Introduction.

Problem.

The Position of graffiti.

Categories of graffiti.

Stylistic forms.

Quality, and how to recognize it when you see it, and no its not necessarily a device of imperialists.

The importance of site.

Conclusion.

As a practicing graffiti artist of 14 years, I find myself in a situation where there is little critical writing about the artform I am involved in. The little writing that does exist, uses no language in which to adequately describe or critique the work. In fact there are even no distinctions made between different types of work and different types of practice. This absence is even more noticeable considering how visible this artform is. Any major city throughout what is commonly referred to as the west has large number of graffiti works within its borders. Yet look through any standard text on the history of 20^th century art and you will find little or no mention of this artform, derogatory or otherwise.

My interest is in developing the existing critical and historical framework into which graffiti falls.

This is with a view to produce terms and criteria that is relevant to reading graffiti work and subsequently my work. I hope to expand this existing framework to include a better understanding of the formal qualities that are the central to this artform. Enabling a decoding of the formal qualities that distinguish works that are well executed, displaying a high degree of technique and with internal logic and integrity. I do not wish to be restricted to revealing a totally formal review of the field however, and I will briefly discuss the importance of site and its political implications.

It is extremely unhealthy for an art form to exist with no critical language and little or no critical writing. With no self-defined language to discuss graffiti art with, the high brow art world has an inability to process the achievements of the graffiti artist, and in part this leads to its marginalised position. From within the movement it leads to a situation where discussion of the work is little more than "yes that’s dope, yeah that’s fresh." The situation is little different outside of the art world and graffiti culture. I often find there to be an inability for readers/viewers to distinguish good graffiti art from bad. Of course this issue which holds true of other forms of modern and postmodern art.

The problem is somewhat made worse or more complicated, in that a number of long time practitioners prefer to not see themselves as artists or see the movement in that light. The self-referential term that is preferred is ‘writer’. The term writer is used "as it is what they do, they write their name". Early on writers such as PHASE 2 and other writers vehemently objected to the term graffiti artist. Both on aesthetic and political reasons. The term Urban Artist was used for a while, but was passed over once the United Graffiti Artist group disbanded in 1973. Since then the movement has been popularly referred to as Aerosol Art and for the purposes of a book by Henry Chalfant and Jim Prigroff as 'Spraycan Art'.

All names are problematic though. The name "Graffiti Art " is meant to refer to a very particular and deliberate painting movement but the word graffiti in the title binds it with all forms of graffiti. Being tied to all forms of graffiti disqualifies the movement from being a true Art. The paradox continues, as separating this particular school of New York based style graffiti form other forms of graffiti takes away some the power of the movement. The political power of "Graffiti Art" is its connection to illegality. This happens as it adds to the credibility of the movement from the view of the art world dependant on classifications for security. How a writer/artist describes the field they are involved in describes a lot about where their intentionalities lie. For now I shall refer to the movement now as "Graffiti Art" but hesitantly so.

I will begin by briefly siting graffiti within the grand (sic) narrative of western Highbrow art. This is not with the view to elevate graffiti, but to allow a future diagnosis of the colonialsation of graffiti and the subsequent misrepresentation of the artform. I will discuss references to aesthetics within graffiti art and then broaden the limited references I have found with the view to develop a language that appropriately describes aesthetics and criteria for quality judgment for a graffiti piece. I will then give an outline of the standard subcategories of this artform. In particular I will discuss the importance of tags; throw ups, pieces and burners. I will define criteria for discussing and appraising work and styles. I will then look at the importance of space and the politics of surveillance. Ending with an informal timeline on the chronological development of styles and shifts within this graffiti movement.

To situate graffiti within a western high brow framework is not difficult. There are few texts to examine and the position is almost completely uniform. The high brow interpretation can be surmised from a number of key texts. The primary of these is the New York City Museum of Modern Art's High and Low, numerous art magazines and journals such as Flash Art, Art in America. From these mainstream texts, graffiti art is a movement which started in New York in the early seventies by largely black and Hispanic youths which peaked both creatively and economically from 1982- 1984. A bunch of ghetto children that flowered briefly and then died off. All work since then derivative.

Contact with the high brow art world has been largely minimal or perhaps ineffectual. This contact has not always been seen as successful for either party. From the inside looking out, these gallery writers were seen by the less fortunate, less-talented or more 'hardcore' writers as sellouts. Often too the work suffered. Materially the work originated on a painting surface 20 metres long and 2 high. Not seen closely under bright gallery lights on small canvas supports. Similar to most site-specific work, if you remove the site the work suffers.

A number of early graffiti artists took different tangents when entering the high brow art world. The most successful stayed committed to styles they had developed within the graffiti framework; writers like Futura 2000 and Lee. The first graffiti exhibition was held by the United Graffiti Artist group in 1972. A second a year later did little over than gain a little media attention. This continued with periodic coverage in the media, mostly reports of costs to the M.T.A.. Until the early 1980's with the launch of the careers of artists such as DAZE, CRASH, FUTURA, LADY PINK, and LEE. Two years later nearly the same group exhibited in a show titled "Post Graffiti". The irony was not lost on some. However all these artists later returned even if briefly both to the subways and the streets.

The Highbrow art world makes little if no distinction between and within these different types of graffiti. This the most obvious faults in reading. From within the movement, stylistically there has been a number of periods seen as high points and a number of artists who are recognized as pioneers or artists of renown leading these innovations. I have a simple and brief outline of the implementations of stylistic devices and shifts. This is based around a chronological timeline. Of course, as with most history there is rarely fixed specific position for developments, but we date the actual painting of these developments. This dating process can usually only be within a month or so of the actual painting. Very few writers date pieces and it was until 1974 that pieces were commonly dated by the year. These pieces were dated as buffing made the birth and now death of a piece important to the artist.

This timeline has often been discussed but as far as I know has never been mapped. Certain writers like Blade kept a clearer track of developments but largely documentation is vague and based on conversation and collected memory. Writers like Phase 2 and Blade often disagree over the invention of certain styles and certain developments started independently. We will look at these sub-genres soon. For now let us begin with the classification of graffiti.

There are five main types of graffiti. It is the first category, which interests us and we will only briefly look at the other four. Stewart puts forward five classifications for different forms of graffiti; 1. Agnomical, 2. Amorous, 3. The obscene, erotic and scatological, 4. Intellectual, limericks, folk wisdom and homilies and the fifth category is the Political, the religious or social. Stewart acknowledged that work often transgressing these definitions. As I will show New York style subway graffiti often contains aspects of the later four as well.

The category Agnomical refers to first names, initials, nicknames, coded identities. The category Amorous describes work that ranges from names carved in a tree to codified notes of homosexual beats of inner city parks. The obscene, erotic and scatological is a categorical definition which is self-defining. So to is the political, religious and social category. My favorite example of this group is Australia's own Eternity. Eternity, like Kilroy of the "KILROY WAS HERE" fame is an example the graffiti artist being recognized as an identity outside of his/her location, prior to the 1970's. Although this was not the makers original intention.

Agnomical graffiti is the most common of all forms of graffiti. This form is found on the school desks of the world, backs of bus seats and prison cells throughout the world. It is graffiti, which signifies a name, or identity of an individual or particular group. To write the name scratching, cutting, drawing, painting, and spraying can do so. Stewart makes an interesting distinction with forms of Agnomical graffiti. This is linear work from non-linear. Non linear work is the writing of a name, nickname or coded identity written randomly, in terms of planning and site. Non-linear sites are commonly toilets or parks. Linear works follows a line of some sort, commonly a train-line. Other lines though are commonly bus lines or paths to schools or train yards.

I am interested in a particular type of Anomical graffiti. This form which started like the others, as relatively random placement of signatures and grew into the largest art movement of the 20^th century. This form has a number of names as previously discussed but I shall use the name most popularly used- Graffiti Art. The name like the movement has no specific single starting point, but it can be linked to Taki 183. Taki was the first New York based graffiti writer to gain recognition from his Agnomical graffiti. He was a courier and he frequently traveled on the rail system as a job requirement. Along the way he left his signature, his tag 'Taki 183' all over NYC and its trains Once the New York Times published an article in 1970 about Taki, the movement truly had been born and given its official birth certificate and name.

Classifications of formats with graffiti

This whole movement was started with the tag. A tag is someone's assumed identity, the coded name. Tagging is the writing of that assumed identity. Every graffiti artist starts his or her career with getting a tag name and then learning to develop a tag style to go with the name. This name is chosen either by the writer or it is an extension of a mentor's name. It is this name, which is the core of graffiti, and the tag is the quickest and simplest representation of this coded identity. The tag is the subject matter, the structure of the art that is graffiti art. The work of the graffiti artist revolves around the development of the name. A tag is the one colour signature of the graffiti artist and their identity.

The tag name can be chosen for an infinite number of reasons. Often the name is chosen as a form of word play; KSINO, CRASH, BAN 2, DMOTE. Sometimes it is to indicate lineage i.e.; T-KID who is a protégé of Tracy 168. A name can be chosen due to preference for certain letters and letter combinations; A and E are preferred to U amongst vowels for instance. This is largely due to preferences in aesthetics with letters, rounded versus pointed. Kudos is given for having a cool name but it is what you do with it that matters. Style wise and otherwise. It seems to me a logical development of late capitalism that the artist late in the 20th century should use the name as the central theme for the work produced.

It is quite common that after tagging the same name for a while the artist inevitably retains a certain signature style, even if this is perceived as bad. After working on the tag form for an indeterminate period the writer inevitably begins on developing a piece style. This process might involve working on throw ups first or straight into rounding out the tag into a piece form. Transference occurs either way and the tag form is often the starting point of an outline or throw-up sketch. If the style is a throw up style the tag is rounded out into a throw up. If it is a piece style

the tag is enlarged and blocked out. The enlarged tag form is then refined with the use of stylistic devices called bits, half caps, arrows, chips and cuts.

How does one judge the quality of a tag? I believe that similar criteria to the critique of calligraphy should be used. A tag is a calligraphic form and volumes could be written on the calligraphic qualities that this work has introduced. The artist Ramellzee introduced the use of calligraphic naming devices and his own personal extensions of these terms to describe features of tagging and piece styles. These language he developed is a deeply personal one and almost illegible to outsiders. Flow is a common term, applicable both to tags and pieces. It describes the harmonic usage of curves and the ability of the letters to flow into each other when reading. A good tag or piece is said to 'flow'. The flow of a tag or piece is broken by excessive ornamentation, disjointed lines and line work or poor paint work. Writers also describe flow as 'funk' in certain groups. The opposite is also true though. Innovation is just as important to the tag form as other forms within graffiti art.

The 'Throw-up' is defined as "a name painted quickly with one layer of spray paint and an outline. Historically the throw up followed the tag in terms of formal invention. The tag, which is done with one colour, was then outlined with another colour to become a throw up and the start of the first masterpiece. In fact, a throw up is more likely to only be one or two letters from the tag name. The letters chosen are either the first two or the first and last letters of the name. A throw up is the extended painting of an abbreviated form of the tag name. Only very occasionally are all the letters from the tag name are painted. The purpose of the throw up is to use little paint in putting up your name. A throw-up stands out more than a tag, but a lot less than doing a piece. It is not however a sketch for the piece.

Visually a throw up can be distinguished by its simplicity in colour and design. Reductive in nature, a throw up is often a bubble-like rendering of each of the letters that are chosen to be the short hand reference to the tag name. A throw up is meant to be thrown up, quickly and large. The standard dimensions are one arms length square for each letter. Although some throw ups have been done that are two stories high. The throw up is often the seen as a non-essential item in the repertoire of the writer.

A throw up will rarely be more than two colors, a colour to fill in with and an outline color. If it is multi-coloured it will usually be due to the use of dregs of paint after a bombing mission. Certain writers will use the last of their paint after a bombing mission on throw-ups rather than risk taking the paint out of the train yards or spot. Carrying the near empty spraycans home, can be evidence of painting activity, if picked up by police. A throw up is usually done in two ways if painted with two colours. An outline is made with the fill colour, then filled in and an outline is made with a secondary and clashing colour. Or if the writer chooses, perhaps for speed, they might outline the throw-up with the outline colour and then fill between the lines with the base coat.

The fill can be done in a number of methods- straight solid fill with a fatcap, one line crossing back and forth within each letter or rough and raw. The one line continuing through each letter tends to create a illusionist effect, which adds a rounded feel to the throw-up letter. This method is also a quick way to fill the letter. Solidly filled throw ups are used when there is an excess of paint or when the surface to which the throwup is going onto is already bombed. If the surface is already bombed the throw up must be filled in to stand out against the background.

The outline of a throwup must be done to appear if not to be one hit. ‘One-hit’ is a shorthand term for describing the process of painting a form like the outline or highlights in one hit. That is in long strokes running from point to point rather than short strokes joined together to define the line. The filling of the throw up should be or appear to be one hit. The continual back and forth should also be done to create a rounding effect, which further pushes the throwup of the surface. (See illustration).

Qualities particular to good throw ups is the same as criteria for all graffiti- can control, innovation in design elements, innovative use of colour and position and the ability to ‘get up’, that is to be prolific. Qualities which are particular to throw ups is mass simplicity. A throw up should be no more than two colours and should be as simple as possible. The idea is to cause damage or to 'bomb' with a throw up. Overworking the throw up form is usually bad. Good throw-ups look simple and quick to paint, but must be well proportioned. All curves should be smooth and continuous. Each letter should be of similar size and weight.

Innovation within this form includes the use of drip designs, the use of the swastika as the center of a letter by REAS. This was an element designed to draw negative attention to his throwup. The use of only one line throw-ups. This type of throw-up is outlined in one consistent line. Other innovations include positioning of the throw-up i.e.; upside down and the numbers of throw ups done can also be seen as an innovation. For instance, the writer/bomber JA set a record for doing 100 metres of filled in throw-ups in a row in the popular LA river system.

It took a while stylistically for the throw up to take a place of its own. And many writers lamented the use of throw-ups as they covered many tags as well as cluttered the painting surface for writers interested in producing pieces. That was until a guy like IN produced 10 000 in a relatively short period, on New York trains and forced them forward as an undeniable presence. Acknowledged kings of throw-ups include the previously mentioned IN, as well as writers like BLADE and COMET and CAP. CAP ONE Morris Park Crew was notorious for going to war with most graffiti writers in the early and mid-eighties and crossing out writers work by going over them with his throwup and then intentionally leaving the piece sticking out to heighten the insult. In fact crossing out is commonly referred to as capping outside on New York City.

The term piece is applied to all graffiti paintings that are more than tags or throw-ups. The term is shorthand for masterpiece. The masterpiece was the third major step in the stylistic evolution of New York based graffiti. This step was achieved when the writer SUPERKOOL 223 added a fat cap to his spray can when tagging. The resultant tag was enlarged and then outlined to create the first piece. He quickly did another piece after this first piece and embellishments were added. The masterpiece was born, although it took a little while to gain popularity. Some writers saw that the paint used to produce one piece could be better used producing hundreds of tags.

For a painting to be considered a piece it must have at least two colours and have letter styling which has more effort put into it than a throw-up. Usually though a piece will have a minimum of an outline colour, a fill colour, a background colour and a highlight color. The main visual differences between a throw-up and a piece, is that a piece is filled completed and that the letters are more clearly defined. A throwup is usually only one or two letters out of the tag, while a piece is nearly always the full name.

I believe the appropriation and shortening of the term masterpiece is intuitively a critique of the high art gallery system. A system where the idea of masterpiece is heavily tied in with the traditional notion of genius, connoisseurship and the monetary value of an artwork. In graffiti every painting is referred to as a piece and therefore as a masterpiece. A burner is the colloquial term used by writers to describe a well-executed piece or a masterpiece in the traditional sense.

Henry Chalfant's definition of a burner is "a well-done wildstyle window down wholecar. A burner is a winner." I believe and have found the term regularly used to describe any well executed piece though, not just window down wholecars. A burner is called such because it burns all competition or the space it is sited in. To be a true burner like any good artwork, all aspects of the piece must be finely executed and have an internal logic. These aspects include the outline, the fill, the cloud or background, the final outline and highlights as well as suitability of the site. I will now briefly outline each of these aspects with a description of criteria for judging each.

The first outline is often a term for the original sketch on which the painting is based as well as the process to its translation to the train or wall. The importance of a good sketch is essential but just as important is the ability to transfer it faithfully. If this process is poorly executed the whole piece will be ruined. The first outline process is successful if the artist or writer transfers accurately the design or if the artist actually adds to the design potential of the space the work is situated in. The first outline is also call the 'mark up".

The 'fill-in' or 'fill' is the term used to describe the decorative colors used inside of the outline of the letters. It is added after the first outline is completed. There are an infinite number of fills available although a number of formats are extremely popular. A very common fill used in graffiti is the two or three colour fade with a one, two or three colour overlay added. BATES is a master writer who commonly uses this formula. Either way a writer can be recognized solely for ability as a colourist or for the ability to produce an unusual or individualistic fill. The fill in alone is not enough to produce a burner.

A good fill you must have a cohesive internal logic, the painting must be solid and not at all opaque. There must be no unintentional drips. If a common decorative fill like a two-color fade is used it will never be a burner but it may be viewed as good if it is an unusual and well-executed blend. A blend is a common technique and much like chiaroscuro, this technique must be undetectable. The blend is a technique, which is usually, learnt early in a writers repertoire but few writers master it. I believe that this technique is popular as it allows stolen paint, which is often, hodgepodge to be used together in a piece.

If the fill-in is to be a collection of grid-like lines then they all should be consistent and even in thickness. If a chrome effect is chosen it must be convincing. It is very common that each letter will be filled with the same fill-in. This is to say if a two color fade is being used it will be used in each letter. If a chrome fill is used it will be used in every letter. Like all rules, the intentional breaking of this aesthetic rule can bring delightful results. A writer renown for this is SENTO and he is one of the most conscious style manipulators and will often have differently styled letters as well as fill-ins. (See illustration)

The cloud is often a generic term to describe the background of a piece, but it specifically referring to a particular background type. That is usually circular formations of colour much like a simple drawing or iconic drawing of a cloud that a name sits on or in. Occasionally the cloud is a mixture of the circular cloud formation and other decorative elements likes stars. The cloud can also be composed entirely of these same decorative elements, a cloud of stars for instance. It is probable that the cloud concept was appropriated straight from the comics.

The cloud is often painted after the first outline is filled in and normally before the final outline is started. Some train writers though apply both the decorative aspects of the fill and the background after the final outline and highlights have been added. This is so that if the painting process is interrupted the writer will have their name at least finished. An incomplete panel is often seen to be more frustrating than no panel at all. A matter of bravado.

To distinguish a good cloud from bad, the normal critical considerations such as good can control, innovative colour combinations and clear execution of idea apply. A cloud should also always completely cover any tags, throw ups or pieces underneath it. It is a disrespect to leave another writer’s work half-covered, a constant reminder of the work lost. This can often result in a conflict situation, which may be resolved in a number of ways.

Perhaps the difference between a good cloud and a badly painted cloud is best seen on the back cover of the book Subway Art. Let us compare the cloud forms used on the panel that says 'PYSCHO" to the 'PAIN' panel. The ‘PSYCHO’ has used the mid-blue and sky blue combination for the cloud with great effect. Note how the Grey keyline also breaks into a cloud effect in some places. The cloud falters in that it doesn't completely cover the throw up underneath and this distracts from the whole piece itself, but overall very nice.

The cloud background on the 'PAIN' panel however is as poorly executed, as is the rest of the panel. The white is of poor quality and therefore has a Grey hue, which reduces the pop effect. The tags add a craziness to the cloud which is dreadful, especially when compared to the elegant and restrained tag styles of SEEN who did this 'PSYCHO". The half circles are poorly formed, and the dark blue used to outline the white for the cloud is only one line and barely visible. It does not create an illusionist of popping the panel piece. As the dark blue for the bottom of the two colour fade fill is the same as the blue used to outline the cloud the contrast is lost. Compare that to the way in which SEEN's use of Orange and Pink contrast to his cloud therefore producing a more energetic and easily registered piece. Note to the smooth blend of his two colour fade compared to the 'Pain' as well. In fact this piece is a good example of a well-executed public style piece by a master.

Simplicity is a key factor to distinguishing a good cloud. Overworking of the format is easy and lessens the effect. A cloud is usually one or two colours. A master will usually use two or three colours. The number of colours is usually related to the number of colours used in the fill-in. A silver piece only requires a one-colour cloud to bounce or vibrate off. Other effects that are added to clouds or used similarly to the cloud are stars or drips.

A background is the picture plane onto which the piece is grounded. The background is the rest of the painting other than the piece itself. The outside keyline is also part of the background. The background was originally a device to cover up other paintings on the train behind the piece. By 1973 in New York City the trains were so heavily bombed that a cloud or background was used to allow the piece to be distinguished from the rest of the work on the train. The use of background is seen by certain writers, as arbitrary. To produce a true burner though the background should be as considered as the piece. The background should never be more considered than the letter forms though. Graffiti art should always be primarily a concern with the development of letter styles and a primary emphasis on background nearly always results in a reciprocal loss in energies on letter styles.

There are a number of approaches to background and each approach indicates the pictorial concerns of the writer/artist. If a figurative illusionistic device is used such as a landscape, it is often used as it is chosen to pander to the public taste. Most writers avoid this cliched and often kitsch picture device preferring to work in an abstract way. Working with abstract and iconic bodies of colour to create vibrations with flat colour planes. Either in the cloud format as described previously, or in a number of other ways. These decorative devices include rectangular planes of colour, flames or colour bands. Sometimes however figurative elements like bricks and rocks are used in a semi-abstract way. A visual pun. In fact clouds in general can be seen in this way.

Over the last ten years there has been an upsurge in writers using illusionistic landscape devices in their backgrounds. This largely is a result of trends started by writers like LOOMIT. LOOMIT makes a living from painting murals and as such his vocabulary of landscape and figurative imagery is extensive. The use of landscapes in his painting is commonly seen as a co-option. A compromise between the commissioner of the piece, the artist and an understanding that the work must suit the owner more.

Shines or stars are the graphic device used to represent reflected light, a star or a form of radiant light. It is a painting device appropriated from airbrushed artwork and from the comic books. In fact it is a device which is common in a number of popular cultural forms in particular signwriting since the 1950's. It is a device used in a number of ways; as a convention to be played with, a device to create dynamism or a device that works in the same way as the bright lights found in Las Vegas. The term ‘shine’ is often used to describe inside highlights, especially when applied to one side of letterforms. (See illustrations)

A well-executed shine will have no visible drips and will create a reasonable shine effect. This shine effect is best described as a graphic note referring to the idea of light reflecting on the side of the letterform. The shine will use straight lines where they are appropriate, and will have a consistency of thickness in the line work. Like all design elements overkill lessens the effect. Shines are often used to disguise a fault in the high light line work, a wobbly section, a drip or broken line work for example. Usually the width of the line in a shine should be as thin as possible. The line work should never get thicker at the ends or tips of the shine.

Some formats you will find the shine comes include the four point star, the eight point compass style, double star, the glimmer and the big shine. The four-point star is just two lines intersecting at the center point of both. A puff of paint is often overlaid onto the intersection point of this star. The eight point compass style is similar to the four-point star except that it has four lines used. Usually like a compass though it has four points further extended than the others.

The Double star is much like the eight point compass except that the North, West South and East points are doubled up. The glimmer has a solid center with a faded outer ring, basically a dot much like a star as seen in a science book. The big shine is rarely used and it is an star of exaggerated size, usually in the four-point format. It is not very common, as it is difficult for most writers to produce long and straight lines.

Two types of highlights by Bates

The 'keyline' is the line, which runs around the outside of the piece. It is also referred to as the outside highlight. It is similar to the inside highlight in that its purpose is to 'pop' the piece. That is to push the letterform off the vertical picture plane and the background. A keyline is often used to sharpen and accentuate the final outline. Occasionally the keyline is repeated and used in a similar ways as action or movement is drawn in comic books.

Although the keyline is not essential to executing a masterpiece, it is usually used. Variation with the keyline format is also expected with all good writers. Variations include the repeated keyline, a device often used by cartoonists, the radio wave within the keyline as by SENTO, the broken dot keyline that CES from Rotterdam made popular. BATES used a Mondrian like grid format extension to the keyline as shown here. (See illustration)

The outline, keyline and highlights should all be done to appear to be done in one hit. 'One hit' is a term used to describe getting it right first time. The logic is if an any aspect has to be redone it obviously indicates a lack of skill. Any reworking of the painting is usually detectable to the eye. Aerosol is a medium that is hard to be precise with and the reworking of an inside highlight is easily spotted, for instance. The width of the lines will blow out at the point of intersection. One line often thicker than the other line. The reworking any of these features decreases the funk of the piece, although good writers can usually hide any design faults. The logic extends back to the painting of trains, where time and getting it right first time. It is this raw quality that is appreciated.

The main categories of styles for pieces are commonly known as publics, semi-public, wildstyle, semi-wild style, blockbuster, straight letter and abstract. It is normal for a writer to be proficient in one style. A good writer will have the ability to an individual style in the public, semi-wild and wildstyle format. A great writer, a supreme stylist or colloquially the 'KING OF STYLE". Two kings of styles are SEEN and BATES. Both are proficient in all styles.

‘Public style’ is read easily by the public. Legibility is the key to this style. All aspects of this style are geared towards legibility or at least not to hinder legibility. This style is like signwriting in its look and intentions. There is an emphasis on name recognition. Good examples of public styles are "SWEET", "DUDE", "RANDY" and "PSYCHO" (See Illustration). A public style is the most likely of all styles to produce the fame effect amongst the general public. It is also seen as the easiest of styles to be done.

Within the genre ‘public’ style there is a number of formats. These forms are many and include straight letter styles, creeper style (based on the common dripping styles of horror comics and the font), Western Saloon, or Bubble letter. The most popular straight letter style is the blockbuster. So popular in fact it really is its own genre within graffiti styles. ‘Straight letter’ styles are just that, letters with frameworks based solely on straight letters. A style that uses straight letters are usually based on standard and common signwriting text styles i.e. a popular font is a version of the Arial Black bold. A good example of straight letter style is the "OCHYSP" end to end Car No. 7897. A poorly executed straight letter piece is the piece that reads as "PAIN".

Writers trying to develop their own vocabulary within the public style lettering, often find the straight letter format too restrictive. Many writers work in looser public formats. These styles are still similar to signwriting but often much more bilious. Often with devices attached to the framework called chips or cuts. (see illustration). These chips or cuts are intended to add a technical degree to the piece, as well being used for composition devices, filling in spaces within the design. Excessive use of chips or any of these devices is seen as bad, for reasons of convolution.

Any cluttering with decoration is likely to decrease legibility. Good public styles must be legible. This is the key. All aspects of this style must be geared towards this goal. From there the work is judged on the usual criteria; colour innovation, can control etc and as always the funkiness of the piece. Writers rarely stay within this genre. It is usually a style, which is preferred by inexperienced writers, as it tends to be a middle ground stylistically. Politically as well it tends to be less confrontational in that it doesn’t alienate its audience with illegibility. As with all artforms, political and social power depends largely on the practitioner.

A blockbuster style is a very common straight letter style. The name blockbuster is taken from the movie expression and perhaps a rehash of the term ‘blockbuster sale’ or 'blockbuster' movie. The blockbuster is similar to the throw up in that simple and usually minimal in colour use. Writers like BLADE were the first to use the blockbuster style of lettering. It was an effort to gain quick name recognition and to cover up the work of other writers. Writers commonly see it as a lesser letter style because of its reductive nature. It is often seen as a minimalistic style in that style is reduced to essences.

A good blockbuster like all other formats needs good can control, consistency of fill-in, etc. It must have even and straight letters. Consistency of line and line angle is the easiest guide to distinguishing a good blockbuster style piece. If there is any kinks or bends in the line work it is easily spotted as being inferior. Innovations in the blockbuster style are uncommon due to the reductive nature of the style. There are a number of examples of innovation including the reverse letters used by Seen (see illustration), the hollow blockbuster style I use (which was first drawn but never painted by SENTO) and the double wholecars by BLADE and COMET where size is the innovation. Nearly all writers try painting a blockbuster style of some sort, in their career. The opposite of the blockbuster is the wildstyle.

'Wildstyle' was a term coined by the writer Tracy 168. It is term that refers to a piece which is a deliberately painted in an illegible and complex fashion. To achieve this effect the letter is stripped down to its essential flow and framework and then elaborated on by a variety of methods. End points are exaggerated and arrows are added to these points to increase the sense of dynamism. The letters might be cut and sectioned beyond recognition, as seen in the popular ‘Computer Rock’ style of KASE 2. Another style is the spaghetti style where the letters are sliced and formed into skinny and rounded shapes that read like spaghetti. The letter is cut into slices that are interlaced and interplay between letters is encouraged within the wildstyle format.

Exaggeration and interconnecting letter play is the key to a good wildstyle piece. This interplay between letters is often referred to as the flow of the piece. A wildstyle piece generally uses a number of arrows and arrowheads to create an indication of letter flow and to create energy. A well-executed arrow will exaggerate the flow of the lines. Writers generally accept that a good writer will have a good wildstyle piece in his repertoire. At the same time some well known writers solely concentrate on this genre. Usually due to the desire to keep the public on the outer of this culture. A wildstyle piece is guaranteed to be illegible except to other writers and to all but the trained eye. It is often the case that a writer who wishes to exaggerate their outsider position will use the wildstyle style.

If we look at the work of the once New York based writer such as DUSTER we can look distinguish a number of features we can decode as being features of a good wildstyle piece. Note the accentuated flow of the letters, the fill-in is dynamic it contributes to the effect. To judge a good wildstyle piece, look for the way that the arrows are used. If the arrow adds to the flow of the piece, if it creates a dynamic movement, the style is good. A good wildstyle reads as if the letters are arming themselves. Writers like Ramellzee encourage this position.

Arrows that are excessive or awkward are considered poor form. So too arrows which appear to be illogically placed. Other design faults are arrows, which do not increase dynamic letter flow, or go against letter flow. Outlines, which are lost in excessive fracturing or splicing or that are not clearly painted is also a design fault. Excess is encouraged with this style but excessive ornamentation takes away from this style. If the piece is erratic, without a consistent feel it is seen as poorly executed. Other signs include the loss of connection to original letter frame, erratically painted pieces without internal logic.

The fill-in of a wildstyle piece should accentuate the dynamic feel of the piece. For instance the fill-in should run parallel with the with the letter flow. This accentuates the ease in which the eye can follow the letter flow, allowing a sense of pace within the design. A polka dot fill for instance will reverse this effect in a piece. Usually a wildstyle piece is often filled in a way to accentuate the illegibility. Often though due to the complexity of this style a simple fill is chosen to reduce a complete loss of reading.

A wildstyle piece is often seen to mark resistance more than a public style piece. A wildstyle with its near illegibility creates a sense of alienation from the non-practitioner. The wildstyle piece from the point of view of name recognition alienates any audience it addresses. And it is here that I want to address the issue of the two types of writer, the writer after name recognition in particular or the writer who is more interested in new aesthetic developments for letters.

The two types of writer can be distinguished in a number of ways, although like all means of classifications there are transgressions. A writer who is after name recognition will usually work close to the golden rectangle format. Public style lettering is obviously used to aid name recognition. A character on either or both sides will be used commonly. The format is much like that of the billboard. This format can be seen as having the following features; product name, pictorial image i.e. model or product itself and the catchphrase. The standard size of a billboard is much like that of the side of a train. For writers from 1974 onwards the ideal size of a piece was a wholecar, just a fraction under 50 foot. The signification of this parallel has been largely ignored.

For writers around the world, New York based artists such as DERO and T-KID best exemplify the execution of a well-designed and painted ‘semi wild’ piece. The semi-wild has its framework in the writer's usual public letter-frame but it is slightly exaggerated to create a dynamic feel. To this framework a number of design elements are added. For example often three or less arrows are added on either end of the piece. This rule is a general rule but it is extremely common. The effect is that of an internal explosion exploding outward or to attack the other words and images around it.

Doc describes his use of arrows and the semi-wild format when battling the writer known as 'Staff' as "…definite Battle Style. This piece is so armed for warfare its ridiculous. This was a kamikaze run, and the sole purpose was to destroy all the other pieces next to it and itself." His piece says Arab and to the average graffiti writer is fairly legible. There are two inward facing arrows either side of the piece. The fill is kept simple and the inside red design work accentuates the letterforms. This red design work is developed with the use of iconic images attached to the ends of each line. A hand, a heart and an arrow are all clearly recognizable in the 'A' alone. Quite a good semi-wild, but not quite a burner. (See illustration)

Another good example of a well-executed semi-wild style piece is this DUSTER piece. (See illustration). The letter frame is easily read, as DUSTER. There are two arrowheads either ends of the piece, which elongate the piece and add a dynamic feel. The fill-in is simple, and the outline is kept clean and easily distinguishable from the background and fill-in. The Green 3d pushes the piece off the picture plane, that is the side of the train. Semi-wild pieces use the same criteria as other pieces for defining quality. The semi-wildstyle format is most popularly seen to exemplify New York style graffiti to the rest of the world.

There are almost as many different styles as there are writers. Commonly known styles include the 'Western Saloon', 'Melted Letters', 'Bubble style', and 'Cursive'. Writers like PHASE 2 have large numbers of wildly named styles. Styles found within tagging, as well as with throw ups are based on similar genres found in piecing such as public, wildstyle and semi wild.

The graffiti artist's relationship to space is the most tenuous and aggressive of all artists. The graffiti artist regularly risks life and limb in painting trains. I have personally, been hit once by a New York train in a minor mishap in the elevated letter lines in Queens, New York. This accident resulted in slight burning to my skin on my left hand and a small fracture in my left thumb. Never will I play the piano again. Police harassment, imprisonment and fines in the form of restitution and compensation are common deterrents against for the act of willful damage that is the graffiti writer's art.

With this in mind the quality of the work has a direct relationship with the site the work is situated in. The higher the security and state determination to control the space, which the work is, found on, the higher the respect for that work. Colloquially this is often referred to as the piece and the writer as being 'hardcore' or not. The key is the illegality of the action and respect is always given to a work, which is placed in a difficult location. The aesthetic value of a piece is also seen to be in a direct relationship with the difficulty of painting the site.

The degree of sophistication of the tag, throw-up or piece form is tied endemically to the perceived degree of rebellion or resistance. Time is usually required to paint a sophisticated style. Therefore a well-painted piece is perceived as requiring time and subsequently indicates a lack of surveillance and control by the various authority bodies overseeing the site. Style equals resistance. To put it simply, if a tag that is placed in a high security spot, it registers resistance. If the tag is poorly executed it can be read as hasty, and perhaps done be an individual without much forethought or by a young person. A well-executed tag shows talent, style, commitment and a determined resistance.

Overdoing the style can lessen the index of resistance. If a painting is too intricate it can produce the feeling of being situated in an easy spot. Complexity in design is seen as requiring time and therefore a complex piece can only be completed in an easy spot easily. That is to say if a piece in a hard spot is too intricate it can be read as an easy spot and therefore as somewhat less. Writers and graffiti artists appreciate the rawness of the medium and therefore appreciate the rawness of a simple piece.

The term 'hardcore' is not important here but rather the insistence on its idea. Each regional area has slight variations in terminology but what is important is whether the piece was legal or not and whether the writer concentrates on painting illegal or legal pieces. It is commonly seen that a strictly hardcore writer will only paint illegal pieces. Working on illegal work only is often seen to be keeping with the original idea of graffiti. The hardcore writer will also steal or appropriate his/her paint. This is a total negation of the usual capitalist processes for producing art; i.e. buying the paint, buying the canvas, rent the space to paint in and then finding a space to show in.

Your position as hardcore also carries through with shifts in your career. If you have a history of train painting, a wall painted by you has more value than a writer who only ever paints legal walls does. If you continue to paint trains or illegal pieces, however inconsistently, you will be held in higher regard than writers who only paint legally will. This is true from within the movement although the opposite is usually true from outsiders.

The opposite of the hardcore writer is the artist who sticks solely to legal work. This type of work includes youth programs, legal sites, advertising commissions, canvases and gallery work. A legal artist will only paint permission walls. I believe that if a writer has only ever-painted legal pieces, they are really muralists working in a graffiti style. The legal artist often has a certain 'welfare mentality' due to constant reliance on government grants and projects to receive their paint and a space to paint. This type of artist usually refers to themselves as 'Aerosol Artists'. Participation in illegal painting activities redeems an artist in the eyes of their peers though.

Criteria for the judging of quality in a 'Graffiti Art' piece, is very similar to a lot of criteria used in other forms of formal art criticism. Other types of critical readings can also be used and a combination of these methodologies is always preferable. For Graffiti Art is not just an art form, it is also a culture. To properly review the work one must consider each piece in its full context. If the residue of the painting process, the painting itself is to be critiqued, it can be done on formal qualities alone though. These qualities always include can control (the painter's hand), colour and other forms of stylistic innovation, flow, funk, the nature of the site and is the work of an illegal or legal nature. These qualities must be appropriate for the form that it is within 'Graffiti Art' and for the type of artist involved.