Graffiti taggers vs British Transport Police

The British Transport Police arrested several graffiti taggers during December, and announced that they would be cracking down on Christmas vandalism, presumably to encourage the taggers to stay at home and enjoy a game of Pictionary with Granny and some seasonal satsumas. Fronted the BTP: "Our message is we're going to be out there, we're going to be looking for you, and there's a high risk you're going to be caught." Unfortunately it seems to have provoked some taggers to break into Camden Town tube station (according to Bixentro, who has some pictures too) over Christmas, covering the place liberally.

The defacement of the adverts is nearly as surprising as that of the underground signs themselves, which is interesting given that we're used to seeing adverts amateurishly defaced with stickers, biro moustaches and used chewing gum deposited on the eyes of the models (there's perhaps an essay on orality, rubbish, beauty and the denial of vision waiting to be written by a post-Freudian in that). This surprise is no doubt because the tube is normally such a controlled and graffiti-free -- if not always dirt-free -- environment.

One of the BTP's arguments on graffiti is that it's perceived as an indicator of lack of control and safety - a "broken windows" argument that I find fairly persuasive in respect of public transport (and, I think, the reason why I feel more forgiving of graffiti on the street, particularly when its content isn't as defiantly vindictive as this). TfL's staff have tagged up Camden Town's graffiti for removal... and so more public money will be spent cleaning it off.

Update, 28 Dec:

TfL are starting to clean off the graffiti.

Dave Knapik in his post here and comments here liked it but is making the point that an appeal to value on aesthetic grounds is pointless. He liked the graffiti - as do the taggers obviously - and others don't; these are all valid opinions. (Though the balancing of one person's freedom of expression against another's experienced quality of life tends to to go unexamined in these aesthetic discussions.) But I think that because the tube is a delicate socio/operational/technical/economic system that runs at capacity, the issue of "utility" outweighs that of whether the graffiti "intervention" has aesthetic value.

So the utilitarian assessment might be: whether the running of the tube service is affected (no, thankfully); whether the experience of tube users is impacted negatively (arguably yes: I find BTP's broken windows argument fairly persuasive*); whether staff are demoralised (I don't know); whether public money will be wasted in the clean up (definitely, yes); whether the break in itself presented a significant safety risk, or merely highlighted an existing security gap (arguable). And maybe even: is the intervention part of an appropriate and constructive exchange between taggers and BTP (probably not, though it's unlikely that a constructive exchange is possible). On balance then, whilst I quite liked some of it, I think it's a shame it happened.

* Though I don't find all of BTP's arguments compelling. And it has to be said that the argument on perception-of-control/safety is itself complicated by the fact that TfL themselves undermine the clarity of their presentation and services at times.

Comments

[rodcorp]

More photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/daveknapik/sets/72157594440789560/

Brixton too, and more artfully:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alex_buchanan/334478883/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alex_buchanan/334482258/

[Bixentro]

I don't dislike street art / graffiti, in fact I document what I see, and enjoy it for what it is. But I do however find in this instance the unwanton and totally gratuitious destruction of property to be completely disgusting. Graffiti is one thing, but to destroy LED signs and Tube Maps? And if they really wanted to say something about public transport and the issues with it, why not destroy the entire system?

If this is their way of getting back at British Transport Police, then they need to get a life, becuase this has not only increased the stakes in a game to catch them, but they have also destroyed property to an extent that it makes it harder for tube users to get by - as if using the northern line every day wasn't bad enough.

I agree with art for art's sake, but i also agree that they can enjoy the long arm of the law, which no one is beyond!

PS> If this is banksy, i will eat my shirt!

[rodcorp]

It does look like a reaction to the BTP's anti-vandalism statements and campaign over Christmas rather than a commentary on public transport, and yes it's a shame: public money wasted, and the public less certain that their public transport, such as it is, is managed well and safely.

Apparently they walked down the tracks to Camden Town when the tube was shut on Christmas day.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6213559.stm

(I think your shirt is safe.)

[Annie Mole]

I agree with the level of the surprise. It's amzing that it hasn't happened to such an extent before and I really hope there aren't going to be graffiti wars. We're lucky the station isn't being closed really - Northern Line has enough problems without this.

[Ben]

I think that this a bold statement saying that graffiti artist will never stop.. no matter how much they are threatened, I think they will allways be around.

I think if their is a "graffiti war" then it hasnt started yet... and that this maybe the beginning. However i think people are forgetting that this has been going on for along time and althought it doesnt usually get the press coverage i think now more than every we really will see the graffit on t.v and newspapers.

Also lets watch the p.r. spins on graffiti and how that this is the cause for all the crap services we have to put up with. LOL.... graffiti artists dont make the trains late... its the crap people trying to run the service that do. Also graffiti artist dont put prices up.. ken livingston and the people at the top make your life hell... WHAT next... a congestion charge on the trains??? and let me gues????...it was the graffit's fault???

[Dave Knapik]

Hiya,

Cheers for the link to my post, comments and photos in your update, but I just wanted to clarify on this:

"...but is making the point that an appeal to value on aesthetic grounds is pointless"

I do believe there is inherent value in the graffiti at Camden Town station. I just found the whole art-not-art debate to be pointless. Art resists easy definition.

[Matt]

I did a double-take as I was rushing for the tube to spirit me away for to my holiday on Boxing Day: good grief! The kind of graffiti to be found on platform 1 at Brixton was definitely more mess than art. It seems to have been cleaned off by the time I got back too, which begs the question: why did they bother? I'm all for graffiti as long as it's well designed or thought-provoking, but TFL are never going to let large pieces stay on Underground platforms, no matter how eye-catching or stimulating they are. Better for these graffers to sharpen up their style and take it above ground, methinks.

[jaoneism]

The taggers only did this because it is fun to break into the arch enemy of graffiti (BTP) and get one over. The style is not too good , but they get props for having the guts to do it. The political statement is an after thought and not planned. Once the taggers were inside the station, it is the obvious signs of a totalitarian government, i.e. their signs. which provoked outrage at the contradiction of the government in its control of public spaces. i.e signs.