whether, as a woman graffiti artist, Lady Pink identified herself as a feminist at the time. It is clear that she supports women's rights and believes in equality for all, which makes complete sense. Yet, during my interview with her, I confronted her, asking,“Do you consider yourself a feminist?” and she immediately responded with “No.” She believes people have put that “label” on her over the years (Lady Pink). This is a perplexing statement mainly because the very definition of a feminist is someone who believes that women are equal to men. It is unfortunate that even someone like Lady Pink doesn’t want to be labelled with the so-called “negative” representation of what every feminist is. Many women, including people like Lady Pink and even my friends, think that if you’re a feminist that makes you decidedly aggressive and in people’s faces which is not true. All it takes to be a feminist is a desire for equality between boys and girls and that’s pretty much it. You don’t need to go screaming about it but you don’t need to deny what is so obviously true. In her contribution to the web discussion “Graffiti and Street Art Can Be Controversial,” feminist critic Laura Shillington said this about the relationship between feminism and graffiti:
[In] many cities across the globe, graffiti is produced predominantly by men. In this sense, graffiti -- both the art and the act -- are generally perceived as masculine. Why? To create graffiti requires placing one’s body in risky places at precarious hours (e.g. at night). Women in most cities are still far more vulnerable than me, especially in certain places and at night. Women graffiti artists experience street harassment by men, including sexual harassment by police officers. Indeed, the women that create graffiti face more challenging situations, making their graffiti more significant to urban spaces. . . Putting themselves at risk to produce art (much of it political) is a claim to the right to the city: a demand to be safe and to be able to engage in producing urban space (1).
I think that Lady Pink’s art, regardless of how she identifies herself, is feminist.
Graffiti art was and still is part of a vibrant, world-wide cultural and artistic movement that will always contain a political message. The fact that it is considered illegal to tag shows its power -- and also to the powerlessness that the graffiti artists still feel. These early artists, including Lady Pink, paved the way for many young and old people living in poor, underserved neighborhoods in the south Bronx and elsewhere to have a voice and a presence. Graffiti represents a lively expression of optimism and hope coming out of the slums, and it remains alive -- perhaps not on subway cars -- but in tunnels, overpasses, and in any public place that is seeking attention.
Works Cited
Berman, Marshall. “New York City: Seeing through the Ruins.” Nonstop Metropolis: A New
York City Atlas. Edited by Rebecca Solnit and Joshua Jelly-Schapiro. University of
California Press, 2016. Print.
Braun-Reinitz, Janet and Jane Weissman. On the Wall: Four Decades of Community Murals
in New York City. University Press of Mississippi/Jackson, 2009. Print.
Ferrell, Jeff. “Urban Graffiti.” Youth and Society, September, 1995. DOI:
10.1177/0044118X95027001005
Lady Pink. Personal Interview. March 5, 2017.
Maddox, David, Ph.D. “Graffiti and street art can be controversial.” The Nature of Cities.
Web.23 Mar 2016.
Mizrahi, Marilyn. “Up from the Subway.” In these Times, 1981. Web.
Solnit, Rebecca and Joshua Jelly-Schapiro. Nonstop Metropolis: A New York City Atlas.
University of California Press, 2016. Print.
Stewart, Jack. Graffiti Kings: New York City Mass Transit Art of the 1970s. Mecher Media,
2009. Print.
University of Texas at Dallas. "Study explores youths' motivations for painting graffiti."
ScienceDaily. Web. 8 September 2016. DOI: 09/160908120959
Berman, Marshall. “New York City: Seeing through the Ruins.” Nonstop Metropolis: A New
York City Atlas. Edited by Rebecca Solnit and Joshua Jelly-Schapiro. University of
California Press, 2016. Print.
Braun-Reinitz, Janet and Jane Weissman. On the Wall: Four Decades of Community Murals
in New York City. University Press of Mississippi/Jackson, 2009. Print.
Ferrell, Jeff. “Urban Graffiti.” Youth and Society, September, 1995. DOI:
10.1177/0044118X95027001005
Lady Pink. Personal Interview. March 5, 2017.
Maddox, David, Ph.D. “Graffiti and street art can be controversial.” The Nature of Cities.
Web.23 Mar 2016.
Mizrahi, Marilyn. “Up from the Subway.” In these Times, 1981. Web.
Solnit, Rebecca and Joshua Jelly-Schapiro. Nonstop Metropolis: A New York City Atlas.
University of California Press, 2016. Print.
Stewart, Jack. Graffiti Kings: New York City Mass Transit Art of the 1970s. Mecher Media,
2009. Print.
University of Texas at Dallas. "Study explores youths' motivations for painting graffiti."
ScienceDaily. Web. 8 September 2016. DOI: 09/160908120959