”Claiming the right to space” is an argument frequently used by street artists for justifying illegal art in the public space. The public city space as a room of democracy and right to free speech is by some people considered threatened by commercial interests, and street art has become a way to demonstrate disapproval towards this. Street art is illegal and often anonymously performed in our cities. It developed in the late 1970s from the urban graffiti scene in America, and has therefore a lot in common with the graffiti movement. While there are similarities between the two, there are also fundamental differences. In this essay only street art is therefore considered.
Today’s cities are full of street art, and its design is widely varying. The pieces can be divided into three general categories; paintings, stickers/posters and objects/sculptures. The street artists’ intentions with their work is often described as political, but the idea of beauty and joy distribution, as well as the pure satisfaction of the action, is also pointed out.
Since street art is such a varying phenomen, people’s attitude towards it is far from homogeneous. Street art with a touch of humour is highly appreciated, while frightening or just “meaningless” pieces are received with a lot more scepticism or anger. Old people’s attitude to the phenomen is not as positive as young people’s.
Street art has the ability to use empty or abandoned city spaces and, through the art, give them a whole new meaning. There is often a clear interplay between the city room and the street art piece, and the art’s message is articulated through the spatial context. Some local governments in Sweden have taken up quite a liberal attitude towards street art while others clear it out immediately. Since street art is illegal and builds part of its identity on this fact, it is rather difficult for town planners to take up a v...
