Where have all the graffiti gone?

By Maria Nguyen

(Photo courtersy of Rap Dictionary)

The new feature idea I’m working on now is about the artists and ideas behind Regent Park’s murals. As you may or may not know, the murals are there to cover up the graffiti that were once plastered on the walls of the apartment buildings.

After many walks around the neighbourhood, even after I made a point to find these murals and their rival graffiti, I realized that I couldn’t find any so-called vandalistic tags.

The city of Toronto’s Graffiti Transformation program proves to be successful after all. Regent Park, despite its violent and troubled reputation, indeed looks clean, upbeat and happy, thanks to the murals.

But I was still curious about what the neighbourhood actually looked like before this ‘transformation.’ After a lot of searching on the Internet, I finally found photographs from this website that showed some graffiti before they were erased by landlords/city workers.

At the beginning of this project, I was actually kind of upset with the city for replacing graffiti art with murals. While the murals in Regent Park carry good messages and convey the values important to its residents, graffiti is an art form in itself and should not be erased just because a city wants to project a certain image for itself.

So I looked for a graffiti expert who could explain this whole business to me.

Dr. Doug Frayn, a retired UofT professor, psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and a graffiti scholar, articulated exactly what I had on my mind. He said, “replacing graffiti with murals sounds good but it also removes the spontaneous expressions of rebellion and voices that can’t be heard elsewhere!”

However, he explained the difference between graffiti and markers, and why some ‘graffiti’ are considered acts of vandalism. “Gang and Municiple ‘graffiti’ are not what I call legitimate graffiti; they are merely signage markers to tell you what gang district you are in and what local water, power, gas lines are present and where. All deface private property and unless there is some major social purpose or pleasure should be discouraged.”

Then he said something strikingly disturbing.

“The murals may just be more government pap in hopes that no one will be upset and it may look cute as in Norman Rockwell's paintings of an idealistic God-fearing America at peace and contented with the managed status quo.”

What we have here are very strong ideas put to action. On one hand, we have expressions inspired by feelings of dissatisfaction, grief, and whatever emotion inspires Regent Park’s youths to plaster names and messages on the walls. On the other hand, we have carefully thought out messages that benefit not only those expressing them, but the entire community. They are both cathartic, but the establishment only supports the latter.

How do YOU feel about this issue?