1) Within the piece, it notes that graffiti was the artists' very public way of expressing their ritualized rebellion. This cohesive force was very powerful and still continues to this day for many graffiti artists in New York City, but it also seems that other avenues are presently being explored for many of today's youth to express themselves. What are some ways that the youth of today often express themselves, and using what forms of technology? Has the paint can turned into the computer?
2) On page 6 of the article, the writer speaks of the irony regarding past plans by government officials to "legitimize" graffiti artistry by installing initiatives through the National Endowment for the Humanities. From the outside looking in, was government leadership finally validating graffiti art only after fitting it within their own accepted hierarchical and race structures? Do other hegemonic structures rework present-day cultural expressions in similar ways?
3) Chapter 3 discusses the role the media played in painting graffiti and its subculture as "dangerous" and "adverse" to the society-at-large. Who do you think was in charge of this (probably) intentional demagoguery, and what do you propose was their end goal, if there was one? What present-day issues are hot button matters because of various leaders' attempts to dramatize said issues?
No comments:
Post a Comment