Another work of Banksy stenciled graffiti: I’m catching the theme that he’s popular among political street art circles. I’m also catching onto his style (totally called that this was his).
This work (on a street corner in Belgium) touches on the idea of graffiti as vandalism, a topic I’ve previously covered. The art world and the public don’t always see eye-to-eye on the role, purpose, and legality of graffiti in society. Here, Banksy offers an interesting twist to the artist’s argument
Protest art is, more than anything, a response. Something spurs it. Artists wouldn’t draw pieces protesting war if there was no war; images of the homeless wouldn’t appear if homelessness was not a problem in society; works favoring or disagreeing with one candidate or another or one issue or another wouldn’t appear if disputes didn’t exist among sides.
In short, politically-charged works of street art tend to emerge as reactions to societal problems and issues. It’s a classic example of cause-and-effect. Where problems arise, art follows. And the greater the problem, the more likely it is there will be a united and powerful response among the street art world.
Furthermore, works of political protest art and street graffiti are not created simply to express an individual artist’s opinion, but to call attention to what they (and generally many others) view as an injustice existing in society. This ‘vandalism’ then, as many perceive it, is precisely the fault of society: as the acting impetus, it deserves to suffer the consequences.
Street artists will continue to launch responses to societal concerns so long as society remains imperfect. As such, it is unrealistic to ever expect walls and buildings devoid of art.