A Brief History of Graffiti: Art or Vandalism? by Anna Baughman, Sophomore
We’ve all seen graffiti, whether it be on the side of buildings, in subway stations, on boxcars. It is a controversial form of expression, and while some view it as a legitimate form of art, many see it as illegal vandalism that damages public and private property. Graffiti has a long history that predates modern spray paint. Ancient civilizations, such as the Greeks and Romans, left behind inscriptions and drawings on public walls, often conveying political or social messages. Over the years, it has evolved into the graffiti that we know now, ranging from simple street tags, murals, and thought-provoking pieces of visual art. Supporters of graffiti argue that it is a valid form of creative expression that should be celebrated, while opponents see it as a threat to public order and safety. The debate surrounding graffiti is reflective of broader societal tensions between authority and freedom of expression. For many graffiti artists, the streets serve as an open canvas, allowing them to communicate messages to the public without the constraints of galleries or museums. Graffiti provides an opportunity for marginalized voices to be heard, offering commentary on political, social, and cultural issues.
Many critics argue that graffiti undermines efforts to maintain public order and disrespects property. They say that leaving graffiti unchecked can send the message that vandalism is acceptable, leading to a decline in the quality of public spaces. On the other hand, many graffiti enthusiasts and artists believe that painting on walls is an act of resistance—a way to reclaim public space and challenge societal norms. In this context, graffiti is seen as a tool for resistance and a form of empowerment for those who may feel voiceless or invisible.
One of the most significant figures in this artistic revolution is Banksy, a British street artist whose works have gained worldwide recognition. Banksy’s pieces often offer commentary on issues such as war, consumerism, and social inequality. His anonymity and use of public space have helped elevate graffiti from an underground movement to a form of high art that commands millions of dollars at auction. Banksy’s influence has sparked a shift in public opinion, with many now viewing graffiti as an important form of modern art. In addition to Banksy, artists like Jean Michel Basquiat, Keith Haring, and Shepard Fairey have contributed to the legitimization of graffiti. Basquiat, once a street artist in New York City, became a celebrated figure in the art world, blending graffiti with neo-expressionism. Haring’s bold, colorful murals became iconic symbols of activism and social justice in the 1980s. Shepard Fairey’s famous Obey Giant campaign, which started as a street art project, evolved into a global brand and has become a symbol of the fusion between art, marketing, and politics.
Parts of the art world have shifted their views on graffiti, with museums such as the Museum of Modern Art and the Smithsonian American Art Museum hosting exhibitions that celebrate its cultural significance. As graffiti has transitioned from a form of rebellion to a respected art form, many critics acknowledge its ability to provoke thought and challenge societal norms. The future of graffiti may lie in finding a balance between respecting public spaces and celebrating the creativity it brings to the urban landscape.
I’m Still Here: The Power of Family and the Effects of Tragedy by Max Kane, Sophomore
This past week, I went to see the Academy Award winner for Best International Feature, I’m Still Here. The film centers around a family living in 1970s Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Eunice Paiva begins a journey to learn the truth behind the disappearance of her husband, former PTB deputy Rubens Paiva, while struggling to hold her family together.
Co-written and directed by Walter Salles, the film is one of the best representations of family I’ve ever seen. Eunice and Rubens have four children: Vera, Eliana, Nalu, and Marcelo. The movie starts with the family happy as could be, but soon, the tide turns. Rubens is kidnapped by the authoritarian government of Brazil at the time because he had been assisting families who had fallen victim to the dictatorship in a number of ways, and it is unclear to Eunice if he will ever return.
Salles describes how the real Eunice Paiva began a journey of fighting for human rights after the disappearance of her husband. She never allowed anyone to take pictures of her crying or upset, as she did not want to be seen as a victim. She returned to school and became a human rights attorney and continued her work until she developed Alzheimer’s and passed away in 2018. In my opinion, this film was expertly crafted. It showcases the brutality of the Brazilian dictatorship whilst simultaneously demonstrating the power of family. The tragedy and loss of Rubens doesn’t stop the family, but pushes them forward.
The film is based on the book authored by Marcello Rubens Paiva, Ainda Estou Aqui. Published in 2015, it is a series of memoirs reflecting on his experience when his father disappeared. In an interview, he talks about how the film was beautiful and represented the true events extremely well. He assisted much in the film, helping with getting certain details right. One detail he raved about was when men came to kidnap his father. He describes how they never hurt anyone and were respectful, as they were just following orders and the family posed no threat to them.
Critics adore I’m Still Here for its fantastic performances and powerful message Jessica Kiang of Variety described the film as “classical in form but radical in empathy.” I think this is a fantastic way to describe the film. It had a familiar feeling to it, while completely changing the way periods of turmoil like this are put to the screen. Seeing the effects of the dictatorship not as just numbers and statistics, but as real effects on an individual family that go on for the rest of their lives is a fantastic method at raising awareness and understanding of the effects of this tragedy for the Brazilian people.
