Emily Hunter

Taking the Train Discussion Questions

1. In Taking the Train, author Joe Austin asserts that framing stories simplify and guide the way people view public and political issues. The New Rome and Naked City were two contradicting ideas meant to frame the way New York City was viewed. What role do these ideas play in the graffiti controversy in New York during the 1970s and 1980s? What effect do the New Rome and Naked City ideas have on the way the general public thought about the graffiti on the subways?
2. Although the graffiti in New York was seen as a nuisance and a major problem, public funds were going to the construction of murals in public places. What is it that makes the murals socially acceptable while the graffiti is not? Many art critics called the graffiti on the subways art, while politicians and others who opposed graffiti saw it as the degradation of society. Do you think that graffiti could be considered to be art like the murals? Why or why not?
3. When the graffiti in New York City began to be spoken about in the public sphere, those who opposed it or found it objectionable began looking for solutions to the “graffiti problem.” The City Council President even proposed a “War on Graffiti” and describes graffiti as something the city must “combat.” Does the harsh language used by those trying to clean up the subways and public areas effect the way the public sees the graffiti? Why was the view that the graffiti may be culturally significant often derided or ignored? Did the fact that it was a movement by the youth of the city play a role in the way it was viewed?