The exhibition at the Zuiderzeemuseum made me think of the term Folklore and it’s definition. What is folklore exactly? Is it a period in time or a certain style? There was clothes, drawings and design objects at the exibition as well as graffiti from Shoe. Is that Folklore too? For me folklore is a period of time, with a certain way of style that we can look back upon. We don’t think of folklore if we look at ourselves today! We are not in a kind of folklore YET, we will be in the future, for sure. But not today. And graffiti will be a part of our folklore too, because it is a big part of our culture, but that time hasn’t come yet. Maybe in a 100 years people will look back at us and talk about the funny way of our communication; ‘HAHA they used walls and paint to express their feelings.” But not today, we don’t see graffiti that way, for us it is normal, it is just something that is there. As it was for the people wearing ‘kraplaps’ and the traditional clothing. They didn’t look at themselves, surprised, they way we do now. Graffiti is our culture, not our folklore. Yet.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
I’m truly glad u also think graffiti is not part of folklore, though you think it is important in the development of our history. I don’t see how…
September 16th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
As far as I understand the term of folklore has a very open definition.
It is the way that a certain group of people, that practices the same culture, communicates through traditions and images.
Griffiti painters can form their own cultural group in a city and they start a form of communication through the images they make.
To me this is a good example of modern folklore.
September 17th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Cecile Wentges
cecilewent@hotmail.com
Can’t we count graffiti to folklore? I believe we can.
Graffiti goes all the way back to the Roman period. They have actually found drawings made by Vikings on Roman walls. Throughout time graffiti has been used as a unique way of expression, but is has basically been seen as vandalism. Though in the 80’s in New York graffiti became a form of art. Like Keith Haring said: “The metro-stations are my galleries and there is my public”. Together with Jean-Michel Basquiat, he was one of the greatest graffiti artists of that time. With this new form of art came a new style. A certain way of living that is still found nowadays. In my opinion this new and outspoken style, with it’s own music and clothing’s, that was or even still is connected to graffiti, can also be seen as folklore. We can’t connect it to a special region, because these big artists like Keith Haring and Jean-Michel Basquiat and many more brought this style all over the world. But it is certainly a style that is recognized by many people and to which individuals all over the world might feel connected.
September 20th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
I’m not sure that graffiti can be define as a part of folklore.
Despite the fact that it is an old pratice, today constantly reinterpreted, who is associated with a type of music and that the knowledge spreads and evolves, I think graffiti is more a way of expression and reaction. In spite of many people who are practicing, it’s an approach relatively individual (name, signature,…) who looks same as artists one.
Other way graffiti is not today entirely accepted in our society. Although if it’s a part, I think folklore define more traditions, symbols, ideas totally accepted and rooted in our society. Because they derive more from ways to live, ways to create with the environment who are logic with dominant thoughts.
Graffiti is rather a rebel or interpellation act. For people it’s in their quotidian and in their folklore, but because it’s still illegal, it’s not completely in our collective unconscious and social structure.
You can have folklore in graffiti but graffiti is not folklore.