JUCS 7 (2+3) pp. 187–198 Intellect Limited 2020 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies Volume 7 Numbers 2 & 3 © 2020 Intellect Ltd Special Issue. English language. https://doi.org/10.1386/jucs_00025_1 Received 10 March 2020; Accepted 24 July 2020 SPECIAL ISSUE TIJEN TUNALI Aarhus University Street art between business and resistance ABSTRACT KEYWORDS Street art, with its subcultural character, has been looked upon for its potential for social aesthetic and political dissidence. While some accounts have diverted attention to street art’s utopia with its creative dissidence and regenerative potential, others have insisted that street art has already been coopted by the aesthetic and institutional order of the neo-liberal economy. Street art has been both a product of and a response to the unequal distribution of resources and visibility in the city. A dialectical study that investigates both sides of the coin showing art’s aesthetic, spatial, social and political situation in the changing neo-liberal urban landscape is needed. Analysing simultaneously the hegemonic restructuring of the urban environment and the growth of counter-hegemonic resistance on the streets requires taking into account the plurality and complexity of the links between the urban environment, society and arts. This thematic journal issue offers a multigeographical and interdisciplinary perspective to analyse how street art, as an aesthetic dispositive, functions dialectically as both resource and resistance in the sociopolitical make-up of the urban landscape. urban aesthetics neo-liberal urbanism street art social resistance urban social movements aesthetics and politics urban culture www.intellectbooks.com 187 Tijen Tunali INTRODUCTION The urban environment is a physical expression of social relations, movements and ideologies (Fainstein 2001; Harvey 1989). Therefore, changes to it can provide some insights into broader political reforms that could produce and reproduce everyday urban life. Many studies have presented a highly sophisticated and detailed analysis of neo-liberal urbanism and how urban public space has become an urban policy tool of a pervasive significance (Fainstein and Gladstone 1997; Low and Smith 2006; Smyth 1994). It is also a concurring discussion that the rapid and intensive urban regeneration thrives on the organization of sensory experience in the city. In this aesthetic–political environment of the urban space, on the one side is urban aesthetics of neoliberal capitalism that puts the interests of capital over the interests of ordinary inhabitants and the other side is the aesthetic disposition of the urban social movements, and artistic activism against the uneven urban development and urban decay. Street art, as an urban cultural phenomenon, stands in the middle of these two forces that compete for the collective sensorium of the urban space and has a growing power to negotiate the aesthetic reconfiguration of it. Some social science scholars have had an interest in cultural and artistic urban politics and the role street art in urban development and gentrification (Deutsche 1996; Ducret 1994; Landry et al. 1996; Ley 2003; Mathews 2010; Cameron and Coaffe 2005; Zukin 1995). Other scholars across humanities disciplines have investigated the relationship between street art and the sociocultural dynamics in the urban environment (Riggle 2010; Ross 2016; Bengtsen 2018). The relationship of the politics of urban space and street art is occasionally studied by historians and art historians, often on the fringes of studies devoted to urban social movements. However, how art re-appropriates the urban space as a privileged site of political visibility and political agency is still an underdeveloped area of study. By bringing together innovative and original studies that investigate street art in various urban contexts and with different methodological takes, this issue discusses how street art politics negotiate between commercial interest and social resistance in the aesthetically and politically contested arena of the urban space. Street art has a broad scope of interests from inserting a subcultural motif to the cityscape to taking part in the struggle for civil rights, individual and collective freedoms, to urban social movements against austerity measures and authoritative regimes. For the greater public, street art is a blatant form of vandalism in its claimed authority over public spaces, while others recognize its cultural and political value (MacDowall 2006). Thus, street art’s public image is situated somewhere between the inappropriate use of public space and rebellious art. As an art form street art is arguably ‘democratic’ as it is inclusive, unsanctioned and tries to keep itself away from the racial, colonial and classist world of the art institutions (Bengtsen and Arvidsson 2014). The street artists, especially graffiti writers, often regard their work as the occupation of public spaces by the dispossessed (Avramidis and Tsilimpounidi 2017). This thematic journal section explores the potential theoretical and empirical inputs that a spatial and urban approach to street art can bring to the understanding of both arts and the urban space. It offers a multidimensional and interdisciplinary perspective to analyse how street art functions as an integral part of the sociopolitical space of the urban landscape both as business and resistance: How does street art reveal, delimit or question the complexity 188 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies Street art between business and resistance of neo-liberal urbanization? How can we interpret the aesthetics and politics of street art from the perspective of subcultures, freedom of expression and the limits of criminality? What prompts street artists to communicate with urban dwellers with their marks on the city’s surface? How does street art respond uniquely to gentrification? How does street art partake in social movements? Most of current research studies take ‘graffiti’ and ‘street art’ as different artistic phenomena although it is difficult to delineate a clear differentiation between them. The articles in this section individually make claims on the two terms as cultural and artistic dispositions in their own right and within the context that they are discussed. On the other hand, for the section’s title, the term ‘street art’ is chosen to work as an umbrella term to indicate ephemeral and unsanctioned art in the streets that incorporates graffiti as well. Street art is a highly complex and multifaceted art practice that covers a wide variety of social and public locations in the city, ranging from the street to the squares, from the park to the art galleries. Street art practices embrace multiple mediums, techniques, materials, styles and forms such as graffiti, murals (wall paintings), yarn bombing, stickers, stencilling, wheat pastes, laser projections, flash mobbing, urban gardening, street performances and theatrical actions, among others. The factors that play a role in this diversity of forms and visual languages depend on the character of (sub-)cultures and identities, socio-economic conditions, artistic skills and knowledge, and conviviality and sociability of the aesthetic form. Yet, all street art works demand active spectatorship and an engaged perceiver (Whybrow 2011). That engagement, whether by reading or looking or listening, is an essential contribution to the total communicative process in the public space (Wilson 1986). As such, it works as a ‘framing device’ for the community around it and acts as a ‘parallel voice of the city’ (Lewisohn 2008: 30) that creates visual and sometimes textual compositions as the intermediary between the public and the urban space. In the time of neo-liberal urban redesign and restructuring, when commercial interests gain too much influence over public space, the ultimate result is a destruction of the sense of shared ownership of that space (that it belongs to the people) and erosion of civic identity. Furthermore, public interaction becomes carefully planned, mediated and commodified. Street art is thus an assertion, a competition for visibility; all the while urban public space is always a place of competition for power by managing the power of visibility. This creative struggle for visibility, separable from the anonymity of many street artists, has become an intrinsic part of the social symbolic world and urban culture (Irvine 2012). Irvine argues that: ‘Street art inserts itself in the material city as an argument about visuality, the social and political structure of being visible’ (Irvine 2012: 237). The way street art presents itself as a visual discourse embedded in the streets of a city and the way it reveals the effects of controlled visibility are important to understand how we can make sense of the urban visual culture and political significance of street art in increasingly militarized, policed, surveilled or otherwise controlled urban contexts. For Irvine, street art stands in the intersection of two regimes, namely, two ways of distributing visibility: the institutional regime imposed by politics, law and property rights, and the aesthetic regime of the artworld, where the boundary between art and non-art is established (Irvine 2012: 253). Street art is arguably an institutional antinomy as it depends on the tensions of working outside traditional art spaces and the ways in which it engages with urban public space. This makes it antithetical to the art world (Riggle 2010: 248). In the late 1980s, the notion of the museum as a guardian of the public www.intellectbooks.com 189 Tijen Tunali patrimony has given way to the museum as a corporate entity with a highly marketable inventory. The desire for growth in the art world’s quest to expand itself has resulted in street art’s entrance to the museum and the art market at great cost. The growing visibility of street art in the 1980s and its relationship to subculture generated the attention of the art world; however, it took decades for the street art to be canonized as fine arts and become a commercial phenomenon (Wells 2010). After the millennium, street art’s appearance in the cyberspace popularized it as a part of the cultural industry and the leisure market. While street art has been more and more incorporated into the museum space, computer screens art fairs and festivals, commercial art and other visual media have been invading the street as a part of the new aestheticization of the urban space. The examples vary from mass stencilling by movie production companies to posters, billboards and projected advertisements. Street art has become another instrument for the expansion of the art market although art on the street as unsanctioned work is made to function in a different way than art created for the gallery that is sanctioned and curated (Bengsten 2013: 68). The burgeoning theories of aesthetics and politics foreground how the dialectical relationship between creative spatial practices and social resistance could challenge the use of space as well as communication and culture foreground how the dialectical relationship between creative spatial practices and social resistance could challenge the use of space and sense-making by urban inhabitants. For Jacques Rancière, aesthetics and politics simultaneously define the subjectivities that articulate a sense to the common world. For Rancière, aesthetics partake in a regime that is a system of a particular ‘partition of the sensible’ that configures habitual ways of seeing, of saying, of feeling and doing. The participation in that aesthetic regime determines individuals’ possibilities and abilities for political action in accordance with their positions within the society (Rancière 2004). Through this theory, urban aesthetics is to be understood as a knot that ties together a particular sense of sensibility and a sense of community. In other words, the aesthetics of the urban space inform and influence how we make sense and how sense maybe ‘sensed’. Thus, according to Rancière, the regime of distribution of the sensible is what makes aestheticization of politics possible but its re-distribution can make re-politicization of aesthetics possible. Street art, as an art genre, takes its political character and its discontents by being situated in both of these paradigms. Hence, which kinds of street art activities challenge the urban distribution of the sensible and which ones become a part of this unevenly distributed urban sensorium? Street art engages the masses through creativity, originality and beauty in the urban space and creates a particular sociality. From the perspective of this sociality, street art is an arena where art, individual and community come together for a re-composition of the shared sensorium. Street art enters the culture of the economy as soon as it establishes a relation between art and the public. Therefore, street art has been a good resource for local governments to market their respective cities to real-estate investors and global tourism, to corporate businesses seeking good public relations, and to cultural tourists who contribute to the image of the global city. In the last two decades, such visual domination (corporate, public and private) have become one of the main features of the public image and branding of a city that commodifies urban space to produce collective consumption. This is often achieved by the saturation of life with signs, images and simulations. Such aestheticization 190 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies Street art between business and resistance arguably intensifies the urban experience, empties social meanings, and spatializes social relations (Frisby 1991: 76). The political projection of this development is for the hegemony over the sensorium of the urban space, thus everyday urban life (Markin 2013). In the cities, attractive corporate-sponsored street art complete the pleasure of freshly brewed latte, the fusion restaurants and art galleries compete for empty lots. Our senses and sensibilities in our daily life are more and more determined by neo-liberal actors that privilege profit over people. Now, from barbershops to restaurants, from hostel owners to music club proprietors, the citadins (urban dwellers) who take part in the commercial activities in the city understand that street art is part of the ‘coolness’ that makes the city an attractive tourist destination and a hotspot for young middle-class professionals. This Special Section elaborates on the thesis that street art is not merely art in the urban public space, but art that institutes a public place – a place of interaction and common action among people. Indeed, street art interacts with the hidden features of the urban space and highlights the fact that public space is a territory of antagonism. That is the antagonism between the politics of urbanity that utilizes art as a property in the service of power capital and politics of subaltern culture that instrumentalizes art to make visible and audible those who are excluded by this power. Therefore, the social dynamics of the contemporary urban space are associated not just as ‘war over space’ but also war over images in that very space, constituting the politics of both occupation and liberation. While the aesthetic reconstruction on the urban space has an essential role in producing and reinforcing socio-spatial divides, the anti-hegemonic struggle tries to reconnect the fragmented subjects through shared aesthetics that reframes the apprehension of for whom the urban space belongs. Street art practices are in the middle of this contestation for the aestheticization of the urban space as a tool to both reinforce and resist it. The social dimension of street art has always been already dialectical. On the one hand, street art takes part in energizing and beautifying neighbourhoods to raise real-estate values and boost tourism, the other hand, it is a site and medium of protest for the labour movement, women’s rights, sexual liberation, racial equality, urban justice, etc. Urban resistance, in which street art plays a major role, has a broad scope of interests from a clear ‘right to the city’ aspirations with its ecological, spatial and ideological agenda to the struggles of civil rights and individual and collective freedoms. ‘The right to the city’, – a concept for urban struggles coined by Henri Lefebvre at the time of Parisian uprisings in 1968 (Lefebvre 2009) – has been a popular term to denote all kinds of struggle for social and spatial justice in the urban space. As important texts, such as Rebel Cities by David Harvey (2012); Searching for the Just City by Peter Marcuse et al. (2009) and Cities for People Not for Profit by Neil Brenner and Peter Marcuse (2012) demonstrated, urban space as the site of both political dominance and political resistance. The city has been the central stage for contesting hegemonic power relations in urbanized societies, making broad claims for rights and justice, building and mobilizing solidarities among diverse people and groups (Harvey 2012). The city’s parks, streets and squares have been the central platforms for elevating these struggles in both the political and aesthetic realm. Notably, art in the rebel streets has been connected to the political constitutions of local struggles on the one hand, and the grassroots politics of the social movements, on the other. Street art had an essential part during the Egyptian and Tunisian revolution (Abaza 2016), Spanish Indignados (Ramírez-Blanco 2018), Greek Aganaktismenoi www.intellectbooks.com 191 Tijen Tunali movement (Tsilimpounidi 2015) and the Gezi Uprising (Tunali 2018). It is even argued that the civil war in Syria is triggered by a graffiti work in Dara’a (Shapiro 2016). Recently, the Black Lives Matter movement leaves its mark in the urban space with street murals across the United States. Street art forms are arguably moments, gestures and acts of fracture in the urban space. As such, they have the potential to create an opening, a breach in the ‘grammar of power’ and new zones for resistance. As Chaffee argues: Street art breaks the conspiracy of silence. Like the press, one role of street art is to form social consciousness. In authoritarian systems where outlets for free expression are limited, it is one of the few gauges of political sentiment. In more open systems, street art enables various entities to lobby for their interests. Street art, in essence, connotes a decentralized, democratic form in which there is universal access, and the real control over messages comes from the social producers. It is a barometer that registers the spectrum of thinking, especially during democratic openings. (Chaffee 1993: 4) This thematic section aims to situate street art as a form of mass communication, sensory dispositive and a bond of collectivity, and as such, as an important mode of political activity. In his influential book Urban Revolution Lefebvre notes, Revolutionary events generally take place in the street. Doesn’t this show that the disorder of the street engenders another kind of order? The urban space of the street is a place for talk, given over as much to the exchange of words and signs as it is to the exchange of things. A place where speech becomes writing. A place where speech can become ‘savage’ and, by escaping rules and institutions, inscribe itself on walls. (Lefebvre [1970] 2003: 19) This journal section invites the reader to recognize street art as a visually contentious and controversial art form through its loaded visual vocabulary and contested aesthetics. It aims to explore the potential theoretical and empirical inputs that a spatial and urban approach to street art can bring to the understanding of both arts and the urban space. The contributors in this Special Section draw parallels between street art as resistance, theoretically regarding immediacy and rejection of semblance, and practically through direct social and aesthetic engagement with the intentions of social change. Discussions in this issue activate street art as a defining element of urban culture through creative dynamics that reflect territorially embedded mechanisms that enable particular social and cultural processes. This approach aims to liberate the discourse of ‘art in urban space’ from being a set of formal relations that are subsumed to the neo-liberal organization of the urban space. The dialogue in-between the articles outlines common concerns related to the capacity of arts to participate, transform, contest and reveal the way the neoliberal urban landscape is produced. What is commonly questioned in the articles is to what extent arts in the urban space and the world they create can influence the hegemony on one hand, and how the construction of a common front for anti-systemic resistance could be possible through the arts in the streets, on the other. 192 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies Street art between business and resistance Much of street art practice follows the logic of transgressions, appropriations and tactics described in Michel de Certeau’s book The Practice of Everyday Life (de Certeau 1988). In this book, de Certeau discusses how ordinary urban citizens navigate and negotiate their positions in power systems that mark-up the city space. Breaking up the totalizing notion of those dominated by power as passive consumers, street art is a creative production that constantly appropriates and reappropriates urban space for artistic dialogue. Street art is an active engagement with both the city and the citadins. The visual and spatial approach taken by all these art projects is the one de Certeau calls ‘a tactic’. Without a place of its own, a tactic operates in isolated actions, takes advantage of opportunities and depends on them, reacting immediately. Tactics are characterized by mobility, speed and smaller goals. De Certeau likens it to poaching: ‘It must vigilantly make use of the cracks that particular conjunctions open in the surveillance of the proprietary powers. […] It creates surprises in them. […] In short, a tactic is an art of the weak’ (de Certeau 1988: 35). This Special Section seeks to discern the various tactics and aesthetic strategies of street art that serve for intervention, collaboration, dialogic critique, individual or collective manifesto, expression and self-assertion in the urban décor of the cities. The contributors discuss the politics of street art not only as a part of neo-liberal urban transformation but also as a critical response to social, economic and spatial grievances. The social life of street art depends on the function of material locations with all their previously structured symbolic values. The city location is an inseparable substrate for the work, and street art is explicitly an engagement with the neighbourhood. Looked from this perspective, street art is a part of the urban environment as a semiotic space for a variety of assemblage of visual production specific to that place. Thus the tension arises between the studies that approach street art from a ‘crime prevention’ perspective (and thus views it as socially threatening), and the literature that approaches street art as a phenomenon reflecting wider issues of power subversion and containment is fierce. The researchers and artists in this issue approach street art from multiple perspectives to discuss its social and political role in reconstituting the urban space as one of the defining elements of urban culture. Considering the multidisciplinary nature of street art, the essays cross several disciplines including geography, anthropology, sociology, urban planning, philosophy, architecture and art history. Ilaria Hoppe’s article engages in the subtle relation of street art and graffiti writing towards the urban fabric of Berlin. By combining theories from the spatial and the visual turn, Hoppe explores street art and graffiti as visual markers of the shifting, complex discourses of power struggles, marginality and counter-cultures that establish a new reality that must be seen and heard. For Hoppe, space appears to be produced not only by architecture and social interaction but also via visual communication. With this methodological approach, Hoppe shows the situatedness and performativity of these ephemeral practices: while street art appeared first as low-threshold, participatory and neighbourhood focused, graffiti stayed more at the margins. Hoppe’s analysis shows that, in time, this relation has changed: street art has become more professional and large-scale, while new graffiti styles have evolved also in more centred areas of town, trying to stand against processes of gentrification. In showing both the commodification and resistance Hoppe’s article starts this issue’s discussion that street art, in the neo-liberal urban landscape, is both a resource and a resistance. www.intellectbooks.com 193 Tijen Tunali Sanchita Khurana discusses how contemporary street art in New Delhi is used for beautification to activate a ‘regeneration’ of space, which is concomitant to the neo-liberal state’s agenda of making a ‘world-class’ city that caters to a growing consumerist Indian middle-class. Khurana’s article contextualizes the urban changes triggered by street art within the larger structural transformations happening in cities in India, often driving them towards homogenization and bourgeoisification. In her doctoral research on street art in New Delhi where the dominance of the visual regime is towards urban beautification, Khurana proposes an understanding of a new kind of ‘gentrification’ highlighting the class and caste bias underlying it. Khurana’s article is significant in showing how the aestheticization of the urban space through street art allows for the clashes of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic interactions between different discursive and imagery practices and diverse subjectivities. Urban design and the built environment function not only as utilitarian arrangements of space but also as designed places of continually contested perceptions and negotiated cognitive experience in the urban space. Konstantinos Avramidis’ article draws from his Ph.D. thesis on the graffiti on the Bank of Greece during the Aganaktismenoi movement against the austerity measures in Greece in 2011, where he innovatively introduces a design method that allows us to reconceptualize the meaning and function of the writings in the streets. Avramidis engages in the aesthetics of destruction and reconstruction on the façades of the Bank of Greece to show us how graffiti could orchestrate complex repositories of meanings for those who occupy those walls and those who engage with them in an exhibition. He argues that by de-situating graffiti from its original urban and political context whilst placing it onto the gallery surfaces, the exhibition undermines graffiti’s critical potency and transforms it into a commodity. For Avramidis, presenting graffiti as an empty gesture, the exhibition nonetheless raises questions concerning the situating role of graffiti. Following the constant appearance, removal and reappearance of the writings, the article maps the hegemonic and counterhegemonic responses to both overwhelming forces of crisis and to the art of graffiti writing. In the studies of the art of the urban social movements, street art is often been understood as a by-product of the uprising, as an example of a newly found freedom of expression. Mohamed El-Shewy argues that in the case of Egypt this discourse has significant orientalist tunes. Instead, he shows that street art has always been a vital element of politics and political struggle. By drawing from Rancière’s concept of ‘dissensus’, a term referring to a political and aesthetic process that creates new modes of perception and novel forms of political subjectivity, El-Shewy discusses that street art can reproduce public spaces and thus is political. El-Shewy analyses the post-January 2011 Egyptian street art – such as the Mohamed Mahmoud Street murals – as a spatial and aesthetic practice that presents a spontaneous politicity. By merging Rancière’s theory in aesthetics and politics with a spatial approach, El-Shewy points to the semiotic and iconographic elements present in the post-uprising works and challenges the scholarship that establishes street art as a mere form of freedom of expression, rather than as a site of politics. Street art highlights the fact that urban space is a territory of antagonism in the everyday life of urban dwellers. The art collective Revue, formed by feminist artists Sreejata Roy and Mrityunjay Chatterjee, facilitates a street art project with a group of young women (ages 15-20) from different ethnic backgrounds in two working-class urban villages, in New Delhi. The project 194 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies Street art between business and resistance consists of a series of wall paintings of ordinary women doing daily activities and engaging in work that is traditionally done by men in that locality. Roy and Chatterjee foreground the ‘relational’ approach and collaborative practice with the trajectory of ‘dialogue’ as a key method. In this socially engaged art project, the artists delve into the experiences of women in public space to gauge how they navigate through what is socially and culturally prohibited or permitted to them and how they create their own particular gendered spaces of community. The article argues that the intricate murals of young workingclass women open a space in the middle of this giant urban landscape and inscribe their self-expression. With this article, the artists bring the gender perspective not only to the discussion of street art and public space but also to socially engaged art and relational art. Street art is a cultural dispositive that turns the speech to writing and writing to visual signs and images. It is a unique urban exploration that enables us to engage with art through the movement and existence of our bodies in the urban space. With a multidimensional perspective, this Special Section shows how street art, as an aesthetic activity in the urban space, functions as an integral part in the sociopolitical space of the neo-liberal landscape. With contributions by authors from diverse geographical and disciplinary backgrounds, the issue aims to push the scholarship on street art to recognize its dialectical and multifaceted relationship with the aestheticization of the urban space, the internationalization of the city, intensification of urban development, and the proliferation of urban social movements. In the current condition of the world connected through increasingly conservative politics that tend to erase the conditions to make democratic participation and grassroots mobilization possible, the social and political capacity of street art that becomes a conditioning factor for urban life is fundamental and timely. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have come to know the works of four of the authors in this issue through the Rebel Streets: Urban Space, Art and Social Movements conference that I co-organized with my project host Gülçin Erdi at the University of Tours thanks to MSH Val de Loire project grant. I would like to extend my thanks to Gülçin Erdi and the rest of the organization committee at the CITERES (CIté, TERritoires, Environnement et Sociétés) laboratory, Muriel Hourlier, Adeline Vioux and Ece Arslan for the realization of the conference. Also special thanks to the director of CITERES Nora Semoud for her valuable support of the conference and my work. I owe thanks to LE STUDIUM Loire Valley Institute of Advanced Studies for granting me the fellowship that made my postdoctoral research on urban space and art possible, which this Special Section is one of the outcomes. I would also like to thank my current institution Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies at the University of Aarhus for their exceptional generosity for institutional and financial support. Additionally, I want to thank the anonymous peer reviewers for their insightful comments and Benjamin Fraser for his attentive work from the beginning of the submission process until publication. REFERENCES Abaza, Mona (2016), ‘The field of graffiti and street art in post-January 2011 Egypt’, in J. I. Ross (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Graffiti and Street Art, London: Routledge, pp. 318–34. www.intellectbooks.com 195 Tijen Tunali Avramidis, Konstantinos and Tsilimpounidi, Myrto (eds) (2017), Graffiti and Street Art: Reading, Writing and Representing the City, New York: Routledge. Bengtsen, Peter (2013), ‘Beyond the public art machine: A critical examination of street art as public art’, Konsthistorisk tidskrift (Journal of Art History), 82:2, pp. 63–80. Bengtsen, Peter (2018), Street Art World, Lund: Almendros de Granada Press. Bengtsen, Peter and Arvidsson, Matida (2014), ‘Spatial justice and street art’, NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research, 1:5, pp. 117–30. Brenner, Neil and Marcuse, Peter (2012), Cities for People Not for Profit: Critical Urban Theory and the Right to the City, New York: Routledge. Cameron, Stuart and Coaffe, Jon (2005), ‘Art, gentrification and regeneration: From artist as pioneer to public arts’, European Journal of Housing Policy, 5:1, pp. 39–58. Certeau, Michel de (1988), The Practice of Everyday Life, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Chaffee, Lyman G. (1993), Political Protest and Street Art: Popular Tools for Democratization in Hispanic Countries, Westport, CT and London: Greenwood Press. Deutsche, Rosalyn (1996), Evictions: Arts and Spatial Politics, Cambridge: MIT Press. Ducret, André (1994), L’art dans l’espace public: Une analyse sociologique, Basel: Seismo Editions. Fainstein, Susan (2001), The City Builders: Property Development in New York and London, 1980–2000, 2nd ed., Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Fainstein, Susan and Gladstone, David (1997), ‘Tourism and urban transformation: Interpretations of urban tourism’, in O. Källtorp, I. Elander, O. Ericsson and M. Franzén (eds), Cities in Transformation: Transformation in Cities, Aldershot, Hants: Avebury, pp. 119–35. Foster, Nicole, Grodach, Carl and Murdoch, James (2018), ‘Gentrification, displacement and the arts: Untangling the relationship between arts industries and place change’, Urban Studies, 55:4, pp. 96–118. Frisby, David (1991), ‘The aesthetics of modern life: Simmel’s interpretation’, Theory, Culture & Society, 8:3, pp. 73–93. Harvey, David (2012), Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution, London: Verso. Harvey, David (1989), The Urban Experience, Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press. Irvine, Martin (2012), ‘The work on the street: Street art and visual culture’, in I. Heywood and B. Sandywell (eds), The Handbook of Visual Culture, London and New York: Berg and Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 234–78. Landry, Charles, Greene, Lesley and Matarasso, Francois (1996), The Art of Regeneration: Urban Renewal through Cultural Activity, Comedia: Stoud. Lefebvre, Henri ([1970] 2003), Urban Revolution (trans. R. Bononno), Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press. Lefebvre, Henri (2009), Le droit à la ville, 3rd ed., Paris: Economica-Anthropos. Ley, David (2003), ‘Artists, aestheticisation and the field of gentrification’, Urban Studies, 40:12, pp. 2527–44. Lewisohn, Cedar (2008), Street Art: The Graffiti Revolution, New York: Abrams. Low, Setha and Smith, Neil (eds) (2006), The Politics of Public Space, London: Routledge. MacDowall, Lahlan (2006), ‘In praise of 70k: Cultural heritage and graffiti style’, Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 20:4, pp. 471–84. 196 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies Street art between business and resistance Marche, Guillaume (2012), ‘Expressivism and resistance: Graffiti as an infrapolitical form of protest against the war on terror’, Revue française d’études américaines, 131:1, pp. 78–96. Marcuse, Peter, Connolly, James, Novy, Johannes, Olivo, Ingrid, Potter, Kuz and Steil, Justin (2009), Searching for the Just City: Debates in Urban Theory and Practice, New York: Routledge. Markin, Pablo B. (2013), ‘The growing aestheticization of society, culture, and everyday life’, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296637920_ The_Growing_Aestheticization_of_Society_Culture_and_Everyday_Life. Accessed 23 February 2020. Mathews, Vanessa (2010), ‘Aestheticizing space: Art, gentrification and the city’, Geography Compass, 6:4, pp. 660–75. Miles, Malcolm (1997), Art, Space and the City, New York: Routledge. Mitchell, Don (2003), The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space, New York: Guilford Publications. Ramirez-Blanco Julia (2018), Artistic Utopias of Revolt: Claremont Road, Reclaim the Streets, and the City of Sol, London and New York: Palgrave. Rancière, Jacques (2004), The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible, (trans. G. Rockhill), London and New York: Continuum. Riggle, Nicholas A. (2010), ‘Street art: The transfiguration of commonplaces’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 68:3, pp. 243–57. Ross, Jeffrey I. (ed.) (2016), Routledge Handbook of Graffiti and Street Art, London: Routledge. Schalk, Meike (2007), ‘Urban curating: A critical practice towards greater “connectedness”’, in D. Petrescu (ed.), Altering Practices: Feminist Politics and Poetics of Space, New York: Routledge, pp. 153–65. Shapiro, Asher (2016), ‘The young man who started Syria’s revolution speak about Daraa where it all began’, Vice News, 15 March, https://www.vice. com/en_us/article/qv5eqb/the-young-men-who-started-syrias-revolution-speak-about-daraa-where-it-all-began. Accessed 12 January 2020. Smyth, Hedley (1994), Marketing the City: The Role of Flagship Developments in Urban Regeneration, London: E & FN Spon. Stein, Mery B. (1989), ‘The politics of humor: The Berlin Wall in jokes and graffiti’, Western Folklore, 48:2, pp. 85–108. Tsilimpounidi, Myrto (2015), ‘If these walls could talk: Street art and urban belonging in the Athens of crisis’, Laboratorium, 7:2, pp 71–91. Tunali, Tijen (2018), ‘The art of resistance: Carnival aesthetics and the Gezi street protests’, ASAP: Journal of the Association for the Study of the Arts of the Present, 3:2, pp. 377–99. Wells, Maia M. (2010), ‘Graffiti street art and the evolution of the art market’, in J. I. Ross (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Graffiti and Street Art, London: Routledge, pp. 464–75. Whybrow, Nicolas (2011), Art and the City, London and New York: I.B. Tauris. Wilson, Robert N. (1986), Experiencing Creativity: On the Sociology and Psychology of Art, New Brunswick and New York: Transaction Books. Zukin, Sharon (1995), The Cultures of Cities, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. SUGGESTED CITATION Tunali, Tijen (2020), ‘Street art between business and resistance’, Journal of Urban Cultural Studies, 7:2&3, pp. 187–198, doi: https://doi.org/10.1386/ jucs_00025_1 www.intellectbooks.com 197 Tijen Tunali CONTRIBUTOR DETAILS Tijen Tunali is an art historian, artist and curator and currently holding a postdoctoral research position at the Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies at Aarhus University. Her postdoctoral projects in France, Germany and Denmark examine the aestheticization of the urban space, art in social movements, street art and its politics, and art’s multifaceted relationship to gentrification. Her book Art and Gentrification in the Changing Neoliberal Landscape is forthcoming by Routledge. With Prof. Brian Winkenweder she is currently working on the volume Routledge Companion to Marxist Art History. Contact: Aarhus Institute of Advances Studies, Aarhus University, HøeghGuldbergs Gade 6B, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark. E-mail: tijen.tunali@aias.au.dk https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5016-7413 Tijen Tunali has asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work in the format that was submitted to Intellect Ltd. 198 Journal of Urban Cultural Studies