Edwards 1
Elyse Edwards
LIS 489 – Tech. Foundations of LIS
Final Paper
Graffiti Art Movement Digital Archive: A Strategic Plan
Introduction
Due to the proliferation of technology in our modern age, archives and archivists alike
are in the midst of a Renaissance. Traditional ways of thinking about and viewing collections
are no longer wholly feasible in today’s digital environment. Specifically, our concept of what a
collection ‘is’, has become broad. Currently, people are creating more records in a day than
most people used to in their lifetime. These records are furthermore not being stored in a filing
cabinet or a shoebox to be discovered at some later date. They are - often instantaneously - put
out in the world to be viewed by others. In order to continue to accurately present a
comprehensive picture of history, we need to open ourselves up to new modes of integration:
within our community, our professional sphere, and the world. Helen Samuels first introduced
the concept of “Documentation Strategy” in 1986, and it addressed the need of archivists to be
more proactive in collection development and maintenance.1 The rapid creation of record types
necessitates active involvement in the creation, selection and maintenance of historically
pertinent records, a position that archivists traditionally avoid. Technological innovations allow
us the perfect opportunity to apply new archival theories; the issues facing the need and ability to
archive the graffiti art movement provide an excellent example of how we might use technology
to advance archival theory, developing new best practices and approaches to expand an historical
narrative and serve the needs of the community.
1 Helen W. Samuels, “Who Controls the Past,” American Archivist 49, no. 2 (1986): 115.
Edwards 2
Graffiti Art – Background
It may seem pointless to attempt to salvage and preserve the legacy of an art form that is
inherently illegal in nature. However, viewed in its historical context, we can begin to see how
the act of graffiti is merely an extension of human expression that has persisted through
millennia. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the word graffiti comes from the
Latin graffito meaning “A drawing or inscription made on a wall or surface, usually so as to be
seen by the public”. Graffiti can trace its roots back to prehistoric cave paintings and to
sophisticated Egyptian Hieroglyphics; one can even speculate that the first instances of written
language were done in the form of graffiti. In this context, it is easy to see that although the
complexity of human society has created the illegal conditions under which graffiti artists
(writers) work, the act itself is historically non-malicious.
Since the late 1960s when Graffiti as we know it today was first introduced in
Philadelphia, the graffiti tradition has grown tremendously and come to be recognized as a
legitimate art form.2 Regardless of the intended audience, graffiti is put in public places to be
viewed and enjoyed by the public. From the perspective of art history, graffiti art is the truest
form of art for art’s sake. It is the “…most honest art form available…there is no elitism or
hype…nobody is put off by the price of admission.”3 While prestige within the graffiti
community is an undeniable goal, writers typically do not set out seeking any sort of monetary
compensation or personal recognition; their aim is rather to serve the public, both by acting as
their voice and by conveying messages to them. Graffiti art is a way for writers and citizens to
interact with and respond to their environment. Anonymity is a necessity, as most street art is
2 Rachel Masilamani, “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments and New York
City’s 1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement,” Art Documentation 27, no.2 (2008): 4.
3 Banksy, Wall and Piece (London: Century, 2005) 8.
Edwards 3
done illegally. This anonymity helps maintain the focus of the work on the message and the art
itself, not on the celebrity or other facet of the writer.
As the movement gained popularity in the 1980s, the gallery and museum world began to
take notice and attempted to possess and capitalize on the fervor. For writers, this became yet
another reason to keep performing their art under illegal pretenses. Graffiti became a blatant
statement in opposition to the corrupt gallery world, taking art directly to the people as an act of
defiance. An anonymous spokesperson advocating for the protection of graffiti, summed up its
purpose by saying that “[this art is about] breaking down the boundary between gallery and
street, and taking art to the people. It gives ownership of art to everyone.”4 The byproducts of
graffiti are thus a form of community outreach, giving communities that may only have limited
resources a sense of pride.
The commercialization of graffiti art was always inevitable, and while writers may earn
their living producing legal artworks, some still take to the streets. For example, Banksy, the
infamous graffiti artist from London, has earned millions of dollars for his art, works that now
grace the homes of Hollywood elite like Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.5 The New York Police
Department (NYPD) most recently wanted this wily, unidentified artist, who has long kept his
identity from public view. Under the title “Better Out Than In”, Banksy set out to put up one
new artwork around New York City every day for the month of October 2013. By day 23, NYC
Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the NYPD had reached their limit. In response to this “vandal”
running amuck in the city, Mayor Bloomberg stated “Graffiti does ruin people’s property, and
4 Colin Moynihan, “Defacer With Mystery Agenda is Attacking Street Art,”
New York Times, March 1, 2007,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/nyregion/01splat.html?_r=0 (accessed November 10, 2013).
5 BBC News: Entertainment & Arts, “Banksy ‘may abandon commercial art’,” BBC News, October 9, 2013,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24464663 (accessed November 10, 2013).
Edwards 4
it’s a sign of decay and loss of control…some places are for art and some aren’t”.6 The debate
over graffiti and whether its illegality supersedes its artistic justification is one that is ongoing
and an obstacle to documentation and preservation.
Documentation Strategy and Graffiti
As graffiti art forces us to look at our physical environments in a new light, so too does
the prospect of archiving the graffiti movement force us to look at archival theories and practices
with fresh eyes. The graffiti culture is a collaborative one and so too must archives embrace
collaboration in order to accurately document its history. As Karen Lamoree postulated in her
essay on the documentation of controversial collections, documentation strategy focuses on
“[d]ocumenting an issue, rather than an individual, side, or particular event”.7 The proliferation
of social media has been instrumental in the increase of documentation by artists and writers, but
from an archival standpoint this documentation is insufficient. Taking an active part in creation
of collections is a means by which we can ensure that the whole picture really is presented in the
collection.
The concept of Documentation Strategy, as put forward by Helen Samuels, states that the
strategy is,
…a plan formulated to assure the documentation of an ongoing issue,
activity or geographic area […] The strategy is ordinarily designed, promoted and
in part implemented by an ongoing mechanism involving records creators,
administrators, and users. The documentation strategy is carried out through the
mutual efforts of many institutions and individuals influencing both the creation
of the records and the archival retention of a portion of them.8
6 Agence France-Presse, “Banksy draws security after NYPD threat,”
The Raw Story, October 19, 2013
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/19/banksy-draws-security-after-nypd-threat/ (accessed November
10, 2013).
7 Karen Lamoree, “Documenting the difficult or collecting the controversial,” Archival Issues: Journal of the
Midwest Archives Conference 20, no.2 (1995): 149.
8 Samuels, “Who controls the past,” 116.
Edwards 5
Originally condemned for its abrupt break with traditional archival practice, it has since been
embraced out of necessity given the diversity of records and the lack of tangible, cohesive
documentation. Modern strategies for collection development are essential, especially in
instances where issues or events that warrant documentation are scattered and unaccounted for.
In order to satisfy our professional obligation to present history as it was, we need to facilitate
appropriate record creation and management. Furthermore, given the diversity that technology
has afforded, we need to embrace the idea that our particular collection is not sufficient to
present the whole of history in such a comprehensive manner. Through outreach within our
community, both professional, institutional, and beyond, and the proper utilization of new
technologies, we can expand the context in which our collections exist, giving meaning to them
in ways we never could previously.
Digital Archive – Approaches and Concerns
Archives especially have an important role to play in the documentation and preservation
of the graffiti art movement. In addition, this process will aid in the development of modern
approaches to archives and theory. One of the reasons that graffiti art has been so lacking in its
documentation is due to the illegality of most works. The complete aversion to record keeping
by artists, especially in the early days of the movement, was not ambivalence, rather a means of
protecting the artist.9 Any documentation a writer possesses might become evidence if they are
caught with it. Add in the fact that in its formative years, cameras were not as expensive nor
readily available as they are today, we begin to see that more creative sources of documentation
are necessary to ensure the survival of the graffiti narrative from it’s roots in the 1960s.
9 Masilamani, “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments and New York City’s
1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement,” 5.
Edwards 6
I propose there are four major components a Digital Graffiti Art Archive would need to
provide access to in order to present the most comprehensive history of the movement: police
and law enforcement records, blackbooks, photographs, and oral histories.
The illegal practices of most graffiti artists, and the negative perception of the artform
eans that there is an abundance of police and law enforcement records associated with the graffiti
art movement. Records on arrests, in addition to police and city’s approaches to preventing,
deterring and cleaning up graffiti art represent an important aspect of the movement that is
mostly overlooked. As much as municipal agents may want to erase graffiti from history as
much from trains and other property, the movement is inextricably linked to the culture from
which it grew.10 Graffiti history itself has the tendency to avoid focusing on this aspect so as not
to detract from the artistic elements. However, arrest records, special police details, and other
attempts to thwart writers are part of the story and serve the purposes of presenting the weakness
and failures, successes and achievements of the movement and society itself. It is imperative
that in crafting an archive where the documentation by the actual creator is so limited, that we
provide as much access to outside resources that aid in creating a comprehensive context for the
movement and participants to exist in.
Working with law enforcement officials would not only involve obtaining access to arrest
records and anti-graffiti initiatives, but also the release of blackbooks, one of the critical sources
of documentation by artists. Due to their incriminating content, some artists speculate that the
best collections of blackbooks reside in metropolitan police departments.11 Blackbooks are the
10 David Gonzalez, “Remembering and Defending, Subway Graffiti,”
The New York Times, November 16, 2004
http://0www.lexisnexis.com.library.simmons.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?shr=t&csi=6742&sr=%28%22Rememberi
ng,%20and%20Defending,%20Subway%20Graffiti.%22%29+AND+DATE+IS+2004 (accessed November 15,
2013)
11 Berry, “Black Magic,” 44.
Edwards 7
sketchbooks in which most writers, at least in the United States, work through their ideas before
realizing them with spray paint (or other mediums).12 More than just doodles, these books
document the artistic growth of not just the individual, but of the art form itself. These books
provide a social service as well, equivalent to “…resumes, calling cards, ice-breakers at social
gatherings…”13 Blackbooks are an essential acquisition not just because they document a
writer’s artistic development but also because they additionally illustrate the collaborative nature
of the graffiti community. This collaboration element has the potential to be an obstacle for
archives over copyright concerns. Through proper community outreach and communication,
these copyright issues would not be too cumbersome. Writers create murals knowing that they
are someday to be added to or covered up by another writer’s work. This ephemerality implies a
level of artistic dialogue between writers that is mostly looked upon favorably.14 By having a
physical presence, and creating open dialogue between archives and writers, we can develop
practices that will continue to promote the values of this movement. It would behoove a digital
archive to assert their historical significance to municipal police departments’ and request the
release of blackbooks that are no longer serving as evidence.
The digitization of these blackbooks in a digital archival setting would serve a dual
purpose: to increase access to them exponentially, allowing artists, aspiring or otherwise, to
witness the evolution of graffiti art as a movement and on an individual scale, while at the same
time preserving the originals for posterity. The primary issues of digitization, which will be
addressed in further detail later, lies in how to approach the cataloging of these materials. In
some cases, especially those blackbooks obtained from police departments for which it may be
12 Masilamani, “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments and New York City’s
1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement,” 6.
13 Colin Berry, “Black Magic,” Print 55, no.3 (2001): 41.
14 Celia Lerman, “Protecting Artistic Vandalism: Graffiti and Copyright Law,” NYU Journal of Intellectual
Property and Entertainment Law 2, no.295 (2013): 306.
Edwards 8
hard to discern who the creator is, it can also be challenging to know “…how and to what extent
to represent the artist’s intention, assuming that is known.”15 Artist books lack basic
bibliographic information, including creator, date(s), titles (of the blackbook and individual
works), in addition to lacking clear intellectual content. It is important to revise cataloging
standards to ensure that users know enough about the content and have sufficient bibliographic
information to be able to have a sense of what ideas the works intend to convey. This is further
challenged by the collaborative nature of many blackbooks, leading to possible copyright issues
as discussed earlier.
Photography is the most pervasive way that artists choose to document theirs and others
work, and is essential in light of the fact that many contemporary artists do not keep
blackbooks.16 In the case of Banksy’s month long stint in NYC, many of the works he created
were covered up within days. The only proof of their existence now reside on his instagram
profile, website, and on the cameras or phones of those passersby who caught a fortunate
glimpse.17 Photography collections of Graffiti art on the Internet represent a treasure trove of
documentation. Put on websites by artists and bystanders alike, there is an overwhelming
amount of photographic evidence on the web. In the last ten years especially, writers have taken
advantage of the interconnectedness afforded by the Internet. The Internet allows writers’ access
to a more global graffiti community while at the same time enabling them to continue operating
anonymously.18 Writers have created their own web spaces for which to showcase their work, in
15
Myers, Ann K.D. and William Andrew Myers. Opening Artists’ Books to the User: An Example of Potential
Approaches. Rare Books and Manuscripts (RBMS) 2013 Pre-conference. Minneapolis, Minn.
16 Berry, “Black Magic,” 43.
17 BBC News, “Banksy ‘may abandon commercial art’,” 2013.
18 Masilamani, “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments and New York City’s
1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement,” 10.
Edwards 9
addition to blogs, or instagram profiles that perpetuate this culture of artistic dialogue on a more
broad scale.
The presence of all of these photographic records and artists’ personal interest in sharing
their works on a global scale is a boon for the documentation of this artistic movement. However
there are severe challenges to accessibility. Mainly, the issues revolve around the lack of
metadata associated with these works, which can inhibit their accessibility. Artists do not create
sufficient metadata for their personal images, and other images uploaded by others, e.g. not
members of the graffiti community, lack even more in metadata. Very few sights out of the
hundreds that exist allow for topical searching, and even less have geographical or date metadata
associated with them. In order to have a successful digital graffiti archive, it is imperative that
metadata standards are created and applied. Metadata elements such as Creator, Title, Date(s),
size, location, style, and medium are key elements that would be recommending for cataloging
images of graffiti works. In addition such an archive would need to establish controlled
vocabulary for graffiti terms. This is challenging because these terms are mostly slang, and
differ regionally. Controlled language, which would invariably be derived from user tags, would
allow for the collocation of digital images based on certain criteria (topical, subject, geographic
location, physical location, in addition to creator(s), dates, etc.).
There are a number of digital shrines to graffiti art and artists in existence, the oldest
being the Art Crimes consortium founded in 1994. While this site intends to be a digital graffiti
archive, it is clear that the person who created this site is using that term very loosely. Whether
the creator knew it or not, they did create a site that begins to address documentation strategy.
The site has links to artist’s pages, a few blackbook scans (though not in their entirety), and links
to graffiti articles, interview, and other sites. It has a very basic Google keyword search
Edwards 10
capability, but it is clear that metadata is severely lacking. Likewise, the @149st initiative in
New York City, whose mission is to present the history of the New York City graffiti art
movement begins to scratch the surface, but is really more of an image gallery than anything.
Another issue with photography stems from representation. An archivist’s goal is to
present history as it was, but without possession of the original work, how can we begin to serve
this purpose? Graffiti works are done with thought given to their placement; location within the
city, the building, and the general size and scale are important attributes of the work itself. While
we may be able to gaze upon a photograph, we cannot understand the magnitude of some of
these works that instill awe and admiration in artists and spectators alike when confronted with a
piece in its original element. The context in which the work exists (or existed) is equally as
important as the content. Creating sufficient metadata would help to contextualize these works
more, but it is also important that the quality of photographs are high enough to warrant
preservation. Concerns arise from low quality image uploads, those taken with a camera phone,
etc. necessitating minimum standards for image files as well.
The final component that would make for a robust digital archive would be the
creation and collection of oral histories. The graffiti writer Stephen Powers (1999), speculates
that due to the disorganized or nonexistent nature of documentation prior to the rise of social
media, oral histories are the viable way to understand the “real story”.19 This suggests that
archivists actively pursue and facilitate oral history projects to create a collection that was not
produced by the participants of the movement themselves. Criticized as being “overly
19 Masilamani, “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments and New York City’s
1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement,” 6.
Edwards 11
activist,”20 it begs the question to what level should archivists instigate the creation and
accumulation of documentation?
While I have primarily discussed record keeping practices of artists, there exist a
multitude of other viable resources that beg reference and inclusion for this discussion. These
resources include literature and films on the topic of graffiti art, in addition to historical
landmarks and community programs that encourage artistic expression in legal ways, such as the
Mural Arts Program in Philadelphia.21 These resources are all part of the narrative, whether as a
reaction to or an attempt at documentation, they lend themselves to expressing multiple
perspectives on the issues, acceptance and promotion of graffiti. Sharing information,
collocating these resources and making them accessible requires unique community partnership
and collaboration.
By protecting and documenting the most comprehensive history of this movement that
we can, we aid in repairing the perception of graffiti and writers as vandals that has persisted for
too long. Part of the narrative of graffiti art that is too often eclipsed by the vandalistic nature of
the art form is the intent behind creating these works. According to Susan A. Philips, author of
Wallbangin, Graffiti and Gangs in L.A., “Vandalism is what they wound up doing in the course
of their work, but their main goal was not that of a vandal.”22 When looked at from a sociocultural standpoint, the act of graffiti is rather selfless. While one of the reasons graffiti tends to
spring up in low income areas is due to the lack of security and police presence, most artists feel
that they are rather taking an aesthetically displeasing area and making it beautiful, giving the
20 Masilamani, “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments and New York City’s
1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement,” 11.
21 Mural Arts Program, “City of Philadelphia Mural Arts Program,” 2013 muralarts.org (accessed November
10, 2013)
22 Jeanine Ancelet, “Art of Vandalism?”, Institute of Archaeology, University College London, November 11,
2006 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/museumstudies/websites06/ancelet/artorvandalism.htm (accessed November
10, 2013).
Edwards 12
community something to be proud of. Supher, the alias of a popular American writer, loves the
ability to paint over these rundown building, giving them new life. He also considers his work to
be an easily accessible, unconventional way to view art.23
Questions and Conclusions
In the course of researching this paper, I feel I have created a lot more questions than
there are answers for. While a digital archive does seem to be the most effective way to
document this artistic movement, certain challenges arise as a result: How do we describe these
resources? Do we describe the resource at hand, i.e. a photograph, or the work it is representing?
Do we show the evolution of a specific piece as it is added to, written over, and eventually
erased? Do we collect all works? Or only works that meet specific criteria, i.e. works addressed
by local authorities, commissioned, written about, filmed, etc.? How do we establish that
criteria? Whatever the answers to these questions, it is evident that archivists are required to be
proactive in the community, implementing documentation strategy, to ensure that proper and
sufficient records are being created. The creation of a digital archive for the graffiti art
movement illustrates perfectly new opportunities for collaboration and documentation that are
necessitated by the diversity and variety of information resources available through technology.
Modern day collections exist in a virtual world that is dynamic, multi-faceted, and in a
continuous state of evolution. The creation of metadata standards and controlled vocabulary
will ensure the proper storage and preservation of the graffiti art movement, making these
records more efficiently accessible, encouraging and inspiring a new generation of artists
across the globe.
23 Kiko Martinez, “Street Legal,” San Antonio Current, September 19, 2007 www.proquest.com (accessed
November 10, 2013): 19.
Edwards 13
References
Ancelet, Jeanine. "Art or Vandalism?". Institute of Archaeology, University College London,
November 11, 2006 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/museumstudies/websites06/
ancelet/artorvandalism.htm (accessed November 10, 2013).
Banksy. Banksy: Wall and Piece. London: Century, 2005.
Berry, Colin. “Black Magic.” Print 55, no.3 (2001): 41-49.
BBC News: Entertainment & Arts. “Banksy ‘may abandon commercial art’.” BBC News, October
9, 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24464663 (accessed November
10, 2013).
Celia Lerman, “Protecting Artistic Vandalism: Graffiti and Copyright Law,” NYU Journal of
Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law 2, no.295 (2013): 296-338.
Gonzalez, David. “Remembering and Defending, Subway Graffiti,” The New York Times,
November 16, 2004 http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.simmons.edu/hottopics/
lnacademic/?shr=t&csi=6742&sr=%28%22Remembering,%20and%20Defending,
%20Subway%20Graffiti.%22%29+AND+DATE+IS+2004 (accessed November 15,
2013).
Lamoree, Karen M. "Documenting the difficult or collecting the controversial." Archival Issues:
Journal Of The Midwest Archives Conference 20, no. 2 (1995): 149-153.
Martinez, Kiko. “Street Legal.” San Antonio Current September 19, 2007 www.proquest.com
(accessed November 10, 2013):19.
Masilamani, Rachel. “Documenting Illegal Art: Collaborative Software, Online Environments
and New York City’s 1970s and 1980s Graffiti Movement.” Art Documentation 27, no.2
(2008): 4-14.
Moynihan, Colin. "Defacer With Mystery Agenda Is Attacking Street Art". New York Times,
March 1, 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/nyregion/01splat.html?_r=0
(accessed November 10, 2013).
Myers, Ann K.D. and William Andrew Myers. Opening Artists’ Books to the User: An Example
of Potential Approaches. Rare Books and Manuscripts (RBMS) 2013 Pre-conference.
Minneapolis, Minn.
Samuels, Helen Willa. "Who controls the past." American Archivist 49, 109-124 (1986): 109124.