Lutz Henke on the significance of street art: ‘It’s absurd to pretend that it has never contributed to gentrification’
Fotos: Lutz Henke
First of all, this is always a question of definition that is as old as the term itself: What does street art even mean? In order to clarify the range, the juggler at the crossroads is often used, which is just as much street art as an unofficially applied sticker. At the same time, graffiti writing is usually also included. Personally, I would always say that although street art is usually ‘self-commissioned’, it is above all more appealing and accessible than subversive forms that are either activist or exclusively subcultural, especially to a subcultural readership.
Street art is therefore aimed at a wider audience. If you define it this way and understand it this way, then it is absurd to pretend that there has never been a contribution to gentrification or that the artists have even been ‘appropriated’. When it comes to the fighting concept of gentrification, the question arises again: How do you define and evaluate it? Is it a perfidious tool of capitalisation and displacement strategies operated from above, for example by property developers and governments?
Or do you consider factors, controlled and self-empowered, that contribute to a change in the attractiveness of urban spaces? It would be absurd to say ‘I act in public spaces, help to make them attractive, but I don’t want it to have a positive effect’. The decisive factor is rather an awareness of processes, one’s own actions and how I can possibly use this for positive development and protect it from misuse by third parties. That is also what will perhaps be exciting in our discussion.
@ba_eisermann
