LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Banksy’s mural is public property

“Banksy’s “˜Crayola Shooter’ mural should be welcomed and protected by Westwood residents” (Feb. 23) praises Banksy’s Westwood piece as a valuable contribution to our cultural substance; however, numerous claims in this piece are ill-informed and render its conclusion unreasonable.

The article claims that the public must protect Banksy’s piece while simultaneously asserting that “Crayola Shooter” has been disrespected by a tagger.

Unfortunately, the board contradicts itself with these claims. By definition, graffiti art is public.

The tradition of graffiti welcomes the competition and nastiness that the board improperly frames as “vandalism.”

Hate to break it to you, but that Banksy piece is vandalism, and graffiti thrives as a rebel art form. Furthermore, this error illuminates the collapse of the article’s conclusion.

When one privileges artists such as Banksy as cultural lifesavers or significant graffiti innovators, one adheres to definitions of graffiti art sustained by Urban Outfitters.

Is it a coincidence that Banksy’s piece is conveniently near a store that sells Banksy books for 30 bucks?

While the article posits that preserving Banksy’s piece is crucial to reminding folks that Westwood is still on the cultural radar, the author’s argument shows how Westwood hungrily consumes definitions of graffiti culture fed by people who don’t know a thing about graffiti culture.

Rather than getting riled up about Banksy’s piece, we should be praising the person who tagged the mural for reminding us that, luckily, not all people take cues from Urban Outfitters to qualify graffiti culture.

Tiffany Nocon
Fourth-year, English