Page 2265 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 15 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Whether we, as adults and legislators, like it or not, graffiti art is becoming part of the legitimate landscape. Only a few weeks ago, Hey Hey It's Saturday - a television program not known for its avant-garde tendencies at times - had two graffiti artists complete a work during the two-hour show. They were leading contestants in a graffiti contest that had been organised in Melbourne, a city that has fostered its graffiti artists for some years. Nightclubs commission works done by these young people, and sections of large walls are spray painted with graffiti art and left as art pieces. They are recognised by young people as great examples of their art.
In Canberra as well, at least one business has given two young artists a commission to provide the interior mood for its shop. While I feel that it would be healthy and beneficial to promote this idea in the private sector, much more needs to be done to encourage young people to express their talents in this complex medium. I am sure that, if members took the time to look carefully at some examples of Canberra's graffiti art, called "pieces" in the jargon, they would be amazed at the technical skill and talent of these young artists.
Of course, some members may be thinking that the majority of graffiti is done in a hurry, is not complex or artistic, and is basically a means of rebellion. I agree. Most of what is called "tagging" is done on what are known as illegal walls, and there will always be people who will want to demonstrate their disregard for authority in this way. This has always been the case. Germany has had a long history of graffiti, and in fact has a thriving and government-sponsored graffiti art culture. People, with or without a political message, will use any means to publish their statements of rebellion. Martin Luther used a church door. Modern-day young people use underpasses, buildings, phone booths - in fact, anywhere their message can be published. This is one of the issues at the very core of the existence of graffiti: It is a means of communication.
The graffiti artists I have had contact with have emphasised the prominence of the walls needed for their art work. They speak with envy of Sydney's public rail system, of the long stretches of embankment walls that form train corridors. Sydney has had a more pressing need to solve its graffiti problem because of the element of danger in young people hanging outside moving carriages to get a better view. Punishment, and even the death of other taggers, does not seem to have had an effect.
I am informed that in Melbourne transit police have taken what I see as an antagonistic approach, bringing along their own cans of paint and destroying any graffiti they can find. This has not solved the problems on the trains but only increased the stakes, and a real animosity has developed there between graffitists and transit police. South Australia has introduced some of the toughest laws in a bid to stamp out graffiti. These have yet to be fully tested by time, but the feeling among graffiti artists is that the laws act more as a bait for tagging and further destructive work.
Queensland, on the other hand, perhaps surprisingly, has taken a progressive approach. As detailed in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald on 14 July 1992, police are currently organising groups of graffiti artists, who under previous laws were common vandals and had been charged with offences, into
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .