When we think of gentrification concerning street art, what might come to mind is street art being painted over or destroyed in search of a more uniform, tidy aesthetic. However, a different type of gentrification is taking place as well: the changing of street art itself.
Though some argue that street art is image-based whereas graffiti is word-based, we can trace the origins of street art back to graffiti. When graffiti first appeared in New York, gangs were the primary creators of the art. Additionally, graffiti was considered an illegal act of property destruction, but its legality—or lack thereof—didn’t hinder its growth.
The unique action of creating something out of destruction rapidly caught on in various cities, garnering the attention of those outside stereotypical street art social circles. Eventually, although it took decades, street artists (a spinoff of the original, raw graffiti artists) earned a place among contemporary artists, some even becoming professionals.
Throughout its journey, artists have used graffiti (and, by extension, street art) as a means of communication—political activism, social commentary, and the like have all shown up within street art. These works were raw, gritty, and nonconformist, and their unifying theme was rebellion.
However, nowadays, many politically charged messages have been gradually replaced in favor of aesthetics: bold, beautiful colors that don’t quite fit in with the rebellious works of the past. Richard Florida, an urban theorist, suggests that street art’s demographic has changed—as it gains traction and popularity, it amasses a wider audience as well.
Currently, so-called trendy hipsters consist of white, typically upper-class people who have completed higher education. This new demographic differs vastly from the working class pushing their way out of the Industrial Revolution. And the most-commissioned artists tend to cater to the former.
The murals sprawled on the sides of buildings, with bright colors and avant-garde aesthetics, are, more often than not, planned out by city officials and developers. Though they push a message of insurgence, these contemporary pieces are disconnected from their roots—disconnected from 1920s New York.
Graffiti, and street art as well, have long been seen as the markers for low-income communities, neighborhoods in which appearances aren’t the top priority. In contrast, street art today is often considered the mark of an artistically-rich community.
What remains, however, is the question: is this gentrification negative? We know that art is forever adapting to the world around us, but has this art form just transformed to cater to those with deeper pockets? Furthermore, we must recognize that the presence of murals within upper-class neighborhoods can coexist with street art more closely resembling its origin.
Is the gentrification of street art a simple changing of the times? Or, perhaps, is it testifying for the all-encompassing influence of capitalism?
SOURCES
https://frescocollective.org/articles/2019/1/11/changes-street-art-gentrification