When Fashion Forgot about Art
Soho is a place where style meets fashion, and expression meets art, but the two correlations rarely meet in the minds of shoppers who flock to this iconic district of Manhattan day after day. It’s on those rough brick walls of the derelict buildings and abandoned doors to emptiness that we see some of the most original and purest art. Strolling down the cobblestone road, the average “fashionista” dangles her designer handbag around her forearm, and in the other hand she carries a black rectangular paper-bag, marked “Jimmy Choo”, her most recent purchase. She quickly paces between the vintage yet chic brick buildings on the look out for Ralph Lauren. She spots the iconic polo logo poking around the corner, without giving the slightest glance to the art piece painted on the walls of the building next to her. Upon finally noticing the hastily written scrawls of words to her right, she rolls her eyes at it and continues on with her frantic yet elegant catwalk towards the famous American boutique. The artworks on these crumbling buildings are often overlooked, let alone appreciated in a world dominated by art’s younger sibling: fashion.
Why are we so indifferent or have such distaste towards public paintings? Are we talking about graffiti or murals? Is there even a difference? Let me explain.
The word “graffiti” often carries a negative connotation. People usually perceive graffiti as illegal and associates it with gangs or criminal activity because the act itself is deemed a crime. Graffiti is commonly understood as paintings on walls of words that are nearly incomprehensible and against the social norm. Murals, on the other hand, have a much more positive association. They usually include content that are more of objects than words. They typically reflect and unite communities by serving as the symbols of the area. The public and authorities often endorse murals because they are viewed as signs of appreciation for art amongst the citizens. Despite the polarizing views on graffiti and murals, they are merely mediums for artists to convey their emotions and social messages. There are such heavy regulations against these public paintings, especially graffiti art, that people have regarded the entire range of these public artworks in a bad light, resulting in our apathy and often aversion toward the art. Even when artists deliver very insightful and positive messages to the public, authorities continue to limit artists by removing their public artworks, judging them not by their content, but by their cover. Despite being somewhat true that certain paintings signify criminal activities or purposely deface property, this sense of judgment has dominated the public’s conception and the meaningful artworks are there to suffer the consequences.
All of us were taught this in kindergarten; don’t judge a book by its cover. But why is that not the case? “LOVE ME” (in the figure above), for example, appears on a red brick wall of a SoHo building, underneath it is a section we would typify as “graffiti”. When we compare the two dramatically different styles with our experiences, it’s quite easy to discern the graffiti lettering from the non-graffiti style. However, if we follow the criteria of civic authorities, two simple words “LOVE ME” would be deemed illegal just like their graffiti neighbours below. How does two innocent, affection provoking words call for removal? We see that the authorities are clearly more concerned about the styles of the paintings rather than their content or underlying messages. They are missing the point. The primary intent of these public artworks is to deliver a message, not to arouse debate of its style or form.
So instead of judging these public paintings by their appearances, let’s examine them from a subjective point of view and find some appreciation for its content and message that people are obviously not getting. Speaking from our own experiences, regardless if we are fashion conscious or not, we go to SoHo for the primary purpose of dipping our feet in one of the most iconic fashion districts in the world. So from the start, artists already have a disadvantage because they have to compete for the attention of viewers against the allure of luxury brands. In addition, the viewers’ predisposition is already trained on the shops rather than the art works. The command “LOVE ME”, written in imperative form, is there to ask for a little consideration from passersby. By capitalizing the letters, the artist further emphasizes his or her demand for the public’s affection towards the art. When already painted in such a bad light by public perception, all the artists want is for viewers to give the art form a little love, a sliver of appreciation. We can see that from the point of view of looking at the painting merely of its existence and style, the authorities can justifiably remove it on the grounds that it resembles graffiti. However by taking the words of the painting for their meaning rather than appearance, and understanding our conceptions of public artworks, we can have a more positive opinion on the art’s presence because we can comprehend its underlying message. That is only if people gave them a chance.
By examining this very peculiar public painting on Lafayette Street, we can further corroborate the artists’ well-put intentions. This painting depicts a woman with long orange hair, bright red lips, and sugar white teeth. In the foreground lie abstract shapes and many indiscernible objects that make up the overall strangeness and randomness of this painting. This is a microcosm of the human-art relationship in SoHo, that shoppers often ignore the artworks because they are not easily understood. Not only that, but many are seen as acts of vandalism rather than works of art, a huge misunderstanding as a result of our social perceptions heavily influenced by authorities. Looking back at the subject, her mouth is opened wide like she is letting out a scream, almost as if crying to the shoppers and authorities to “LOVE ME”, pleading for their appreciation towards her and the art she represents. The pain on the subject’s face symbolizes the cry of the artists, making the message even more personal to the viewer. The subject carries the point further through her fashionable looks in her bright red lipsticks, and long flowing orange hair, resembling a typical female shopper that would walk through SoHo. Comparing the two artworks, the words “LOVE ME” explicitly demand the reader while the female subject illustrates the same command but to the viewer. The two artworks appeal to two separate senses: a literal sense, and a personal sense.
Even though SoHo is regarded as a place where style meets fashion and expression meets art, reality is that the two separate correlations rarely intersect. Looking back at the painting with the orange-haired girl, we notice a hand painting on the hood above her head. This image perfectly summarizes art’s struggle for love from viewers and authorities. The hand: artists, works hard to secretly stroke the paint brush on the light blue hood, a piece of fashion, adorned over her orange hair, symbolizing the hopeful recognition of art from fashion. It is a correlation that traverses yet neglected by many. In SoHo, a district renowned for its sense of style, its sense of fashion, and its sense of art, the artists plead for a reunion and the public’s recognition of art alongside its long lost sibling: fashion. The artists revealed to us just how close-minded we are to ideas outside of those we already endorse, and how we judge things before we even give them a chance.
The implications of these public paintings are extremely powerful because they are so accessible. Anyone can view the artworks without having to pay a fee and can admire it for as long as they would like. For the authorities to take away such a privilege is not only condemning to artists but also to the citizens who could use a little divergence from our uncompromising lifestyles.
Art, more specifically public art, which includes graffiti and murals, is something that is used by artists to convey their emotions or messages to the public. Despite rules set out to minimize much of today’s public paintings, artists continue to share and express their opinions without fear. As the public, we should step away from our predispositions and rules of authorities and lean on the side of the artists. We should view their messages with consideration because artists often make very insightful observations on society and shed light on certain flaws of our daily lives that we would otherwise be unconscious of. The paintings discussed revealed our closed-mindedness on everything surrounding us; we have become much too obsessed with fashion, and unquestionably followed the rules of authorities that we became completely ignorant of much of today’s meaningful public art. In a place like SoHo, where style meets fashion, and expression meets art, we need to explore the latter just as much as the former because we would otherwise be missing out.