BEHIND CLOSED DOORS:

An analysis of contemporary graffiti writings in situ

from Sydneys recent urban past


Samantha EDWARDS-VANDENHOEK
Lecturer, The School of Communication Arts,
PhD candidate, University of Western Sydney
s.edwards@uws.edu.au


The act of archaeology constitutes objects for the formation of discourses about
absent or denied subjects, as a form of creative materialising intervention, which
has redemptive and therapeutic powers which helps individuals and communities
cope with painful contradictions that otherwise would remain unarticulated.
(Symonds 2004:36 paraphrasing Buchli and Lucas 1996:17)

This paper outlines some recent research into late 20thearly 21st century illicit graffiti
writings that occur within derelict buildings in the inner suburbs of Sydney, Australia. It
involves a site-specific investigation of the material record in situ, mapping the complex
spatio-temporal and socio-semiotic dimensions of these unsanctioned urban inscriptions.
Framing graffiti as inscription implicates the interconnectedness of both the material
writing surface (as palimpsest) and visual language. As such it also connects this
everyday practice to an occupational history and materiality that precedes and intertwines
with the conceptual and ideological space a graffer
1
is writing in and drawing on. The
spatial and temporal elasticity of urban graphic imagery and text is essentially an
archaeological concern. This is consistent with a methodological approach that
contributes to a growing body of literature (Orengo and Robinson 2008; Chmielwska
2007; McCormick and J arman 2005).

This paper attempts to reunite the disparate treatments of image and text, and of
representational and discursive forms in the analysis of graffiti writings. In doing so, this
work acknowledges that graffiti is a system rather than a symptom. It positions graffito
as a mentally constructed artefact of covert spatial behaviour and graffiti as a material
discourse that informs physical and sensory engagements within the built environment.
The visual culture of graffiti embodies very particular kind of energies and motivators.
This work emphasises its affective, subversive and transformative powers. It draws on
Piles notion of theatrical space, de Certeaus territorialisation of space and Butlers
theory of performativity in that it concerns how identities are constructed and
performed through stylised and repetitive spatial practices (such as tagging and
stencilling) that play out on an architectural stage. In this case, the stage for the graffer
manifests as boarded up building interiors in Sydneys inner suburbs.


1
Graffer is a colloquial expression used to describe someone who does graffiti - a writer, tagger and/or
bomber.
This paper goes on to consider how site visibility and accessibility impact on
signification. One ramification of urbanisation is the over abundance of human-made
space. Private property lies in wait for refurbishment, redevelopment or appropriation.
These empty and transient spaces are co-opted by graffers, not only as writing surfaces,
but also because they provide a relatively secure place to socialise and practice their craft
without the fear of prosecution. As a consequence, these writers may have a selective
audience in mind (primarily themselves and their peers). Rooms dedicated to pieces
2

signed by individual writers or collectives, and instances where poorly finished pieces
have been erased or censored by tagging form part of the discussion. To its end, this
paper supports the call for a more inclusive and diverse notion of cultural heritage that
incorporates the dynamic and fleeting expressions of the vernacular in the contemporary
past (Symonds 2004; Rathjes 2001).


Reference List
Buchli, V. and Lucas, G. (eds.) 2001. Archaeologies of the Contemporary Past. London
and New York: Routledge.
Butler, J . 1993. Bodies that Matter. London: Routledge.
de Certeau, M. 1984. The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Chmielwska, E. 2007. Framing Context: Graffiti and place. Space and Culture 10(2):
145-169.
Dew, C. 2007. Uncommissioned Art: An A-Z of Australian Graffiti. Victoria, Australia:
The Miegunyah Press.
Fortier, A.-M. 1999. Re-membering Places and the Performance of Belonging(s), in
Vikki Bell (ed.) Performativity and Belonging, 41-64. London: Sage.
McCormick, J . and J armon, N. 2005. Death of a Mural. Journal of Material Culture.
10(1): 49-71.
Orengo, H. A. and Robinson, D. W. 2008. Contemporary Engagements within Corridors
of the Past: Temporal elasticity, graffiti and the materiality of St Rock Street,
Barcelona. Journal of Material Culture 13(3): 267-286.
Pile, S. 1996. The Body and the City: Psychoanalysis, Space and Subjectivity. London:
Routeledge.
Rathjes, W. L. and Murphy, C. 2001. Rubbish! The Archaeology of Garbage. Tuscan,
AZ: University of Arizona Press.
Schacter, R. 2008. An Ethnography of Iconoclash: An investigation into the production,
consumption and destruction of street-art in London. Journal of Material Culture
13 (1): 35-61.
Symonds, J . 2004. Historical Archaeology and the Recent Urban Past. International
Journal of Heritage Studies 10(1): 33-48.

2
Piece is short for masterpiece. It is used to describe a large, elaborate and complex form of aerosol
graffiti. Pieces consist of stylised letterforms and shapes that incorporate 3D rendering, shading, colour,
line and readable type. In some instances the piece spells out the pseudonym of the writer (Dew 2007).