I find some of the street art such as the stenciling and stickers to be interesting enough that they enhance the streetscape. However the tagging and etching are a serious nuisance. We have occasional problems with tagging on the alley side of our building and promptly remove it – although scrubbing spray paint off of bricks is no easy task and the wall will never look the same again.

I would like to see a crackdown on tagging (especially etching) with an emphasis on public service for offenders – as in scrubbing paint off bricks. However, it frustrates me that we tolerate advertising, often depicting unhealthy images and promoting environmentally and socially destructive consumer culture, on virtually every surface but don’t welcome artists enhancing our public spaces. Erecting a big, cheap, ugly building made of toxic materials is a much more menacing, long-lasting, and destructive pollution of our community than some paint randomly applied to a surface. Does the fact that it cost exorbitant amounts of money and many professionals to erect make it more tolerable than the unpaid inspiration of a street artist?

Can we offer more appropriate outlets for spontaneous public art? The painted bus stop shelters seem to be working reasonably well for deterring graffiti while showcasing young artists. Another solution would be to do a better job articulating wall surfaces so that they are not a ugly blank canvases. Studies have shown that beautiful, textured walls are less likely targets for graffiti than large monotonous expanses of Dryvit. Perhaps we would have less problems with graffiti if we made our community more beautiful to begin with – and bolstered the art programs at our schools.

1.Do you think graffiti is a problem in your area?

Yes, there needs to be more street art including stenciling and stickering. Some sort of discouragement should be given to scratchiti and taggers.

2.Where are the problem spots?

Anywhere there’s a blank canvas (new ST site, anyone?) + Broadway itself: the cleanScapes folks keep taking down perfectly good (and legal) art on utility poles. Those punks need a kick in the junk.

3.What do you and your neighbors do to help clean it up?

“Clean up” here must mean ‘encourage / finish the proliferation’. In any case: I buy spray paint for kids and teach them about PPE (respirators). I hand out stickers to be added to the visual landscape.

4.Should the city be doing more to help out?

Hells yes. Encourage street art with law changes or incarceration reduction, zoning, parks-coordination for installations and pitch in some modest finances. Designate public owned buildings that are not in use as city canvases, aka graffiti magnets. Most artists are younger and appreciate a little structure in their lives: helps them concentrate on the art & the nurturing of creativity.

Orange Splott forever….!

oops.
Here’s the link.

All the graffiti I’ve seen all looks trashy and makes a neighborhood look like crap. Who decided that graffiti would improve the apartment building at the corner of E Pine and Bellevue E? It loos like cråp.

I admit, Juliette, that I am just guessing, because I don’t know the owner of that building. But that area has been hit regularly and frequently with tagging in the past, and what is there now will certainly act as a deterrent, even if this is not the intent.

You were able to find some examples of some pretty cool art, but this kind of quality is very rare, and is the exception, and does not negate the fact that the vast majority of graffiti is tagging crap. Also, I would be pretty sure that the examples you provided were done with the permission of the property owner, as opposed to most graffiti which is done in the middle of the night and not with permission of either the City or a private property owner. Therefore, it is vandalism, pure and simple.

Hi Juliette, and thank you for YOUR thoughtful comments. I agree that we could use more art in our public spaces….if only it was the quality of the things you have shown in your picture and video links! But (I repeat) that such quality is really quite rare, and is drowned out by all the unauthorized/illegal crap. I would be in favor of more “street art” on public structures, IF it were done legally with permission of the City, so that then there would be some control over the quality. Otherwise, we will continue to get stuff which negatively impacts our streetscapes. There actually is a City agency which could serve this role…called “Arts and Cultural Affairs” or something like that.

Not long ago, I proposed to the Capitol Hill Chamber of Commerce that we arrange to have the many “traffic signal control boxes” in our neighborhood “wrapped” with art images (using printed vinyl)…Victoria, B.C. has done this, and it really enhances the streetscape (and deters tagging). My proposal didn’t get very far, but I still think it’s a good idea.

As far as the other examples you give of other uses of public spaces (buskers, etc.), I think you pointed out the crucial difference…these are legal temporary uses, with no impact the next day, and are a positive contribution to our City. Graffiti “art” is illegal, usually ugly, and more-or-less permanent.

Having had to clean up grafitti at the family business over the years, I would like to point out that while decent art in a truly “public space” is all fine and dandy, any unrequested grafitti in a private space can make business owners (though they are the victim of the crime), subject to fines of anywhere from $100-$5,000 from the city if it is not removed in a timely fashion under the Grafitti Nuisance Ordinance. Which makes it even more of a nuisance for businesses on the Hill. Just thought I’d throw that out there.

http://www.seattle.gov/UTIL/Services/Garbage/KeepSeattleClea&_Removal/GraffitiNuisanceOrdinance/index.htm