Between art and vandalism: discourse representation of graffiti and street art

Today we are witnessing significant cultural changes. The new model of culture can no longer be hierarchical and base on binary structures. The tree model is changing to the rhizome model. Rizome offers a high level of freedom in making new connections that generate cultural reality. Big narrative as a normative instance is being replaced by separate discourses that dictate norms only within themselves. In this article, we explore how the specificity of different discourses (legislative discourse, discourses of the art world and public opinion) affects the representation in them of such cultural phenomena as graffiti and street art works. From a legal point of view, graffiti and illegal street art are acts of vandalism and deserve punishment. The legislative branch operates in the field of two concepts - «permitted»/«prohibited». The semantic space of the legislative discourse has retained a binary structure and hierarchical organization. The discourse generated by the institutions of the art world is very mobile, the binary structure and hierarchical organization of its semantic space have disappeared. There obviously takes place the rhizome principle of organizing the normative space of the art world and the increasing role of the individual principle in the formation of a discursive statement. These features of the discourse created an opportunity for street artists to enter the world of art. The study of the discourse of public opinion was carried out through sociological research. Most young people not only distinguish graffiti from vandalism but are also ready to see it as a form of contemporary art. We explain the clear correlation in the responses of young people in different cities by a single media space. The results of the study confirm the disintegration of a single normative space and its replacement by local (specific) discourses.