Categories
Opinions

“I was here”

The under-appreciated art of bathroom graffiti.

“Should I break up with my boyfriend?” was scrawled on the bathroom wall in Sharpie. 

Underneath, an extensive list of pros and cons. In different inks and handwriting, others had replied: “DUMP HIM NOW!” “You deserve better!!!” and “Girl, run.”

This was all on the stall door of my CEGEP bathroom that I sometimes visited just to read the writing on the walls. I amused myself reading this make-shift discussion board, shaking my head at the man being described and nodding at the advice these helpful strangers had given. A few days later, the original scribe added a final word: “I broke up with him!”

Not long after, the entire bathroom was painted over in a coat of white paint, erasing this message chain as well as hundreds of other words and doodles. I was enraged. I have always had a fierce love for bathroom wall graffiti—I would argue that what schools might call vandalism is an art form and an important form of communication. It even has a scholarly term: latrinalia. 

Latrinalia takes on so many forms, from declarations of love and other confessions to rude messages and random thoughts. The words can also be more serious, with political messages or pleas for advice. There is a stark contrast between serious messages and nonsensical scribblings. Intricate drawings sit beside crude sketches, and the notes often flip between earnest and irreverent. Because the form is entirely anonymous, people feel comfortable revealing secrets and being honest in their beliefs, which creates an ecosystem of thoughts and feelings. 

In this sense, the graffiti becomes a communication method as an ongoing dialogue with total strangers. Messages of solidarity and camaraderie are common, and people sometimes ask for advice or start lists and tallies. 

Bathroom graffiti is nothing new, either—in Pompeii, ancient graffiti revealed insults, jokes, and slogans. In The Guardian, Chiara Wilkinson writes: “Since ancient Rome, public bathroom scrawl – or latrinalia – has proved its power to entertain and enrage as well as highlighting society’s most divisive issues.” 

It’s interesting to see which bathrooms on campus and across the city have the best graffiti. The women’s bathrooms on the third floor bathroom of the VA building and the second floor of the EV building are some of my favourites. Of course, bar bathrooms are excellent too; The Bar Le Ritz bathroom is a classic. 

Bar bathrooms are particularly special because they tend to embrace the graffiti rather than paint over it. This isn’t always the case across campus, of course. “White paint is political” declares a stairwell in the VA that is repeatedly painted over in the quest for a blank wall. The relentless erasure is especially disappointing in an arts building—so long as the messages aren’t hateful, they should be respected. Who gets to decide what is valid art and what isn’t?

It might sound stupid, but bathroom graffiti is important. It’s a reflection of what’s on people’s minds—what brings us together, what divides us. It’s collaborative but also controversial, and I would even go so far as to call it a folk art. Its longevity is a testament to its power: humans were scratching “I was here” on the bathroom wall thousands of years ago and will continue to do so for as long as there’s a bathroom wall to write on.

On that note—mere days after a coat of white paint erased my favourite bathroom graffiti, the walls were again plastered with Sharpie and pen marks. Just as they should be. 

Categories
Opinions

Vandalism: An occasionally necessary subversion

Can vandalism of historical statues ever be justified as activism?

My views towards vandalism always depend on the circumstances, but I do believe it can be justified to promote change.

In the past month, Canada’s first prime minister has been in the headlines. According to a Montreal Gazette article published on Nov. 12, an anonymous group of “anti-colonial anti-racists” claimed responsibility for spray-painting a statue of Sir John A. Macdonald in Place du Canada in downtown Montreal. The group filmed themselves in the act and posted the video online. The same article specified that the activists claimed Macdonald was a “white supremacist.”

According to works published by Timothy Stanley, a professor at the University of Ottawa, it appears Macdonald was indeed the first to incorporate racism into Canadian politics. He hated the Chinese, wove laws allowing colonialists to profit from Aboriginal property, and believed an Aryan Canada was key to a successful future, according to Stanley. Allowing problematic figures to remain glorified in ore not only casts a shadow on our public spaces in a literal sense, but also on our identity as an egalitarian society. In my opinion, if Canada prides itself on promoting freedom and acceptance, it must recognize the faults in its initial development.

Acknowledging past racism is important. Recognition serves as a tool for reconciliation and a sign of respect towards those who were preyed on throughout history. If the government does not address aspects of its antecedents and instead allows racist figures to remain honoured in statues, memorial buildings and commemorative plaques, I believe it actively encourages institutionalized racism. Every individual’s vision of progress is subjective. While I might believe vandalizing a statue of Macdonald is a way to demolish respect for supremacists, others will surely disagree.

Yet if Macdonald thought it was acceptable to exclude entire cultures from a developing Canada, are we not allowed to believe it’s acceptable to deface his statue with red paint? In my opinion, “damaging property” is sometimes the most productive way to promote change.

Yet, I do not always agree with others who use vandalism to convey a message, such as the anonymous graffiti artist Banksy. I find his street pieces, which comment on issues that plague the world, extremely clever and tasteful. However, due to his disagreements with the concept of institutionalized art, he also has a history of defacing paintings preserved in galleries.

I view these modifications—such as painting a gas mask on a woman’s face in a piece at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art—as counterproductive in the spread of free art philosophies. Banksy’s tweaking of other individuals’ work seems more like a juvenile prank than a calculated move. The purpose of the Macdonald vandalism was to debase a racist, whereas Banksy’s modifications just disrespect artworks.

Some might feel that vandalizing Macdonald’s statue is too radical. However, racism is sadly embedded in Canada’s past, therefore society must make an effort to recognize injustice in an attempt to achieve equality. I believe many of us want to break away from what the founders of Canada’s Confederation built off of. However, if our streets are still sprinkled with statues of known racists and colonialists, is it possible to be progressive? There are peaceful ways to protest without paint, but I believe vandalism expedites change by calling attention to injustices that hide in plain sight around our cities.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Step up or step off: if you want our space, pay for it

An open letter from The Concordian to everyone who dumps on our turf

Every week, it’s the same story. The Concordian comes out, and just a few days later, it starts: different pamphlets and ads begin to cover the print edition of the paper. Sometimes, people even throw their trash in our distribution booths, or consider our booths to be some sort of lost and found bin.

Our booths are very clearly identified. They say the name of our publication on them. Our smaller ones, which are metal, are the perfect size for our publication, and nothing more.

When it is so obvious that our booths are made for the distribution of our publication, it is therefore shocking to us how often, and how many, ads are thrown onto it. The people distributing these ads clearly know what they are doing, there is no way not to. The same goes for those who throw their trash on top of our publication; there is no way that you don’t know what you are doing, the same way that you notice when you throw litter on the street. Although it is wrong, you do it anyway.

The worst part of this is that these pamphlets and ads are coming mostly from Concordia groups. For example, the distribution booth in the entrance of the SP building at Loyola campus has had tons of Concordia bookstore flyers thrown onto it, as well as over 20 copies of Concordia’s Bridge magazine–a magazine for new students. As Concordia initiatives, shouldn’t you all respect The Concordian’s space? Not to mention the fact that student publications offer inexpensive ad space where campus causes can get the word out to students easily and respectfully.

And this is not just the case for our publication–all of Concordia’s booths face the same issue: a total disregard for reserved space.

The booths are not there for just anyone to use. Please, respect the space of Concordia’s different publications. Use the allotted spaces to distribute pamphlets, ads, and announcements. As for your trash, it goes without saying that everyone should take those extra three steps and put trash in recycling or garbage bins.

Exit mobile version