Why and how do street artists use Instagram for their work?

Why and how do street artists use Instagram for

their work?

Kat Milligan

23

June 2017

Supervisors:

Robin Boast

Neils van Doorn

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the six artists, Metraeda, Oogman, Sinnr_Stickers, *183 Street Art Collective, Instant Sticky Crimes and Sm111le for their input and support

throughout the research. Additionally, I´d like to thank Robin Boast for his support as my thesis supervisor.

Abstract

This thesis will discuss, analyse and investigate the role Instagram plays in the work of six interviewed street artists. It will discuss this in relation to theories of art written by Walter Benjamin, Pierre Bourdieu and Guy Debord. Street art is unique as it exists in a particular context and time, and this is challenged by methods of regeneration and preservation that translate the art into a permanent form in the online sphere. Examples of Banksy and Gucci Ghost represent alternate ways in which street artists can transcend the street; this is compared to how Instagram affords artists to do something similar. The thesis will also discuss the idea that street art is a creative subculture, developed as such through its rejecting of norms and the law. As street art is considered vandalism by many, artists frequently create an alias for

themselves; this is discussed in relation to anonymity and privacy on Instagram. The research will finally discuss how street artists use Instagram as a “tool” for their work. This will be discussed in relation to network development, digital promotion,

maintaining a character or alias and how aspects of the interface, such as hashtags, afford artistic pockets to be formed online.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

Chapter 1: Introduction 5 


2.

Chapter 2: Theory 9

3.

Chapter 3:

.

3.1. Instagram 16


.

3.2. The Street and Vandalism 18 


.

3.3. Commodification of Street Art 25 


4.

Chapter 4: Methodology 29


5.

Chapter 5:

.

5.1. Artist Responses and Analysis 36 


.

5.2. The Interviews 39 


6.

Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusion 62

7.

Bibliography 67

Chapter 1

An Introduction to Street Art

This research is about how street artists use Instagram as a tool for their art work. Instagram is a photo sharing platform that allows for public and private profiles to post photos and is mainly used for diversion, personal relationships, personal and online identity, surveillance and sharing (McQuail, Blumler, & Brown). It is a social media site that affords the user the ability to create networks, follow others and develop a profile online for their photos. This thesis will focus on why street artists use Instagram and how. It will also ask sub-questions about whether artists are ever concerned about the implications of digitally publishing work, and discuss

perceptions of vandalism with regards to street art. Finally, it will discuss what the aims of artists are when they are using the application. Street art is an art form that is “local and global, post photographic, post-internet and post-medium” (Irvine 1). It is a form of urban art that is part of the city environment and community: underground, over-ground and now also online. This research will focus on the way in which street art is “now documented almost obsessively with digital photography for the Web” (Irvine 1). Therefore, the research question for this thesis is: why and how do artists use Instagram for their work?

There are many terms employed to describe `street art ́. Graffiti, urban art, brandalism, guerrilla art, muralism and public writing are but a few (Tulke). All of these terms refer to art that is placed and performed on public space or property. For the purpose of this thesis, the term street art will be used; however, the term `graffiti ́

is used in the literature and interviews, and will subsequently be referred to. Street art is considered “doubly transient” (Raychaudhuri 51). Firstly, because it is frequently illegal and is often removed by authorities. Secondly, it also has “almost

overwhelmingly urban roots” (51), which results in an audience that is constantly moving. This limits response time, as many people only see the street art as they travel through public space. For example, street art on a bridge has many passers-by everyday. The opposite is also true, for instance, art that is placed on a train moves past its audience constantly. This opens up a dialogue about the role art has in a city, and displays the “clash of intersecting forces that surround street art” (Irvine 2). Its

mobility, visibility, and transient locations embody street art as an urban subculture, and questions why an audience is important. The audience arguably become part of the subculture when they notice, appreciate or even object to the work.

Consequently, street art is characterised by “the aesthetics of reappearance”; meaning its invisibility and ability to blend into the city is part of its intention and power (Irvine 5). For this reason, the location of its placement is very important, and frequently coincides to become part of the art piece. Street art can also be in the countryside, the roadside and other non-urban locations; however, for the purpose of this research, street art in the city will be the focus, because “the city is the assumed interlocutor, framework, and essential precondition for making the artwork work” (Irvine 2). Therefore, moving street art into the online sphere is an interesting question, and one this thesis will address.

Street artists practice this art form for many different reasons; from love of the aesthetics to urban activism (Tulke). Common forms of street art include tagging, murals, stickers and paste ups (prints stuck to a wall with paste). These are the types of street art investigated in this research. These were chosen because they correlate with the Instagram profiles analysed and the artists interviewed. To analyse all

aspects would be too broad, as it would require an analysis of larger scale which would be less specific. Additionally, stickers, stencil art, tags and murals are the dominant forms of street art shared on Instagram and therefore the most relevant forms for this research. This research will also avoid delving into inherently digital street art or graffiti; that is art that exists only digitally, and not on the actual street. The focus here is street art that started out designed for and installed on the street, its digitalisation and how this process affects it. Inherently digital graffiti or digital street art does not experience the same translation, as it started out with the intention of being a digital asset. Social media enables fast and easy sharing for free, and allows the users to quickly accumulate a network of followers, who become the public audience to their activities (Emanuel et al 146). As an increasing number of street artists publish their analogue work in photographic form on digital platforms, the role Instagram plays, and the reason it is the platform of choice is the focus of this

Street artists are arguably attracted to Instagram for many reasons, one of which is developing a network (Mimi Miyoung & Sheng Kuan). “As a method of broadcast, Instagram allows for the direct exchange of social capital for other modes of capital” (Honig & MacDowall). It is a perfect platform for promotion, be that for personal, professional or artistic publicity. Thus, it is the ideal place for artists who are not considered to be officially and intrinsically a part of the `art world ́ to show their work and build up a profile, both of artistic prestige and digitally on Instagram. Due to the illegal nature of street art, Instagram is attractive for artists who wish to transcend the street (Irvine). This raises the question; why do street artists use Instagram? One reason could be that the platform allows artists to claim ownership to the pictures of art posted through an alias. This prediction stems from the way the platform allows one to create an online profile or identity without revealing the user´s real name, age or gender (Honig & MacDowall). This means the user can have a public profile, but still maintain a level of anonymity. Therefore, theoretically street art is unique in the way it almost requires the alias and anonymity due to its practice being illegal.

Another reason could be the global network that can be created online (Paul). Artists can show their work and follow work that others are producing. This is particularly interesting when discussing how street art can be commoditised and transformed from its transient natural form, to something entirely different.

An example will be Banksy ́s work in auctions and museums. Banksy is one of the most famous street artists in the art world, and has become the name referred to globally when discussing street art (Raychaudhuri). He has remained behind his alias and his art has arguably changed perception of graffiti and street art. To transcend the street through this art form could be seen as a contradiction, but also appears to be what a lot of street artists are doing globally. In addition to this, from the social disorganisation theory perspective, this text will discuss whether street art becomes more powerful when it is published online, and whether it challenges urban systems and structures, as well as dictating the street culture itself. Visual culture is also important here, as street art questions who has control over this. “Street artists are making statements about visual culture and the effects of controlled visibility in the lived environment of the city, where walls and screens are increasingly intermingled” (Irvine 4). Authorities define the aesthetic of the city, and frequently street artist challenge this. Street art arguably mirrors the “crisis experienced by urbanism”

(Salcudean 47). Many street artists work with a compassion and sympathy for the city itself; feeling “compelled to state something in and with the city, whether as forms of protest, critique, irony, humour, beauty, subversion, clever pranks or all of the above” (Irvine 3). Thus, street art does not always need to be political (Bell). There are various reasons for street artists to make art, and to assume they are all activists fighting the political system is overly simplistic.

The research will also consider the idea that Instagram is a digital public space, and look into how street art changes or adapts to this online platform. Anonymity is common amongst street artists, which is often for protection, but can also be for the creation of an alias or pseudonym. These alias´s often aim to fight alienation whilst allowing the artists to maintain “their anonymity advantages as they are rebelling against the existing order” (Salcudean 47). Street art is generally illegal. This makes it unique as an art form and also raises questions about who actually owns and controls `space´, which is arguably “a social product” (Lefebvre 208). By limiting what can be practiced, the idea of public space is challenged. The crime these artists are committing is arguably minimal, and the fact that it is even considered petty crime opens up a debate about who has the right to the city (Irvine). Street art is unique as it puts the art outside, in public, and allows the observer to take the role of the critic (Borraerd). They become an audience the moment they take notice. This allows for unpaid art to be seen, or expressly labelled as “expensive” by professional art critics; thus the “ontological foundation of the street art is society” (Salcudean 49). There are exceptions to this; work by Banksy started on the street but has developed and transcended the street to appear in art galleries, museums and auctions. However, this will be discussed in relation to the definition of street art further in Chapter 3, which will contextualise street art, Instagram and give examples of famous artists that have transcended the street.

Chapter 2

Theory

Benjamin: Translation of art & auras

This section will consider theories that can be related to the discussion about street art and its digital translation. It will examine existing ideas about art as rebellion, defying norms, the commodification and commercialisation of art, anti-capitalism, street art as a subculture and the concept of an “aura”. Additionally, the idea of photography and its effect on an original art piece will be deliberated, and linked to Instagram. Key theorists in this section are Walter Benjamin, Guy Debord, Pierre Bourdieu and Robert Merton.

Art is interpretable, and its legitimisation is frequently defined by classification from hierarchies. Art is a man-made product, and to produce high quality art, there must be an element of exclusivity and uniqueness. In principle, a “work of art has always been reproducible” (Benjamin 2), and this idea is what will frame the theory for this thesis. Street art is unique in that it is mortal, but by reproducing it through

photography, film and other methods of reincarnation, it is made immortal

(Messinger). Walter Benjamin´s theory investigates how art can be reproduced and what effect that can have. This will then be applied to street art and its digital

reproduction through Instagram.

Walter Benjamin discussed how art has reacted to and been shaped by the conditions of production in his essay, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” written in 1935. In this essay, he discusses how art has been changed by a system of reproduction, in which photography has a key role. “Photography freed the hand of the most important artistic functions” (Benjamin 2). By this, he arguably meant that a representation of art no longer required the actual artist themselves. The skill of the artist had been taken away by the ability to replicate the artist´s work. Benjamin argues that even the most perfectly executed reproductions still lack “one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be” (Benjamin 3). This can be taken quite literally regarding street art. Street art is designed to be on the street, and is placed in particular areas for different motives; but the placement of this form of art is what

characterises it. Therefore, to reproduce street art ultimately changes it in some way. Reproduction can mean that the piece turns into a mere imprint, and poses the

question: does the art lose something? Pictures of pieces of art take away the unique quality, as they are replications. Benjamin felt that this meant that they no longer maintain their “aura” (Benjamin 3). An “aura” in Benjamin´s terms is “that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction” (4).

One could argue that the very purpose of a photograph is to freeze a moment, thus transcending the boundaries of time and space by doing so. This implies a limitation to Benjamin´s theory, (which was written over eighty years ago), as photography is considered a skill and an art form in itself. However, the idea that the development of photography has sped-up the sharing and reproduction of pieces of artwork is an important point to consider in this research. Though his essay is dated, the same thought process can be applied to replications made through modern media, and more specifically photographs made of street art that are posted on Instagram. Photography has certainly changed the meaning and delivery of certain artworks, insofar as Benjamin describes, it allows the artist to be closer to their “patient”, by depicting a very realistic version of the piece of art without it physically being the artwork itself.

However, what also comes with photos is the idea that “for the first time, captions have become obligatory” (Benjamin 8). This is the idea that an original piece of art should speak for itself, but a photo of a piece of art needs an explanation. This

impression that a photo requires some kind of accompanying text is characterised by modern media, and has become an essential part of Instagram culture. Arguably, photographs of art do not carry the same “code” as the original piece; or at least, the code is adapted. This introduces Pierre Bourdieu´s theory about codes and culture.

“A work of art has meaning and interest only for someone who possesses the cultural competence, that is, the code into which it is encoded. A beholder who lacks the specific code feels lost in a chaos of sounds and rhythms, colours and lines, without rhyme or reason” (Bourdieu 2).

Most modern artists want to say something when they make a piece, but that meaning is interpreted and comes from the viewer, whatever their code. This emphasises that the observer is the critic. The power of street art is not fully

comprehended unless its audience understand, acknowledge or appreciate it. It is relevant that street art can surprise and confront viewers simulated through the space in which it is presented. Here, the “aura” of a singular art piece with a specific time in place that Benjamin discusses is relevant. If the art piece possesses its unique aura, then the code is arguably more likely to be dictated by the artist; however, if the piece has lost its aura, then it is possible that the `code´ of interpretation is more strongly dictated by the audience. Regardless of either situation, the code is important and dictates how the art is received. On Instagram, there arguably exists a disconnect with this auratic being of the art piece. The piece posted can be confronting or complex, but the user has frequently scrolled past it before having time to question whether there is a specific code or not.

Benjamin´s text was written a long time ago, and nowadays photography has developed into its own category of art. However, what Benjamin says remains; a photo or indeed, any replication of art is not physically the same as the original piece. Subsequently, and most importantly, a photo does not have to be taken by the

original artist, and this means that the skill required to make the art is not necessary to represent the art. This can be seen on Instagram, and will be discussed further in the following chapter.

The Situationists

Ideas of replication can be related to that of the commodification and

commercialisation of art, and subsequently the way in which the capitalist system absorbs certain art forms in this process. The Situationists were a Paris-based group of people who dedicated themselves to breaking the capitalist system and ways of societal being. They were in line with `avant garde´ artistic tradition; that is, they were experimental and radical with regards to art and culture. They are relevant here, as they “believed in the necessity of the realisation and suppression of art” (Matthews). They wanted to change the idea that art is a separate entity or culture that cannot be integrated into a normal and regular daily routine. Thus, they wanted to incorporate the “passion and beauty of art into everyday life” (Matthews). Debord wrote “The Society of Spectacle” in 1967, which was a Situationist critique of capitalism. He spoke about capitalism and how “conditions of production prevail presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles”, suggesting that everything has become a

“mere representation” (Debord 12-13). He talks about the “spectacle”, which in his eyes represents an “inversion of life, and autonomous movement of non-life”. The 1967 text is a critique of consumerism, cultural homogenisation and the way in which capitalism engulfs this.

If these ideas are taken into the context of Instagram, and commodification of street art, it is possible to see how such an online platform could transform the “aura” of street art by producing an alternative space and method for its consumption.

However, whether this process can be argued to be “an inversion of life” is debatable (Debord 13). This is not to say that artists who use Instagram are not legitimate, but that the opportunity and development of the ability to digitalise street art translates it, subsequently changing the way in which it can be viewed and shared. Additionally, this opens opportunities for new networks and audiences. However, from a critical anti-capitalist stance, the reproduction of art does change the essence of it. “By fragmenting more areas of previously undifferentiated social life into quantifiable units, the capitalists forced atomised workers to meet their needs externally rather than through community-direct non-market relations” (Matthews). Debord essentially discusses and critiques commodity forms of culture and suggests that by allowing these, the quality of what is being produced is somewhat lost, as is its “aura”

(Benjamin). This is arguable in the case of Banksy and his incorporation into the `art world ́, as the process of this has led to many of his pieces being reproduced in print form, thus making them less unique. However, this is not a critique of the artists themselves, but of this particular mode of production. The regeneration of street art does not take anything from the original piece, but the transformed version disputably does not hold the same character. This is considered further in Chapter 3.

Street art challenges what have been termed the social norms, and the `norms´ of the traditional art world. Robert Merton discusses the idea of norms, and how they make people aspire to be more (Merton). If a `norm´ is in place, the motivation to transcend the norm is also present. When subcultures or creative clusters are developed, they are often a rebellion to the mainstream and can contribute to the `creative economy´. The creative economy produces symbolic goods, and Richard Florida suggested that we are now experiencing a `creative economy´, whereby “new ideas and innovation are paramount” (Florida 6). In this respect, the city is a critical aspect of the creative economy. “Renewed focus on social identities manifest in

lifestyle and service communications” (Tay 220). Tay goes on to argue that creativity provides a language for the city. Street art arguably contributes to aspects of a city´s `language´, and this is symbolised by the term `writers´, which is often a name given to street artists who use text and typography. In regard to this study, norms can be seen as abiding by the law, and street art defies this. Even by its very presence, street art is making a statement as it is not `meant´ to be there. This is why its translation is particularly interesting. As it becomes easier to consume through the comfort of a phone, it is questionable as to whether the “aura” of the original piece can thrive.

“Misconceptions about their (the artists’) motives and stereotypes linking the artists to crime and vandalism have been fuelled by media reports that are often biased.

Graffiti as an art form has been given minimal attention by scientific research” (Bowen 22).

By this, Bowen notes that research on street art is limited, and therefore knowledge on how and why it is produced is also limited. This can result in assumptions and stereotypes about who is making street art (Bowen). This re-introduces ideas of the creative economy and subcultures that are developed as defiance to the `norms´ of society. There are existing ethnographies about street art which formulate graffiti and street art as part of a subculture, especially amongst the urban youth culture (Ferrell; Lachmann; Snyder). However, despite these, there is still a lack of literature on the topic, meaning that many in the past jumped to the conclusion that those making art on public space were simply vandals. Since Banksy has become such an important character in the art world, opinions of street art have adapted, and now it is

suggested that street art may even improve the economic conditions of urban neighbourhoods. For example, in London, house prices can be both positively and negatively affected by the presence of street art (Bell). Opinions about street art often depend on broader views of what is and is not acceptable in public space; however, the belief that it is vandalism is still present and implemented by law, despite an increasing number of people accepting and appreciating it. The role of graffiti and street art does not have to be intended as an act of vandalism, or even urban activism. It can be as simple as a group of people wanting to decorate grey space (Irvine) or a way for artists to use public space as an opportunity to promote profit-free art (Bell). This is something that is often under discussion on the topic of street

art, as people have different interpretations of art, and on the street there is no dictation of what is beautiful and acceptable, and what is not. Thus, street art is raw and open to interpretation without a presupposed hierarchical judgment, and that is part of its beauty.

By being placed in a public space, street art is automatically available to everyone who wants to see it. Once the art is taken out of its context and someone is paying to see it or buy it, this very free and open method of creating and displaying artwork is changed. Even the idea of curating street art in a museum or gallery seems mildly absurd. The piece in itself is still street art, but the way in which it is mediated after its creation means it no longer holds the same character or “aura” (Benjamin). This can be compared to putting a lion in a zoo. It does not cease to be a lion, but it does change in some way. The ferocity of the lion is diminished, and it is not able to be thrive as the wild animal it is. Capitalisation arguably creates pockets and free space (De Waal et al.), but it also destroys and swallows them, and the commercialisation of street art is one way this can be seen. Foucault defines resistance as “action to other actions” (Foucault 780), and this is relatable to this idea of pockets created by capitalism. The important question with regard to this research is then, does the digitalisation and virtualisation of street art through Instagram have a similar effect? Does this mean the “aura” of street art is lost (Benjamin)?

“Any photography is only a part of a bigger picture that does not exist. It gives frame only to the singular and repetitive second of the exterior world, the “now and here”, “anywhere”, “anytime”. The viewer is “anybody” ... there is no image in general terms, what exists is only the concrete image” (Salcudean 50).

This can be directly related to Instagram and what the photos exhibited on it

represent. These points then pose the key research question: why do street artists choose to use Instagram and what do they get out of it? To say they are using it for the translation of their art is too assumptive. Instagram can be used as a tool for artists. However, regardless of why it is used, the translation of the artwork, and ability to immortalise the otherwise mortal art form, is something to consider. What makes street art a unique and unambiguous art form is challenged.

The point of delving into theories from the Situationists, Benjamin, Debord and the reproduction of art, alongside its development and re-appropriation through

capitalism is, firstly, to raise the issue of regeneration and what that can do to a piece of art. It raises questions about commodification of art and how this can affect the “aura” of a unique piece. It additionally critiques modes of capitalist society that merge culture into a system of reproduction. Secondly, these theories open the debate as to whether the art world has become institutionalised, and how. This point is under dispute, but there is no denying that the consumption of art is capitalised and commercialised as much of it relies on galleries, museums and economically based institutions (Fraser). By turning street art into a consumer product and taking it from its natural time and setting, the art is arguably changed. It almost loses its initial meaning, just by being rebellious both physically and ideologically. This assimilation is something that comes from commercialism and consumerism, and is inherently illogical when it comes to street art. This is because street art is separate by nature to the art institutions. Often it is separate deliberately (Raychaudhuri). It is frequently designed to oppose, rather than create economic capital and by attempting to make it do so could be seen to diffuse its artistic potential (Hebdige). Thus, with regard to street art, the capital can have other forms of prestige; it is not just based on money (Bourdieu). Finally, by discussing street art as a subculture, and its affect on the creative economy and city, these theories can be linked to the diversity of the genre. Street art can be an “intervention, a collaboration, a commentary, a dialogic critique, an individual or collective manifesto, an assertion of existence, aesthetic therapy for the dysaesthetics of urban controlled, commercialized visibility” (Irvine 3). Thus, it is a complex field to analyse.

Chapter 3

3.1: Instagram

This section will discuss Instagram, and its function as a platform. It will review how Instagram is suitable for street artists and why. Benjamin discussed the concept that “individual reactions are predetermined by mass audience response” (14). Instagram is structured in such a way that a profile ́s status relies on followers. It is digitally hierarchical in a quantitative fashion (Emanuel et al.), essentially meaning that more followers make an Instagram profile seem more legitimate and thus gives it a higher status. Interestingly, the street is public and therefore to be seen by everyone, and Instagram is a mostly `free ́ space which can be publicly explored through scrolling. Inherently both the street and Instagram have characteristics that are similar, yet the way in which they are public contrasts hugely. Instagram can therefore be seen as a tool that “immortalises the craft of street art forever” (Messinger).

Bourdieu and his theory of art and codes can be referred to again here. Networks are created on Instagram and thus photos that are shared are aimed at the network that will be looking at the post, allowing for a certain specific set of codes. “There are millions of people following Instagram accounts and Facebook pages displaying street art, emphasising the wide-reaching political potentialities of these arts” (Thor 026). The way Instagram is set up must be appreciated to understand why street artists would choose this platform to post photos of their work and create a network.

Instagram and Network Development

Instagram was launched in October 2010 and is a free image and video sharing social network (MacDowall). Instagram is extremely popular, and “by 2015 Instagram had become one of the most widely used social media platforms with over 400 million users who post media items and follow other accounts” (Honig & MacDowall).

Instagram is essentially an online platform that allows users to indulge in interests and share what they do through photographs they take. People tend to use this platform for different reasons such as personal profiles, and business marketing and promotion. Instagram affords the user a pseudo online photo album, on which they can post pictures. Subsequently, photos of the user’s personal life can be displayed,

as can promotional photos for a company Instagram account. Instagram allows the user to create as many accounts as they wish, and does not require the user´s `real name´ for the username. Therefore, Instagram becomes suitable for a range of users and uses, including street artists.

The boundaries of social media can become blurred, insofar that people often have several online selves and thus “online self-representation is sufficiently nuanced for us to maintain multiple discrete identities” (Emanuel et al. 146). Roughly 75 percent of Instagram users use the public profile setting, which makes all their content and social engagement available for anyone to see (Emanuel et al.). This gives artists a wide outreach and also allows for online communities to be built that are not

constrained to national borders (DeAndrea & Walther). This is a unique way in which the digital affords street artists the opportunity to network. An artist from Berlin and an artist from Tokyo can see each others’ work on a day-to-day basis. Thus, inspiration can come from other artist ́s profiles amongst many other things (Paul). Again, this can be related to Bourdieu's concept of “codes”; insofar that as networks are created, specific criteria of what qualifies an artist into the network and how this is defined come about. Essentially, a common code is created and developed within networks and this defines the codes of how art is received and appreciated within that group of users.

Social media platforms afford online communities, and allow artists to follow each other as well as the general public being able to see street art without even stepping out of their door (Salcudean). “The more users are using a platform, the more

valuable that platform becomes for everyone”, which is what is known as “network effects” (Srnicek 256). This basically results in a “winner-takes-all” environment that allows all users to take something from their network. The point is that if a social media site is popular and develops a large enough network, frequently that will make users continue to post on the application. An example of this is Facebook, (and Facebook owns Instagram). When logging into many applications (including

Instagram), the option to “log in with Facebook” is frequently there (Srnicek). People have Facebook because most of their friends do, and it therefore becomes a norm in social interactions. Smaller social media companies don't have the same network as Facebook, which therefore remains one of the dominant platforms. Additionally, as Facebook owns many other applications, “the expansionary nature of these platforms

means that different areas are now converging together under the pressures of competitively extracting data” (Srnicek 256). This can also be seen with Instagram as it is the dominant photo sharing platform.

Instagram posted on its blog “you now have more ways to share than ever before with Instagram. Stories, live video and disappearing photos and videos in Direct”, show-casing how they have developed the interface over the last year. Additionally, they posted that “we’re working to make Instagram safer than ever for connection and self-expression” (Instagram). This is important for street artists, who arguably use the platform for these exact purposes. Instagram affords a digital public space on which users can create their own profile, and mould the interface to suit their use. Some street artists also integrate other types of art they do to their profiles, for example graphic design or animated videos. The feature of 24 hour stories allows artists to have a more personable profile as they demonstrate their art being made and their other handiwork. They can show the `backstage´ of street art while maintaining their anonymity which is an interesting contradiction afforded by Instagram. One of the accounts chosen for interview, (Oogman), used the `paint ́ feature on their Instagram story to draw the `street art character ́ on photos taken during the day. These can be seen in the analysis in Chapter 5. This is an interesting way of showing how Instagram can be utilised to showcase the essence of an artist’s work, affording the ability to do so in a humorous and subtle way. Overall, this

underlines some of the ways in which Instagram can be used by artists.

3.2: The Street and Vandalism

This section will discuss the street as an environment and canvas for street art, as well as the social production of urban space. It will then discuss understandings of street art and how and why the discussion of vandalism is important. As street art is illegal, there are consequences to its practice. However, frequently the term

“vandalism” is used as a subjective interpretation, and this idea will be explored.

The Street

The street is an important point to consider as it is the setting in which this art is performed. Once the street ceases to be the `gallery ́, the art arguably changes, but

to truly see that change, the original state and intention of street art, the city and street, must be analysed and discussed.

The social production of urban space is important to consider with regard to street art. “Approximately 54 % of the world’s populations live in urban areas and by 2050 this number is expected to increase to 66 %” (Thor 026). Thus the way in which cities are divided and developed for the public to use is increasingly affecting more people. The street is appropriated in a certain way by artists, some of whom see the street as an empty canvas. Artists presumably practice street art for very different reasons, but the distinct spatial practice which indicates the organisation of urban space in society shows how it is appropriated and mastered simultaneously. This shows the

“conceptual representations of space expressed in patterns of planning and design and the representational space, imagined, lived and experienced by urban dwellers” (Lefebvre 198). Urban dwellers therefore experience and make street art `art ́ from their interpretations. The act in itself becomes socially acceptable from its continuous presence and the dialogue that is created by this. Subsequently, “the causes that determine a social act have to be searched for in the social acts that came before it, and not in the conscience case of the individual” (Salcudean 48). Because street art is actually a common part of modern urban fabric, it is by no means a new

phenomenon, which allows the creation of a culture of networks that legitimise the act. Street art is a medium and historically has been a form of delivering a message, particularly against the neoliberal and capitalist development of New York, where the `graffiti ́ we think of today was born. It can often be considered part of public art existing “on public buildings...more like a performance art” (Ximeng).

Cedar Lewisohn initiated a discussion on the topic of graffiti in regard to McLuhan's argument `The Medium is the Message ́ and noted that street art uses “the medium as an element in constituting its meaning” and can be seen a commentary within its own environment of faceless dissatisfaction with seemingly unchangeable systems (Lewisohn 107). The idea that street art is “a voice and a response to multiple signification and slippages” (Frederick 211) means that it can be considered in a dialogue both of the city and the artists producing it. The way in which it is performed is of vital importance when considering this. Many arguments have debated whether street art and graffiti is ‘art’ or ‘vandalism’. The timeline of this art form dates back to early archeological history with rock art (Frederick 213). Additionally, since then, the

environment for street art has regenerated repeatedly to the contemporary art form we associate with the term.

If we speak of street art as simply drawing on walls, with or without permission, then we speak of it in very broad terms, and don't necessarily have the ability to specify its characteristics. For example, is a commissioned mural still considered street art or graffiti? Is advertising and graphic design printed on public property with permission street art? How is that any different, and would it be considered as such by artists? It promotes a message in the same way. Just because they do so in an economic way, does that make them more acceptable? This is arguably down to interpretation, which again is why the question of whether street art is vandalism or art, or neither, or both is impossible to answer without a degree of subjectivity. This is also important to consider as street art has the potential to produce economic revenue (Bell), as discussed below, Banksy and Gucci Ghost have both successfully commoditised their artwork and integrated it into the legal economy and thus are no longer viewed as vandalism or indeed street art by consumers of products and the controllers of public property. This also opens up an interesting dialogue on power and public space.

The capitalism of space is an important element to consider with regards to street art. Irvine stated that the city is “an essential precondition for making artwork” (3). It becomes the canvas, and by doing so challenges the idea of “space” being “social product” (Lefebvre 208). What street art does to space globally and digitally is extremely important with regards to this topic. By using digital media to map and document urban space, artists change and alter the landscape of that space both physically (in terms of street art, physical art), and digitally (with how people react on Facebook, Instagram and other platforms, the sharing of photographs, stories and art, as well as how these reactions are combined with others and spread across the internet). “Street art can thus be described as a practice of creative disruption and distortion, working to dissolve the boundaries between public and private space, thereby reclaiming urban public space back to its rightful owner, the public” (Tulke 13).

This idea conjures questions of who is considered the “public”. In the mainstream and art world, there is a hierarchy of critics who legitimise certain forms of art by

curating it in galleries, museums and reviewing the messages and techniques used. Regarding street art, when it is in its raw form, the public are the critics. Their views and taste may vary, but they have the power of their own subjective opinion.

Essentially, when it comes to urban space, is what matters most what is seen? Jeffrey Steele states that “despite the fascination of many city writers with urban mysteries and political divisions, much of the critical discussion of urban writing has attempted to maintain the emphasis upon the visual” (Steele 3). Essentially, street artists, who practice this form of art for different reasons, completely rely on the placement and visual aesthetics of their work to deliver their message to the public. Arguably, “spatial practice is constituted by an orientation towards neoliberal

capitalism, dividing the city into functional parcels that are associated with the different functions essential for maintaining the system” (Tulke 11). The social

production of space is an important consideration of why street art is produced in the first place. Therefore, it is inevitable that western city design “leaves cracks and voids in the urban fabric that potentially become strategic sites for marginalized actors, that are enabled to indirectly emerge as political actors” (Tulke 12). The idea of the `right to the city ́ reiterates this idea of who owns public space and how that is defined (Irvine).

This ownership, movement and use of space is particularly interesting when social media is also involved. In 2014 Swedish authorities received an anonymous

message stating that Banksy would be holding an unofficial art exhibition in

Stockholm (Thor). This became a phenomenon on social media; “the global city is a node for flows of communications and mediations and a space of diverse and (possibly) unexpected encounters” (Thor 026). The event raised questions about place, locality and the role social media can have in the promotion of street art. The hashtag, #banksyinstockholm was spread throughout the city in the week leading up to the supposed event, and caused a great deal of discussion. Firstly, it was

questioned whether this was legitimately Banksy, which in the end it wasn’t. Secondly, it was promoted as a mysterious event with a secret location which

changed the virtual conception of urban space, especially in relation to how it can be rejuvenated by street art. The concept of #banksyinstockholm is an example of the city being virtualized and hyped through social media and of the role social media can play in the promotion of anonymous artists; it also emphasises the power of

hashtags. Additionally, it highlighted the hierarchy and hype that exists between street artists. People were stealing the fake Banksy pieces with economic revenue in mind, which outlines ideas that will be discussed below about Gucci Ghost, Banksy and the commodification of street art by its transcending the street. The fact that this was mediated through a completely anonymous rumour made over social media, shows what an effect the digital and virtual can have on the physical street. It was also a way to create an inclusive use of city space that allowed for an urban story to be made not just by the “fake artist”, but also the community of Stockholm

(Georgiou). Essentially, it was an inclusive prank that opened a dialogue about street art and the effect anonymity, authenticity and curiosity have. In this sense,

#banksyinstockholm also highlighted “artistic interventions have the potential of generating a re-imagination of the urban and to renegotiate the connection between the local and the global” (Thor 026). This challenges Benjamin´s idea that art has a specific time and place.

Vandalism

Street art has received many labels, from “urban blight” to “artistic expression” (Gomez 634), but regardless it has persisted to be an ever present and important category of art in urban areas. Governments have tried to create anti-street art policies, but banning it entirely would be an unsuccessful and unsatisfying solution. Firstly, it would put an outright claim on public space, reducing the label `public´ to `government´ space. Secondly, it could potentially encourage it more. The idea of `norms´ discussed earlier, refers to the idea that norms encourage non-norms. McLuhan´s anti-environment also illustrates ways that artists have rebelled against the `norms´. Additionally, the idea of the creative economy displays that creative clusters are hard to eradicate; the more rules that are in place can equal the more ways in which they can be broken (Florida). A better way would be to discourage `vandalism´. That is, street art that is produced with the aim of claiming space, and make more room for street art. The issue here is that the distinction between art and vandalism is interpretive. It creates huge issues of legitimacy and implements a hierarchy that is exactly opposite to what half of graffiti stands for.

Jan Blommaert developed five points that he argues transform street art from vandalism to art. These include: abandoning “anonymity”, operating “globally”,

working in a “non-random” way (by planning spaces), practicing in an “organised” manner, and practicing in a “quest for an art-loving public” (Blommaert 4). These criteria are quite broad and also display an element of subjectivity. What counts as non-random? If an artist only practices art on bridges, is that consistent enough to be considered “ordered”? Here, Blommaert underlines the difficultly in labelling and categorising street art. From his criteria, all of the artists interviewed in Chapter 5 would be considered to be making art. Yet what they are doing is inherently illegal, and therefore these five `guidelines´ only represent a reflexive interpretation.

The question of what actually defines street art is important in this research. Is street art still street art if it is legal? Is advertising also considered an “urban blight”

(Gomez)? For example, McDonald’s are allowed to “buy out a space within the city and advertise themselves in it” yet if a street artist “places the same symbol in the same space, he is committing a crime because the ‘public’ space of the city has, in effect, been privatised by a corporation” (Salcudean 53). Some would certainly consider the adverts of McDonald's an eye-sore and something they would not want decorating their public space; therein lies part of the difficulty in the different

interpretations of street art. Defining street art as vandalism or art is completely subjective. In legal terms, there is a more definite line of what is and is not allowed. Ross & Wright suggest that street art provokes a number of reactions from three major urban actors: “the public, municipalities, and law enforcement agencies” (179). This links graffiti and street art to petty vandalism and articulates attempts of young people in the city to seek “sneaky thrills” (Ross & Wright 178). Possibly, this is a simplified characterisation of what street art is today, but could be a fair analysis of how some artists started out.

Gomez describes graffiti and street art vandalism as “scrawlings that are motivated by a desire to mark territory” (635). This is an interesting viewpoint as all artists are in some way marking territory by putting their piece of art where they do. Assuming that Gomez refers to the culture of tagging, that is, the repeatedly marking of a symbol or sign in different places, ideas of what is art and what is vandalism are again conjured up. As mentioned below, Gucci Ghost started out with tagging, and later his art became a key feature of high fashion, setting trends globally (Munro). This is where interpretation again becomes important. Public space is defined by governments, and

by creating these pockets and structured areas open to everyone, opportunities for anti-structure or anti-environments are created (McLuhan).

Subcultures arguably emerge from such pockets that allow for rebellion against the norm. Street artists can put art in the space because it is public. Graphics are placed all over urban space in the form of advertisements, and “screens and walls exist intermittently” (Irvine 3), arguably representing the capitalist and economy driven side of society. To create street art that questions and confronts this is the exact dialogue that is an essential part of what art should be. This relates to Benjamin's idea of critical epochs, which discusses how “a certain art form aspires to effects which could be fully obtained only with a changed technical standard, that is to say, in a new art form” (Benjamin 16). This can be seen in the development of street art and dialogue it has created, that is whether it is a form of art or a form of crime. This implies that street art is subversive because it claims public space in a way that defies `norms´, as discussed earlier. By defying these norms, the street artists arguably claim their pocket of space to be outside of capitalist proscriptions, creating a subculture that is seen by some as art, some as vandalism, and at the end of it all is still mostly illegal. Street art is a fully integrated and partially accepted part of urban fabric despite its illegality. This can be related to the thought that “ideas are produced through our experiences in the world, and they remain a component of that same world”

(Matthews). That is to say, the subculture of street art and graffiti has moved into the mainstream in a way as it has become so normalised. In the Punk subculture,

Hebdige noted two ways of “assimilation which diffuses punk's subversive potential”, as soon as it was changed from a unique and small subculture into consumer

product, “by ideologically relabeling it as natural or otherwise exotic” it became harmless (Hebdige). Punk violated the conventions of what is socially acceptable in society, similarly to street art; yet also similarly, both became part of a larger culture and though still rejected by some, both have the potential to be commoditised and therefore have a place in society. Essentially, “the ontological foundation of the graffiti image is society” (Salcudean 49); by putting the art outside without permission it gives a unique opportunity in which the general public are the observer and have the role of critic. This role becomes theirs the moment they look at the art, because as soon as they have viewed it they become the audience that the street art is

sheer presence (Mimi Miyoung & Sheng Kuan). Overall, street art is a specific and unique form of art due to all the debates that surround its legitimacy, diversity and persistence.

To conclude this section, from the debate it can be seen that although the label vandalism stems from the fact that street art is illegal, it maintains a level of subjectivity. The street becomes the canvas without which street art cannot exist, however determining whether the work itself is considered art or vandalism is often defined by its audience; the public. “Street art continually reveals that no urban space is neutral: walls and street topography are boundaries for socially constructed zones and territories, and vertical space is regulated by regimes of visibility” (Irvine 8). In this sense, the question of what street art is, can be re-phrased. The more

appropriate question is, why is it there? Alongside, how does its digitalisation transfer this purpose? These questions will be answered in the analysis section in Chapter 5.

3.3: Commodification of Street Art

This final section will review existing street artists that have transcended the street. It will discuss the commodification of street art and how that has changed the way in which street art is received by certain audiences. It will also analyse how and why certain artists are much more recognised than others, and by doing so will question who defines which artists are `legitimate´ and which artists are `vandals´. The reason for this discussion is to understand ways in which street art can transcend the street, and use these as a comparison to how Instagram affords a similar but different translation.

Street art is an “activity, or rather an inter-activity”, thus, its interactive nature provides a social space in which art can be critiqued, observed and consumed in a unique way (Crossley & Bottero 4). Gucci Ghost is a graffiti artist who started by continuously tagging with the symbolic `G ́ of Gucci on bins, street walls and other forms of public property. He was scouted by the new creative director of Gucci, Alessandro Michele, who loved the street art and wanted to collaborate (Munro). This integration of street art into the high fashion brand it was based on is a very

interesting concept to look into. It shows street art transcending the street in an unusual and unique way. Gucci ́s new range of shoes and bags displaying the graffiti

tag as a reaction to the artwork, and the consumer reaction to the Gucci line, is a development of the clothes and art combined. Gucci ́s interpretation and use of street art poses an interesting question with regards to its definition.

This introduces the idea of an anti-environment, as the statement Gucci Ghost makes is made in a different context and legitimised by the label it feeds. An anti-environment refers to (McLuhan 90), who discussed art as such. He felt it was

necessary and natural, given that any new technology creates a new environment for itself. An anti-environment takes aspects of an old environmental system and

regenerates them into a new way. This introduces a new idea about what street art actually is; if it is integrated into high fashion, and regenerated as such, is its original “aura” lost or enhanced (Benjamin)? Within the development of new media, street art ́s environment has developed, insofar that now it has broadened considerably. This is one example of street art transcending the street. Though the means for this was a high fashion brand, it still is an example of a transition of art from the street to an alternate form, thus displaying a regeneration. This is a more economically orientated translation, nevertheless it holds similarities to the translations seen on Instagram in the sense that they give street art, (which is designed to be in a particular space for usually an uncertain period of time) an alternate space in which to exist. Essentially, they abolish the mortality of Instagram by changing the location of its existence and translating it to a permanent form (Messinger).

Anonymous celebrities are a contradictory fascination that seem to have come hand in hand with graffiti art culture in the “legitimate” art scene, seen through artists such as Banksy, who after over fifteen years, still hides his true identity (Raychaudhuri). He has created a completely new character for himself through his artwork. The contemporary and independent art museum, Moco in Amsterdam, has been showing a collection of pieces by Banksy, who is described as a mysterious, faceless

character (Presse). These were alongside works by Andy Warhol and then the exhibition changed to Banksy and Salvador Dali. The graffiti artist, who is now labelled an `art legend ́ (Moco), after being a criminal searched for by the police, inspires the questions about what street art defines and why Banksy is in particular so celebrated. Subsequently, if art museums like Moco or designer labels like Gucci integrate graffiti, does street art cease to hold its “aura” or does it exaggerate it

(Benjamin)? Integration in the art world could be seen as a case of one door opening and one door closing.

Banksy stated that when he integrates into the art world, his art ceases to be the most honest art-form (Raychaudhuri). This is arguably because in galleries, the art is economised and is not open for everyone. A price is put on the art and its

observation. Banksy ́s content has developed, but his overall message of police ambiguity through use of stencils has remained consistent. So perhaps the

contradiction of governments celebrating art that protests against key aspects of its normative power, amplifies the message that street art intends further. Banksy has pieces in several different cities all over the world explicitly critiquing the societal structure of capitalism. In London it is possible to buy a map that marks the locations of his art, which are protected by the very societal structure he is critiquing (Moco). In New York, former Mayor Michael Bloomberg labelled Banksy ́s works as vandalism, stating graffiti is “a sign of decay and loss of control” (O ́Brien). However, one could argue Bloomberg articulates precisely the point of Banksy's art. Street artists often try to underline this aspect of society with their paintings, creating a dialogue about who owns public space as well as pointing out aspects of dissatisfaction and areas of decay. The reason Banksy is an interesting reference with which to set the scene, is because he is a street artist who has transcended the street. By printing and

reproducing his work in art books, as well as auctioning his art and displaying it in renowned galleries all over the world, he no longer leaves his art solely on the street. He stated “I love the way capitalism finds a place – even for its enemies”

(Raychaudhuri 57).

It could be argued that by using Instagram, other street artists also transcend the street. However, they do so in a slightly different way. By posting art produced by themselves, artists are not necessarily integrating into the “capitalist system”, or developing economic revenue; they are transforming their art from its temporary form, existing only in a non-permanent position in a public place, to a permanent digital gallery, with work they have created collected together. This shows a direct way in which street art is changed by its regeneration. Banksy´s art is changed when it is regenerated into print, and an artist using Instagram changes their art by taking a photograph of it. The obliteration of “time and space” (Benjamin) is the argument

here. It does not mean that the skills of the artist are diminished, but that the artist themselves loses an element of control of their piece the moment it is created.

Chapter 4

Methodology

The research for this thesis was mainly based around social media analysis and observation, as well as interviews over email and through digital media; Instagram. The focus was on Instagram, as the research aimed to analyse and answer how street artists use this platform as a means of promoting their art and creating an online identity. The reason I chose observation, online analysis and interviews, was because my enquiry was complex and therefore it needed the interview contact to contextualise specifically what was observed online. Because “online observation is a method employed to study interactions in virtual communities in their natural setting”, the most effective analysis of Instagram required an Instagram orientated

observation (Nørskov & Rask 49). Street artist’s profiles on Instagram can be scrolled and viewed easily, but observing alone could have led to assumption based

research, rather than a solid set of data. For this reason, interviews with the six artists chosen to be observed were necessary. Interviews avoid “misunderstanding and inaccuracy as observation of only one online communication channel may be insufficient for understanding what is actually going on in the observed online setting” (Nørskov & Rask 45). Subsequently, there was a strong likelihood that there were varying reasons for Instagram use amongst artists. Due to this, qualitative data was much more valuable as the cultural and artistic nature of the research was not easily quantifiable (Denzin).

Observation and ethnography have been seen to be the most effective ways to gather data in culture based, artistic studies (Adams 8). Therefore, this topic would not be suitable for survey style research. One could argue that in a certain way, Instagram allows for an unconventional-ethnography. It is a digital platform designed for observation. Though the research has not physically observed the subjects in their day to day lives like a traditional ethnography, Instagram allows for a

metaphorical type of following, which has allowed the artists to be observed and `followed´ through their use of the platform. This is a unique observation strategy as all the street artists the research ´followed´ were anonymous. Hence, the online environment enables participants to build their identities separate from their "real-world bodies"” (Turkle). This was an interesting way of observing, as while

researching it was not possible to know the true identity of who was being observed. For example, certain aspects of the artists like age, gender and race were invisible online if the artists had chosen it to be (Mann & Stewart).

Additionally, this metaphoric idea of `following´ the artists using an unconventional-ethnography and observation allowed for a more well rounded view of the artists over a period of time. Using my personal profile to follow artists over the time period of five months, (February to June) meant that I observed the different ways in which the six artists used Instagram first hand, as well as interviewing them about how they viewed their use. Traditional ethnographic research methods could have been used, but due to time constraints, observation, `following´ and interviews served as useful

alternatives as a method to gain the data and understand the context and complexity of street art on social media as a topic.

Multimedia data such as photographs and videos have been used, as Instagram is inherently a photo sharing social media platform. It was of key importance to look at the photos and observe what the artists were actually posting. Additionally,

screenshots were taken to use photographic evidence to back up the analysis. Using communication as a resource and form of research brought insight that would not have been possible by simply using secondary data. Due to the subjective nature of my enquiry, much of the data analysis has an element of self-interpretation.

However, it underlines and emphasises many points also gained from secondary data exploration. This does not decrease respectability of the analysis, as the reflexive interpretation was critical and also based on prior knowledge (Denzin & Lincoln).

My personal Instagram account was used to follow artists and to start developing a network. By doing so, I experienced how easy it is to create an online group of users with similar interests. This again underlines the method of an

unconventional-ethnography, as I experienced first hand how Instagram works for network

development. Utilising the network of street artists created from my profile, I was able to expand and find more artists that were recommended by those I was already following. By being an active participant of street art on Instagram, I managed to create a network and start a dialogue about what the artists were doing, why and

most importantly, how Instagram was used in the process. “Cultural intermediaries such as creative professionals are emblems of cool, and use themselves as shop windows to sell products as well as lifestyles” (Tokatli); this is arguably what networks on Instagram encourages and allows for. Users with similar user interests can come together, and through this, observation study becomes a lot simpler. This network development could be seen through social media, by looking at the ways in which artists portrayed themselves through imagery and status. I have made sure that I am personally following each Instagram profile used for this research to make sure I had a full perspective of what kind of work the artists I interviewed produced, how they promoted themselves, who they followed and who followed them.

To find artists willing to be interviewed, I used the direct message function on

Instagram as a method of contact. Firstly, I searched `#streetart ́ on Instagram and a huge array of photos came up. Hashtags are a useful method for this type of

research, as it categorises the area of interest in one place and allows for easier scrolling and searching (Rogers). I clicked into each profile to see if the user made the street art themselves, or if they simply took pictures of art done by others. Additionally, I looked at which type of street art they did, and how many likes their photos were getting and how many followers they had. I did this to understand the scale of their network and the response their art received. Once I found artists who were making street art themselves, with a collection of their work on their Instagram, I sent the artist a direct message asking if they were willing to answer a small set of questions for this thesis. In this case, Instagram acted as "the face between faces" (Poster). The interface became the mediator for communication as well as the point of study. I messaged seventeen artists, ten replied and six answered the interview questions.

The message sent consisted of:

“Hello, I am writing my thesis for the University of Amsterdam about the role of Instagram for street artists. Would it be ok if I asked you a few questions about this for my data.”

Next, the artists who answered were asked if they preferred to receive these questions over Instagram; where limited characters are allowed for each direct message sent, which makes the process more of an effort, or whether I could use an

email address to contact them. The responses varied, as by giving their email address some felt that they were ceasing to remain anonymous, and thus they preferred to use their online Instagram identity for contact.

Once the method of communication was decided and settled, the following nine questions were sent to each artist. These were designed to withdraw as much information from the artists about their Instagram use as possible, while also leaving room for the artists to develop their answers.

Questions:

1. How did you get into street art and why?

The reason for asking about the background was to understand how each artist got into this type of art in the first place. This hoped to contextualise the artist’s experience of street art.

2. Why do you use Instagram for your work?

3. Do you have an online or offline (or both) network of other street artists? If yes, what role do they play in your work?

4. Why do you use hashtags?

Questions two, three and four were based around the use of Instagram itself. These questions outline the key focus of this study, and allow for expansion and discussion. By asking: “if yes, what role do they play in your work” with regard to networks encourages artists to expand and explain their answer.

5. What would you define is the difference between street art and vandalism? Question five was designed to gain insight into whether the artists thought of street art as vandalism. Again, this was asked to open up a discussion and the wording was chosen specifically. By asking “the difference” between street art and vandalism artists were encouraged to discuss both interpretations and debate their opinion.

6. Do you think the internet/Instagram has changed street art? Do you think this is good or bad?

Question six was chosen as it is a key aspect of the research, I wanted to see if artists themselves felt that Instagram had changed the nature of street art and how. This links clearly to the idea that Instagram allows street art to transcend the street.

7. Do you ever feel concerned about showcasing your street art online? Question seven was asked to gain insight into whether street artists took the criminal aspect of street art into consideration when using Instagram. The question aimed to understand if artists ever questioned their use of Instagram for their artwork.

8. Do you prefer to keep your art anonymous? If yes, why?

9. Would you say you have created an online identity through your art?

Questions eight and nine were based around the theme of online identity, and aimed to see how artists viewed their online use and whether they felt that by using Instagram, they had created this for themselves. Additionally, eight underlines the topic of anonymity and aims to first, confirm that artists maintain anonymity, and second, find out why.

The reason a structured set of questions was chosen was to make sure that there was a level of strong consistency for each artist (Denzin). They strongly relate to ideas discussed above about the role Instagram has for artists, the way street art transcends the street and the dialogue around whether street artists themselves consider what they are doing as vandalism. If the questions had catered for and been adapted specifically to each artist, the consistency of the research could have been affected. Additionally, the answers could have strayed away from the focus of this research. Each question was related to literature and theories discussed above, with the aim of trying to understand the artist’s motivation for their work, their feelings towards Instagram as a platform and its effect on street art as a phenomenon. Due to communication being over social media, and many of the artists having little time to keep a continuous conversation, asking the same nine questions to each, meant that I could get the information in a way that suited the artists best (Pearsall).