As an American
Jew I heard a lot about the First and Second Intifada, however I was unaware of
the role graffiti played in allowing Palestinians to express their opinion. It
was stated that the “Palestinian community thought out loud in graffiti. Issues of gender, religion, and
politics were charted and debated.”
I thought it was really interesting that the situation made Palestinians
inclined to break the law in order to express themselves. The article stated numerous times that
in the morning the graffiti would be covered up, however I am curious whether
or not Israelis often responded to the graffiti with their own graffiti.
I also found it
interesting that “on occasion graffiti proclaimed the unity in resistance of a
spatially and experimentally fragmented community.” I understand that using graffiti as an outlet helped
unite Palestinians, however it was erased in the morning and didn’t create any
permanent change. I am curious
what particular aspect of expressing themselves through graffiti created the
sense of unity. Was it simply
having an outlet? Or was it that it created a sense of optimism and hope that
the occupation would end?
It also
fascinated me when the article mentioned that “a writer and scholar explained
that he paid particular attention to the graffiti as he rode in the shared taxi
in the morning. He found it useful in getting a reading of the street.” I was
surprised to come across the fact that the graffiti itself was able to depict
the situation and communicate it so effectively. It is also very impressive that this art was done in a way
that caused people to respond. It
was mentioned that “for one elderly lady I used to visit in Jerusalem graffiti
was often a point of departure for political discussions with her children.”
Lastly I found
it interesting that Israelis reacted to the graffiti in different ways. “Some soldiers read them as defiance to
be met with a violent response.
For others their presence and content reaffirmed the sense that it was
time to withdraw from the territories- to heed the writing on the walls.” To me
this shows that the graffiti did in fact have the strong influence that it was
after.
Robyn,
ReplyDeleteI was thrown off a little bit by the perception of the graffiti and the role it has played since the separation barrier was built. I think your questions at the end of the second paragraph are very interesting and worth discussing. I think there are strong elements of both while I would think the latter would be the more prominent opinion.
I was interested by your question about why graffiti united Palestinians even though it was painted over the following day. I think that it was the act of painting the graffiti that served as an outlet for Palestinian emotions. It didn't really matter if the pieces were covered up. Working together to express ideas was an effective unifying action. Most people will not violently resist occupation, so painting graffiti is an easy way to express emotions.
ReplyDelete