A Guerrilla Artist's Call for Peace in Palestine by Liz Chapman, Tempe Mabe, and Sam Kauffman
In
2008, hand-written post-it notes began appearing all over the city of
Copenhagen to promote non-violence. The act is attributed to a group who calls
themselves “Vandals Against Violence,” but members are anonymous and, as far as
we know, not members of the “art world.” In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s,
street artists like Shepherd Fairey began creating more pointed works on public
walls. But none has had quite as prolific an affect as Banksy.
The UK artist began working in
Bristol around 1993, and by 2001, his work was found throughout the entire
United Kingdom.Choosing to work anonymously, Banksy has revealed
very little about his true identity. Several articles have been published
supposedly revealing his true identity (Robert Banks or Robin Gunningham,
depending on who you talk to), but none have been confirmed. And while Banksy’s
distinctive stenciling methods were recognized as progressive, and while his
work was hailed as everything from satirical to poignant, the artist remained
relatively unknown until 2005.
In
2005, Israeli officials were in the process of building a 425-mile wall separating
Israel from Palestine. The International Court of Justice had ruled it illegal,
but construction on the wall was continued, apparently to protect the country
from Palestinian violence. Banksy said on his website at the time: “The Israeli
government is building a wall surrounding the occupied Palestinian territories.
It stands three times the height of the Berlin wall and will eventually run for
over 700km—the distance from London to Zurich. The International Court of
Justice last year ruled the wall and its associated regime is illegal. It
essentially turns Palestine into the world’s largest open-air prison.”
But words were always only half of
Banksy’s power. In August of that year, nine paintings appeared on the
Palestinian side of what was now known as “The West Bank Wall.” They depicted
what looked like holes in the wall to reveal paradise on the other side. They
featured a girl being carried over the wall by a bunch of balloons. They showed
a dove with an olive branch in its mouth, wearing a bullet-proof vest.
Reactions
to the “peace vandalism” were mixed. A spokesperson for Banksy said that “‘The
Israeli security forces did shoot in the air threateningly and there were quite
a few guns pointed at him.’” While Banksy was at work on the project, he
recorded on his website that an “old Palestinian man said his painting made the
wall look beautiful.” But after thanking him, Banksy was told, “ We don't want
it to be beautiful, we hate this wall. Go home.’”
But welcome or not, many are unsure
about whether to call Banksy’s work art or vandalism. Some of his paintings
have been sold for as much as $400,000 and have been bought by Angelina Jolie
and Brad Pitt, among others. Studying his prints, it’s apparent that the man
knows what he’s doing—not only does he stencil rats onto subway walls, he
paints recreations of Van Goghs (a vase of wilting sunflowers) and adds Simon Cowell sitting behind an office
desk in Degases.
On the website Underspray, Andy Excell says “Just because I feel something is
downright offensively bad, doesn’t mean it’s not art at the same time…Instead
of arguing over whether it’s one thing or another, just accept that it is two
things simultaneously and that those two things, may change according to
people’s preferences.” By definition, Banksy’s creations seem to be both art
and vandalism: he defaces the property of others with expressive and skillful
visual pieces.
Many suggest that it depends on
perspectives and priorities. Exell goes on to say, “I take the opinion that
Graffiti is both Art and Vandalism. And that would make three types of people
in the world, those who think Art first Vandalism second, those that think
Vandalism first and Art second and those that think it’s just plain vandalism .
. .”
Those in the “graffiti is vandalism”
camp see the law as an immovable line, any crossing of which is criminal. Those
of this persuasion believe that “Unsolicited graffiti is just disrespectful and narcissistic. The
idea that you are so . . . special that you’re entitled to deface public and
private property is just offensive and should not be encouraged. Paint your own
. . . walls.” Charlie Brooker, a critic of Banksy, says that Banksy’s graffiti
is only considered art because “his work looks dazzlingly clever to idiots. And
apparently that'll do.”
Others recognize graffiti’s
artfulness, but cannot consent to breaking the law for its sake. One
interesting example is Fred Radtke, a New Orleans native who took it upon
himself to cover all the graffiti he saw with gray paint. Nicknamed the “Grey
Ghost,” he claimed his efforts were not at all anti-art, but purely
anti-vandal. Ironically, Graffiti artists complain because “what Radtke does—apply
paint to public and private property without permission—is no different from
what [they do].”
Most who share the latter opinion utilize
law enforcement to solve the problem. When Banksy painted "One Nation
Under CCTV" in large letters in a public place in London, Westminster
Council ruled to have it painted over. The council reported that it will
“remove any graffiti, regardless of the reputation of the creator.”
From an “art first” perspective, many blame the
city for not allotting a public space where graffiti artists can express themselves. After all,
certain parts of the city belong to the public already, and are not being used
for anything else. Banksy’s supporters—from famous celebrities to poor city
dwellers— believe that artistic works of graffiti should be treasured and not
discouraged.
We could
look at the issue from an “effectiveness” point of view. Does art like Banksy’s
affect change to bring peace? Dorothy Thompson, American journalist during the
Nazi era, said, “Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the presence of
creative alternatives for responding to conflict.” By this definition, Banksy’s
art does promote peace. Banksy uses
his artwork to create a greater harmony among people and remind them of the
conflicts they need to face. It is necessary to bring conflicts to the surface
so that efforts will be made for change.
Art can bring us together as people
and help us find common ground. It can open lines of communication between
people of diverse social, ethnic and economic environments. It can impact
and alter our own personal opinions, views, and standards.
The idea that art can alter or impact
people on a personal level is widely accepted. But it is widely debated whether
art can lead to social or political action. Deborah Dague-Barr, who holds a Masters Degree of Fine Art, wrote an
article titled “The Power of Art in Society.” When she first starts discussing
her opinions on art and the influence it has it society, she says, “Art can have an
impact on consciousness. It allows for ways of looking at and thinking about
life that may not be tolerated in the social and political paradigm of a given
society, and this freedom to converse and reflect allows artists to bring public
attention to areas of concern. Art and artists can—and do—make
contributions that help focus awareness on needed social changes.”
Banksy is known for creating bold pieces of
graffiti art that are fraught with political statements, yet most recognize him
more for his art than for his political activism. Many appreciate Banksy’s art
and it may have effect on individuals, yet many could argue that it does not
create a social or political change because people only see him as an artist. However, his art is clearly a
manifestation of his political views. He says of his own work: "I like to think I have the guts to stand
up anonymously in a western democracy and call for things no-one else believes
in—like peace and justice and freedom."
It
is evident from the articles and quotes offered by these artists that art is
valuable and has a place in our world. Deborah Dague-Barr goes on to argue that
art is not a direct catalyst in political activism, but that “Art is emerging as
a tool that is deliberately and consciously used by certain artists who are
interested in contributing toward a greater understanding between people.
It may help in bringing about—at least in a small way—a greater understanding
of the dynamics of cultural and social paradigms. Art is another means of
helping people see and better understand the dynamics of our world and how
human consciousness impacts it at every level.”
While we’ve heard many arguments stating
that art only affects individuals, not societies, it must be noted that the two
are inextricably connected. To say that individuals are affected, not
societies, is fallaciously ignoring the tie between the two. Every society,
regardless of culture, political organization, or technology, is made up of the
dictates of individuals.
So, if that’s the case, Banksy is changing the world. Every individual
that is changed, whose mind opens a little bit more, who makes a more peaceful
choice because of Banksy’s work is proof enough. Change can only happen one
individual at a time. And with every individual who sees a Banksy work and does
something good as a result of it, the world is becoming a more peaceful place.