words on Basquiat
something I wrote for class.
TV PARTY WITH BASQUIAT
Though he didn't say much, I enjoyed seeing Basquiat on TV Party talking about writing graffiti. As we often say, "less is more," and it’s a phrase that a lot of contemporary graffiti writers could utilize in videos and DVDs today. There are those that deny graffiti the label of an art form, but when it comes to talking about the work or action, those same writers have a lot in common with the artists the seek to distance themselves from: they aren't eloquent, they have big egos, and they talk a lot of shit. At the time he was doing it, graffiti was young enough that Basquiat did not feel the weight of history that is a sticky point for writers today. Many of them are real conservatives, trying to emulate styles past and bemoaning the fact that things ain't like they used to be, as if it was just yesterday that they were bombing whole cars with DONDI.
So I almost expected to hear Basquiat recite today's familiar rhyme about going bombing and keeping it real, and was instead refreshed to hear him talk instead about improvisation and reaction. The graffiti writers who I like the most are those who weave their tags into the physical framework of the city, not just slap throw-ups around like this was a white canvas. Certainly there is something to be said for both saturation and going big, but the immediate environment in which you do your work and attention to details can make it shine.
It's not immediately apparent with Basquiat's work, but its there. SAMO was just writing text, kind of wherever, with seemingly random content. But his words reflected the city and times around him, if not the quality of the bricks that they were on. On TV Party a caller asked him if he was interested in political graffiti, and he just maintained that "its just whatever I feel at the time." If, like most writers, your only content is always your own name, style goes a long way. But only so far - Basquiat's sans-serif anti style became just as much of a signature as any tag in the early 80s in New York.
The style of graffiti is the code, the hieroglyphs that need to be deciphered to get to the words, the supposed "meaning" that lies underneath. I think it was precisely this anti-style that allowed people view his work as art, as it fell more neatly into the notion of artists-as-creator/genius. Even in the 80s and supposedly long after the "death of the author," this role of the artist seems the most accessible to the public, and certainly a good way to sell paintings. I have mixed feelings about Basqiuat because he opened that door for graffiti writers to enter the gallery, where they would get kind of pimped to their logical conclusion and then quickly co-opted into kitsch culture where now kids can get sold back their youth culture. Graffiti in galleries to me is just graffiti inside. It loses its power and interest to me when its taken off the street; it becomes a product for consumption instead of a document of an action.
I'm probably the one sounding conservative at this point. But I do see hope in the street-art movement that has gathered steam in the past five years, with good innovations in terms of materials, tools, and content. There are new anti-styles out there today that are mystifying people in ways besides complex letter-forms. Digital cameras and the internet have become invaluable tools in documenting work on the street as well as spreading ideas and creating a global dialogue. The MTA won their battle with graffiti, but the new enemy are advertisers, clamoring for space in the public eye and getting paid to think of new ways to go big. One thing doesn't change - work on the street is ephemeral. But hopefully there will be more of those like Basqiuat who's work reflects the city back onto itself and writes a history into the minds of those who see it.
