The category comes with a certain amount of ambiguity baked in. Street art is inherently hard to define, It is difficult to categorize as sometimes it can feature graffiti, or other times more image-based work. The former oftentimes features alongside the latter, but the uniting elements include the use of stencils and/or elements of reproduction, allusions to and questioning of everyday visuals or slogans, and of course its ‘street’ setting—or indeed proximity to its roots.
Graffiti art should be generally viewed as a distinct category due to its focus on lettering and authorial expression, the bounds of street art are more aesthetically slippery. It may borrow heavily from advertising, branding, traditional mural making, and pop culture aesthetics or methods of creation and dissemination. While the category may focus more on figuration than graffiti, it’s not limited to pictorial representation—conceptual, sculptural, electronic, and performance practices have been variously incorporated into the porous bounds of street art.
Despite this aesthetic omnivorousness, Street art belongs on the street. In the cases of both [street art and graffiti], the authentic original definitions would most likely require that the works were illegally done on the street in a public view. Works made in studio specifically for the market would not accurately be described as graffiti or street art. They may be ‘graffiti-style’ or ‘street art–inspired’ works, but essentially they are fine art works. In this view, the “street” in street art connotes not just a lineage of image-making, but an anti-authority, anti-commercial ethos.
As street artists are commissioned to do murals, versus the installing of that image without permission—that is often where the roots of it have been, A public monument wouldn’t be considered street art, because it’s commissioned, it went through a review process.
Image : Work by Mr. Allan Detail Seven