Just Looking ...

I've been repeatedly encountering this image on Toronto walls for the past few weeks, at first completely oblivious to it.

Now, I can't help but wonder who the infamous "Running Shoe" artist is, and why they felt compelled to cover the city walls with their message (whatever that message may be).

In fact, I've been encountering more and more street art like this one that make me stop and think, when I'm usually prone to ignoring graffiti altogether.
I will be the first to admit, this post, in terms of class topics is incredibly belated, but Spring has me out exploring the city again and I keep encountering more and more of these.

I'm happy to see more "art" like this emerging on Toronto streets. If anything, I'm happy it's engaging me with the city. Images like this one are characteristic of the emergent "street art" scene that has become increasingly popular over the past decade, originating in cities such as London and Berlin. Not only has street art taken over city walls worldwide, it is also being exhibited in galleries, or the outside of galleries as was the case for the Tate Modern Gallery in London this summer.

Though in this case, I think their outside exhibition is highly appropriate.

It is difficult for me to imagine now that when these images started to appear, executed by artists such as London-based Banksy (who is now internationally famous), they were still often negatively connected in people's imaginations with crime, gangs, territorial graffiti, etc. Which is perhaps why the Tate chose this decidedly controversial image of a black man holding a gun to exhibit as an example of street art for the side of it's building.

All of it though does call into question that ultimate divide between high and low culture. Although the Tate Gallery is known for showing avante garde and controversial work, it is above all, an art gallery. Yet, street art seemed to and does seem to have a place in it - despite it's origins in graffiti and often people's reluctance to qualify it as "art". Afterall, officials in London for example still continue to remove works of famous street artists from the city walls, claiming they are acts of vandalism.

The works are still "offensive" images to a degree, a "high" image (art) presented in a "low" way (that is, on the streets). For many people, the great difficulty in their mind lies in distinguishing street "art" from graffiti. Whether not this distinction should even be made is another matter altogether; the questions are nothing new to the art world - what is art? who decides what is art? - Where do we draw the line, if anywhere?

In Berlin this summer, the streets were covered with street art and after living there for 6 weeks I began to realize the street art and graffiti was part of the city. It told stories and mapped the city's history (as cliche as that may sound), or grabbed out at you from an alleyway engaging you with every corner of the city. It was creative and beautiful, and for that I have no reluctance in qualifying it as art.

However, I can at the same time understand people's reluctance. Like my own reluctance to accept "ready-made" art such as Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain" - ie urinal.
Hopefully in the time being more street artists will start filling Toronto's walls with images like the "Running Shoe" (as silly as comical as it may seem).

Until then....




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tate_Modern
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

** After posting this blog, I clicked on the Toronto link on our blog page which brought me to the Torontoist website. Coincidentally enough they have an article on Toronto street artist "Anser", which is interesting and reflects some of the things I've been saying. The reader's comments on the article in response to Anser are also interesting, reflecting just how controversial street art can be.

http://torontoist.com/2009/02/tall_poppy_interview_anser.php