When I first saw the graffiti, it was actually my mom who brought up the idea. She was shocked to see it; in her 18 years of living here it has never shown up. This got me thinking to what has changed in Winnetka that would conclude to this happening. After a bit of research I found that there were 20,000 more calls about graffiti in 2013 than 2012 in the city of Chicago. 2013 received 100,000 calls asking for the removal of the "art". I finally decided that maybe nothing has changed in Winnetka, it was just random.
If those 100,000 calls don't surprise you, maybe the $6.5 million dollars on graffiti removal in Chicago will. If we are spending $6.5 million dollars annually, why do some neighborhoods continue to have it around every corner, and on nearly every building? When I go to the city, or drive through other neighborhoods like evanston, graffiti is nearly everywhere. So much that the addition of a few more drawings would hardly be noticeable among the rest. You might see why the appearance of a bit of graffiti in the prestine streets of Winnetka came as a shock.
First there is the amount that a specific neighborhood is willing to spend on the removal. Where would they rather put $6.5 million dollars annually, towards better schools and teachers or towards the appearance of the area? This is otherwise known as opportunity costs. In addition to the problem of opportunity costs, there is also the factor of what the people value. Typically, I would say that upperclass people care more about appearance, therefor they don't want to look out their windows and see the sometimes-but rarely, artistic "art".
The last factor is the amount of time that people have on their hands. The northshore has many stay at home parents who have time to call up the village and complain about the graffiti. In lowerclass neighborhoods, people might just be too busy to call. It may not even cross their minds. While this is a bit of a generalization, because of course there are many families in the northshore with two working parents, it does come in to play.
First there is the amount that a specific neighborhood is willing to spend on the removal. Where would they rather put $6.5 million dollars annually, towards better schools and teachers or towards the appearance of the area? This is otherwise known as opportunity costs. In addition to the problem of opportunity costs, there is also the factor of what the people value. Typically, I would say that upperclass people care more about appearance, therefor they don't want to look out their windows and see the sometimes-but rarely, artistic "art".
The last factor is the amount of time that people have on their hands. The northshore has many stay at home parents who have time to call up the village and complain about the graffiti. In lowerclass neighborhoods, people might just be too busy to call. It may not even cross their minds. While this is a bit of a generalization, because of course there are many families in the northshore with two working parents, it does come in to play.
What sort of neighborhood stands for graffiti to be left up and more importantly, for how long? I didn't even get the chance to take a photo of the graffiti before it was taken down. It was up for three weeks maximum before it disappeared and the streets (actually street, there was only one small appearance) of Winnetka were back to their prestine state.
2 comments:
Interesting blog Isabel. I think there are a number of other factors that cause the suburbs to have less grafiti than their more urban counterparts. For example, the simple fact that the suburbs have less concrete buildings, and more houses doesn't allow for as many places to paint. If there are less places to paint then it wont be as popular. In addition to this, living in an urban environment gives you more exposure to street art so it's less of a shock when you see it. Finally, graffitti in the city tends to look much better than anything you see in the suburbs so people have less of a problem with it because it actually looks cool. I would agree that any graffitti done in an commonly seen location does get taken down very quickly. My best friend actually is really into street art and when ever he puts up a stencil or a tag it's usually taken down in a matter of weeks.
Agreed with Erik -- interesting idea for a post and a great WHY question.
I do think that some careful editing could make this stronger, though.
1) Need more empathy for the reader. Would everyone in your audience understand the difference between Winnetka, Evanston, and Chicago?
2) Need a tighter focus. Stick with a city vs suburb comparison. Or just the opportunity costs in the city. OR just the explanation of why graffiti disappears so quickly in the UC areas.
Post a Comment