Part I. Street Art in the USA, Its History and Its Evolution.
• What’s an informative document? True or False?
1. An unbiased (objective) argument is delivered in a neutral tone.
2. A speaker should speak in a formal way to be understood by everyone.
3. A professor/A doctor/A police officer… is someone we can trust because he/she is a
specialist, or someone who can help us.
4. A report should not be objective. It should be about your emotions.
5. A document about the history of a movement should be neutral because it is informative. An
informative document is about a specific topic.
6. An informative document usually uses figures to support its information.
7. A neutral document is a document that provides information, and gives the author’s opinion
or emotions.
8. A biased document (subjective) is a document that only provides information.
Recap:
An informative document provides information about a topic. It uses figures to support its
information. It does not provide opinions or emotions because information is supposed to be
neutral. A speaker should present information in a formal language so that everyone understands
him/her. He/she should use a neutral tone to deliver the information. Individuals who are
specialists, representatives of the law or have a position of authority are usually trusted.
Activity One: Listening Comprehension
An Audio- The History of Graffiti and Street Art.
The document has been divided in four parts to help you understand better.
Part 1.
a. Listen to the first part of the document three times, and identify the words you hear
from the list.
Graffiti – murals – origin – originate – 1976 – 1967 - student – studies – tagging – competition –
artists – accessible – inaccessible – public – private – paint – painting – original – originality –
content – discontent – evolve – evolution – locations – locate – seeing – seen – hear – heard
b. Write a paragraph in English explaining the main ideas of part 1.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Part 2: Read the second part of the document, and choose the words that you expect to be
stressed:
In the early 1970s, as a transgressional type of art, graffiti was quickly considered as vandalism
by some cities, like New York City, who decided to declare a war on it; however, it also won so much
praise that some art galleries started buying graffiti. That is when the movement really took off as a
new art form and diversified.
Check your work listening to the document.
Part 3: Listen three times to part 3, and match the information with the correct artist. There
might be several numbers in one box.
A – Jean-Michel Basquiat 1 – white chalk drawing artist
B – Keith Haring 2 – Denounce the controlling nature of state power
C – Blek le Rat 3 - British
4 - French
D – Banksy 5 – denounce homophobia and AIDS
E – Blek le Rat and Banksy 6 – spray-paint artist
F – Jean-Michel Basquiat and Keith Haring 7 – stencil artist
Part 4: Listen to part 4, and choose the correct word:
However, many [street art / stencil art] artists have now [achievable / achieved] mainstream success
in what was, at first, a [grassroots / grassland] movement. Galleries and [collections / collectors]
compete over the possession of their artworks. As the urge to revitalize urban neighborhoods grows,
they are also becoming [economical and social / economic and socializing] drivers to successfully
bring changes to [underprivileged / underpriced] neighborhoods and communities.
- Listen to the whole document again, and put the following sentences in the order of the text:
a. It quickly became a transgressional movement.
b. Galleries started buying some artworks.
c. It spread out and took different forms.
d. In the late 1960s, graffiti appeared in Philadelphia.
e. Some cities decided to fight it.
f. They have also become drivers who help poor communities.
g. Plenty of people compete to collect their artworks.
h. The artists would use inaccessible public places to paint graffiti.
i. A lot of street art artists are now successful.
j. It was considered as vandalism.
Activity Two: Speaking
Nigel Morris, (CC BY 2.0), Graffiti Building in Queens, NYC.
[Link]
Read the text and choose the correct word:
This document is a [painting / photograph / drawing]. It shows an old building that has been covered
with [graffiti / stickers / yarn]. The colors are [bright/dull/dark], which gives the building a [gloomy
/ sinister / lively] look. The main colors are red, blue, green, purple, and yellow. They contrast with
the [dilapidated / new / glossy] aspect of the building. The [vertical / horizontal / diagonal] lines are
reinforced by the color red, and the [vertical / horizontal / diagonal] lines are used to display the
graffiti. The [red / blue / purple] color on each side of the building outlines the brightness of the work.
The outside [vertical / horizontal / diagonal] stairs which lead to the fifth floor are covered with
graffiti too.
In the [top right-hand / top left-hand / bottom right-hand] corner of the building is a tower with a
bright green graffiti [at the bottom / in the middle / at the top] of it. [On the right / In the middle / On
the left] of the photo is a diagonal staircase going to the [top / bottom / middle] of the building. In the
[bottom
right-hand / bottom left-hand / top left-hand] corner, is the top of a concrete building with a small
shed on top of it covered with graffiti. At the [top / bottom / middle], we can see many cars parked [in
front of / behind / above] the building. Most of them are in the [bottom left-hand / bottom right-hand
/ top right-hand] corner.
Activity Three: Reading Comprehension
Read the following text:
February 16, 2018 9.09am EST, [Link]
Enrico Bonadio, Senior Lecturer in Law, City, University of London
It’s an extraordinary tale with a whiff of Banksy about it, although surprisingly, he was not involved.
In a landmark ruling, 21 New York street artists have sued and won US$6.7m in damages from the
owner of a building who destroyed their graffiti when he had the building demolished.
Following a three-week trial in November, on February 12, Judge Frederic Block ruled against Jerry
Wolkoff, owner of the 5Pointz complex in Queens, conferring the biggest award of $1.3m on the
building’s mastermind-curator, graffiti artist Meres One, real name Jonathan Cohen.
The demolition of the former factory site turned graffiti mecca began in August 2014. The year before,
artists had tried to oppose the warehouse’s destruction, but an attempt to win an injunction to prevent
the owner from knocking it down was unsuccessful.
In the 1990s, Wolkoff had agreed to allow the derelict factory to be used as a showcase for local
graffiti talent. Called the Phun Factory, it was later renamed 5Pointz by Meres One in 2002. Under the
artist’s watchful eye, it evolved into an “aerosol art centre” and became famous the world over, a huge
draw for graffiti aficionados and tourists alike.
In the end, Wolkoff profited from the graffiti and its destruction, when the value of the complex went
up from $40m to $200m and permission to build luxury condos was obtained. Destroying 5Pointz, the
judge stressed, permitted Wolkoff to realise that value.
Proper Works of Art
Judge Block accepted that 45 artworks at the centre of the case had “recognised stature” and must
receive protection under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), a piece of legislation which was
introduced in the US in 1990 to protect artists’ moral rights – but has rarely been applied in their
favour.
The rationale used by the court to confirm these artworks were of merit was crucial. To be considered
such, works of art don’t need to be mentioned in academic publications or be considered masterpieces,
as the expert for the property owner had argued.
It was enough, the judge said, for the 5Pointz artists to show their professional achievements in terms
of residences, teaching positions, fellowships, public and private commissions as well as media
coverage and social media presence.
Judge Block also carefully examined Wolkoff’s behaviour. The artworks – even those that could be
easily removed as they had been placed on plywood panels – were whitewashed prior to demolition
without giving artists the 90-day notice required by VARA. And the owner did so, the judge stressed,
while conscious of the fact the artists were pursuing a VARA-based legal action. Such behaviour, the
judge concluded, was not acceptable.
Such blatant disregard for an important legal provision pushed the judge to award the artists the
maximum amount of damages allowable under the law. And although he did not grant the injunction
requested by the artists in 2013, the judge had warned Wolkoff that he would be exposed to potentially
high damages if the artworks were finally considered of “recognised stature”, as they were by the
February 12 ruling.
The court also took into account that 5Pointz had become an attraction for visitors to New York, with
busloads of tourists, schoolchildren and even weddings heading to the site. Also, thanks to Meres
One’s savvy stewardship for more than a decade, not only was the complex painted regularly by
talented graffiti artists from all over the world, 5Pointz also attracted movie producers, advertising
companies and bands, and was used as a location for the climax for the 2013 film Now You See Me.
The judge did not attach much importance to the fact that several artworks at 5Pointz were not meant
to be permanent, an argument that had also been relied on by Wolkoff to claim that the pieces could
not be protected. But the court reminded him that VARA protects both permanent and temporary art.
This is an important provision of the law, especially when all that makes a work transient is the site
owner’s expressed intention to remove it.
Art v Property
This ruling may well embolden other graffiti artists to sue property owners who destroy artworks
without following the correct procedure, even beyond the US. It may also make owners of buildings
whose walls host graffiti more careful. Most important, the huge amount of damages awarded in this
case will convince many that ignoring legal provisions and disregarding legitimate graffiti art is not a
good idea.
Judge Block made clear he awarded the maximum penalty allowable to deter other building owners
from behaving in the same disrespectful way as Wolkoff.
Finally, the decision clearly marks the evolution of graffiti and street art, long considered to be
temporary or transient artforms. It is now clear that artistic movements such as these aim to become
more permanent forms of art, and that they have achieved a status similar to the one traditionally held
by works of “fine art”.
So, the gap between “street art” and “fine art” is narrowing. As 5Pointz curator Meres One put it:
“This case will probably change the way art is perceived for generations to come.”
1. Global comprehension:
a. Choose the correct answer:
The author’s name is: Banksy Enrico Bonadio
The document is: old (>10 years old) new (<10 years old)
The document is: an article a novel
The document is: about Judge Frederic Block about graffiti artists
Check the answers.
b. Put the events back in chronological order matching them with the dates:
1990s: ……………………
2002: ………………..……
2013: ………..……………
2014: …………..…………
A - The artists tried to oppose the warehouse’s destruction but were unsuccessful.
B - The warehouse was destroyed.
C - The owner allowed the artists to use his Phun factory as a place to express their art.
D - The factory was renamed 5Pointz, and became world-wide famous.
c. Find a headline (title) for the text.
………………………………………………………….
2. Detailed comprehension:
a. Read the part ‘Proper Works of Art’ and say whether the judge (J) or the owner’s expert (O) used the
following arguments:
…...……: Artworks which are of merit must be protected.
…...……: Artworks are mentioned in academic publications.
…...……: Artworks are present in the media.
…...……: Artworks are masterpieces.
b. Read ‘Proper works of Art’, then find synonyms for the following words in the text:
1. Comportement : …...…......................................................
2. Enlevées : …...…......................................................
3. Recouvertes de blanc : …...…......................................................
4. Avant : …...…......................................................
5. Exigée : …...…......................................................
6. Évident : …...…......................................................
7. Condition : …...…......................................................
8. Accorder (2 verbes) : …...…......................................................
9. Autorisé : …...…......................................................
10. Décision : …...…......................................................
c. Choose the correct proposition to complete the text with the following words:
Attitude / admissible / largest / not given / paint
The owner’s …...…....................................... was examined by the judge. The owner had
…...…....................................... the 90-day notice required by VARA, and had covered the artworks
with …...…......................................., even though the artists were pursuing a legal action.
The judge decided to give the artists the …...…....................................... sum of money that he could to
make people understand that such behaviour was not …...…........................................
d. Read ‘Art vs Property’, and identify the four consequences that this ruling will have. Write a
paragraph to rephrase them in your own words:
Toolbox
Embolden (rendre plus audacieux) - Disregarding (ignorer) - Deter (dissuader) - Achieved (acquis) -
behave (se comporter) Narrowing (se retrécit) - Hesitate (hésiter) – dare (oser) + to v – discourage
from (décourager de) – consider (considérer)
