The documentation and dissemination of images of contemporary graffiti and street art have been integral to its existence and development.
Meanwhile, how people have shared images of this material has evolved.
Much of this shift parallels advances in photographic, computer, digital, and web-based technology and the culture’s response to these developments.
While practitioners and audiences have always seen graffiti and street art firsthand, the medium’s ephemeral nature necessitated documentation for preservation and sharing.
For some subway and freight train writers, the mobility of their canvas provided a unique form of exposure. Their work traveled to different parts of the city, region, or country, creating a dynamic showcase.
Meanwhile, photos were taken and exchanged through interpersonal networks, and some of these images were reproduced in zines, magazines, and books or featured in or referenced in films.
These publications, often produced with limited resources, became vital archives of the movement’s evolution and helped establish graffiti’s visual language. Films like Style Wars (1983) and books such as Subway Art(1984) further cemented the importance of documentation in graffiti culture.
The Digital Revolution Begins
In 1993, a significant shift occurred when Susan Farrell, then a master’s student in computer science at Georgia Tech, began posting her graffiti photographs online under the name Art Crimes. She was later joined by Brett Webb, a student at the University of Southern California. Their efforts coincided with the rise of the World Wide Web, and in 1994, they launched www.graffiti.org, one of the first dedicated online platforms for graffiti documentation.
The site quickly attracted attention from graffiti writers and the news media, including coverage in The Atlantic, Newsweek, and Scientific American. Over time, the domain transitioned to www.artcrimes.com, with Farrell serving as head curator and Webb as assistant curator and system administrator. Though they were passionate about the work, sustaining the project without financial backing became increasingly challenging.
Social Media’s Impact on Documentation and Style
The landscape of graffiti (and street art) image-sharing underwent another change in the mid-2000s with the emergence of social media. The launch of Facebook (2004), Flickr (2004), and YouTube (2005) provided new avenues for graffiti writers and street artists to showcase their work to a global audience. The introduction of the iPhone in 2007, with its built-in camera and subsequent video capabilities, further accelerated the ease of capturing and sharing graffiti and street art in real-time.
This website influenced how work was shared and the nature of the work itself. Practitioners began considering how their pieces would appear on the app, sometimes choosing locations and styles that would photograph well for social media.
However, this digital evolution came with tradeoffs: While reach expanded the reach of graffiti and street art images, the intimate connection of physical sharing networks diminished, and corporate algorithms began influencing visibility.
Seeking Independence from Mainstream Social Media Controls
As mainstream social media platforms became increasingly commercialized, particularly following Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter (X), many graffiti writers, street artists, and enthusiasts felt that the countercultural spirit that had long defined graffiti had been lost. They began seeking alternative spaces to share and view this content.
In response to these developments, over the last few years, dedicated mobile apps, such as Graff Map, Grafy Map, MASA Street Art, Spray Street, and Street Art Cities, that support user photo uploads have become available on the Apple App and Google Play stores. These tools attempt to reclaim the community-focused sharing ethos of graffiti’s earlier days.
For Webb, the creator of the Spray Street App, “I got to thinking that I would like to have a private app catering to photographs for urban art that would not be supported by ad revenue,” Webb explained. “The community needs to have its own tools. If we can move away from corporate platforms, that’s a win.”
The Future
While social media has increased the reach of graffiti writers and street artists, dedicated art photo-sharing apps demonstrate the community’s desire to maintain autonomy over how their work is shared and preserved.
This tension between accessibility and authenticity shapes how graffiti and street art are documented and shared. As new technologies emerge, the graffiti and street art community’s approach to documentation will likely continue to evolve, balancing the benefits of broad exposure with the need to maintain the culture’s independent spirit and artistic integrity.
Photo Credit
Title: Share Key
Photographer: Mike Lawrence
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/38470144796_1185f249ba_o.jpg15072381Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2025-02-16 05:56:012025-02-16 13:27:52Tracing the History of Documenting and Sharing Images of Graffiti & Street Art
I’ve stayed in everything from budget hostels to luxury hotels—and, most recently, so-called smart hotels.
With this last type of accommodation most interactions with the hotel and the room are either automated, and/or customers can do this through their smartphone or computer.
Guests are usually given a code to check in and out and to request specific amenities. There is usually no front desk and no security. Customers can typically program their rooms’ lights, televisions, heating, and air conditioning.
Why do these types of accommodations exist?
There is an underlying logic to this type of hotel. When traveling (especially for business or tourism purposes), you spend little time in the room when you’re busy with meetings or sightseeing.
The appeal is clear: automation promises convenience for guests and cost savings for hotels.
In principle, this arrangement makes sense. Nowadays, when you can book, modify, and cancel a reservation online, and with the convenience of your iPhone, modify it online, having a reception staff and even a concierge seems unnecessary.
But all that glitters is not gold.
To begin with, in-room digital user interfaces are not always intuitive, working, or functioning correctly, and it is not easy to override them. Sometimes, they are in a foreign language and cannot easily switch to English.
Room and bathroom lights can turn on and off at all times of the day and night.
Curtains and blinds open and close at hours you may not want.
And the same is true with televisions, air conditioning, and heating.
Customer service is almost nonexistent. Chat-based exchanges with hotel management are dominant, and you often deal with an AI bot.
Reaching a human is challenging. When you do, they are often offshore, unfamiliar with your hotel, and juggling multiple customers.
You are often better able to solve problems than someone working on a different continent.
Meanwhile, the cleaning staff is typically skeletal. If you have challenges, like the room you just rented was not cleaned, the remediation times may be ridiculous, typically until the next day.
If your smart hotel has a front desk, the staff can be incredibly rude. This is probably because they have been dealing with customer complaints all day (if they work past 8 p.m.).
Smart hotels typically offer less security. If you encounter a challenge, such as being locked out of your room or a stranger buzzing your room at all hours of the night, customer service is often of minimal help. It’s better to put a pillow over your head or call the cops.
So what is going on?
The so-called smart hotel goes against the basic model of hospitality, which makes guests feel welcome. Hotel rooms are not simply places to rest your weary head. They should be frictionless for the customer. It is not supposed to be a stressful experience, and customers should not be subject to numerous hassles.
So what is the solution? Unless you have a friend or relative who has raved about a location, just like you would do with an Airbnb, home exchanges, etc., carefully read all the reviews on different platforms before booking a smart hotel in a city or country you are unfamiliar with. Treat the positive reviews with a degree of skepticism.
Remember that there are also hybrid smart hotel models. I recently stayed at one in San Francisco. From when I checked in to when I left, I interacted with friendly staff who assisted patrons with everything from navigating the computer tablet in each guest suite to restaurant recommendations.
,
Photo Credit
The Three Stooges from the movie The Idle Roomers (1941)
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/Screenshot-2025-02-08-at-12.42.54 PM-e1739037046644.png9331212Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2025-02-09 05:27:152025-02-09 05:27:15No Soul in the New Hotel?
Street culture has received considerable attention in the popular press, on social media, and increasingly in scholarly circles.
One of the things where less attention is spent is on a reasonably acceptable definition. In short, Street Culture can be defined as “the beliefs, dispositions, ideologies, informal rules, practices, styles, symbols, and values associated with, adopted by, and engaged in by individuals and organizations that spend a disproportionate amount of time on the streets of large urban centers (Ross, 2018, p. 8).
That said, many questionable myths exist about street culture. These beliefs prevent us from adequately understanding its contributions, limitations, and possibilities for use.
Some popular misconceptions about street culture are listed as least to most important.
Many assume street culture is inherently tied to specific communities and neighborhoods because they encounter distinct styles, behaviors, and symbols in those urban areas. However, while some elements—such as streetwear trends, graffiti styles, or body modifications—may have originated in particular locations, they are not exclusive to them. The mobility of individuals, the influence of global media, and the commercialization of subcultural aesthetics have contributed to the widespread dissemination of elements of street culture beyond its points of origin. Rather than being static and place-bound, street culture evolves as it travels, adapting to new environments and merging with local traditions. For instance, hip-hop, which emerged in the Bronx, has been reinterpreted in cities worldwide, leading to distinct regional expressions. Similarly, once rooted in specific urban communities, sneaker culture has become a global phenomenon shaped at the very least by athletic endorsements, hype culture, and corporate branding.
Myth 2: Street Culture is Primarily an American Phenomenon
It may seem like an American phenomenon if one equates street culture solely with the origins of hip-hop and its associated elements (rap, beatboxing, breakdancing, etc.). However, street culture is far more expansive, encompassing diverse expressions like graffiti, skateboarding, parkour, and informal economies. These forms appear worldwide, from Brazil’s pichação and France’s parkour to South Africa’s pantsula dance and Japan’s bosozoku subcultures. Rather than being confined to the United States, street culture emerges in response to urban conditions, social struggles, and creative activities across economically privileged and marginalized communities.
Myth 3: Street culture is restricted to the disadvantaged, excluded, poor, or marginalized sectors of an urban population.
Popular media often portrays street culture as the domain of marginalized and socioeconomically disadvantaged people, frequently linking it to gangs or criminal activity. Although street culture can emerge from economic hardship and social exclusion, reducing it to these conditions ignores its broader appeal and diversity. Many aspects of street culture require significant financial investment, contradicting the assumption that it is solely for the disadvantaged.
For example, lowrider culture—commonly associated with street culture—involves customized cars costing tens of thousands of dollars. Similarly, the sneaker industry, driven by streetwear trends, includes luxury collaborations where shoes sell for hundreds or even thousands of dollars. High-fashion brands frequently draw inspiration from street aesthetics, and affluent individuals participate in street culture by incorporating elements like designer sneakers or graffiti-inspired couture.
By framing street culture as exclusively tied to poverty, we overlook its fluidity and how individuals across socio-economic classes engage with and contribute to it. While some forms of street culture originate in marginalized communities, they are neither confined to nor defined solely by them.
Pop culture often reinforces a common perception that street culture exists only in large cities, particularly in low-income areas. Although this view has some merit, street culture thrives in various environments and adapts to different social and spatial contexts. First, street culture extends beyond major cities into suburbs and near suburbs. While neighborhoods like the banlieues of Paris or the Jane-Finch corridor of Toronto share socio-economic conditions with some parts of inner cities—dense populations, high unemployment, and significant immigrant and refugee communities—street culture also emerges in smaller towns and rural regions through informal economies, graffiti, and underground music scenes. Second, street culture manifests in diverse urban spaces beyond the stereotypical “streets.” It influences social interactions in bars, gyms, nightclubs, restaurants, and transportation hubs, shaping behaviors and hierarchies. In schools, students navigate status through language, dress, and affiliations, while in correctional facilities, power dynamics often mirror street norms in a hypermasculine form. These settings demonstrate how street culture is not tied to geography but to social structures that emerge in different institutions.
Myth 5: Street Culture is the Purview of Youth Culture
Media portrayals often highlight youth-centered movements such as hip-hop, graffiti, and skateboarding, reinforcing that street culture is inherently youthful. While younger generations pioneered these movements, street culture is not age-specific. Many older individuals actively shape and sustain street culture in often overlooked ways. These include street vendors, small business owners, homeless and unhoused communities, elderly street performers, artists, older graffiti writers, and urban creatives. Why, then, does the myth that street culture is the domain of youth persist? This can be boiled down to three overlapping factors: Media Representation, Historical Association, and Marginalization of Older Participants. Street culture is not bound by age—it is shaped by all who navigate, inhabit, and contribute to public spaces. While youth may bring innovation and energy to various aspects of street culture, they are not the only participants.
Street culture is often reduced to streetwear—sneakers, baseball caps, and T-shirts—produced by brands like BAPE, Stüssy, and Supreme. While these brands capitalize on the aesthetic and energy of urban life, this oversimplification serves a commercial purpose and obscures the broader, more complex concept of street culture. Beyond fashion, street culture includes the ideologies, practices, and interactions that shape life in urban public spaces. This encompasses graffiti, street art, street food, and the social dynamics—ranging from community-building to informal economies, as well as the tensions of policing and resistance—that give urban environments their vibrancy. Street culture is not simply a style; it is a lived experience and a form of expression that extends far beyond retail.
Myth 7: Individuals associated with street culture are engaged in creative or artistic activities.
There is a widespread belief that people who engage with street culture are inherently creative, participating in dance, music, graffiti, street art, and fashion. This myth excludes a significant portion of those involved in street culture, such as individuals who work on or adjacent to the streets, those experiencing homelessness, and street vendors. While these groups may not be traditionally seen as engaging in “artistic” or “creative” activities, they contribute to the fabric of street culture in vital, often overlooked ways. For many, street culture is about survival, resilience, and adaptability—qualities that require significant creativity, even if they don’t manifest in the expected forms of music or graffiti. Street vendors, for example, may not be regarded as artists in the conventional sense. Still, their resourcefulness in marketing their goods, navigating social dynamics, and creating vibrant local economies reflects a creative engagement with their environment.
Why do people hold on to these beliefs about Street Culture?
Many misconceptions about street culture stem from mass media’s (especially news and social media) portrayals, which often reduce it to crime or exoticized subcultures. These representations homogenize the lived experience of those who create and sustain street culture.
Until we critically examine these beliefs, myths, and representations, street culture will continue to be misunderstood, limiting its recognition as a legitimate and complex social phenomenon.
While most communication channels do not engage in this kind of analysis, the academic fields of urban anthropology, geography and sociology, and criminology often provide valuable frameworks (or counternarratives) for understanding street culture beyond the mainstream. Indulging in these academic disciplines may open doors of understanding to people interested in learning about street culture at a deeper level.
Photo Credit
Photographer: Nate Bolt
Title: b-boy executing a freeze
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/2142720958_58fbaccb6a_o-scaled-e1738420863200.jpg426640Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2025-02-02 05:32:052025-02-02 05:32:05Seven Popular Myths About Contemporary Street Culture
Tracing the History of Documenting and Sharing Images of Graffiti & Street Art
/by Jeffrey Ian RossThe documentation and dissemination of images of contemporary graffiti and street art have been integral to its existence and development.
Meanwhile, how people have shared images of this material has evolved.
Much of this shift parallels advances in photographic, computer, digital, and web-based technology and the culture’s response to these developments.
While practitioners and audiences have always seen graffiti and street art firsthand, the medium’s ephemeral nature necessitated documentation for preservation and sharing.
For some subway and freight train writers, the mobility of their canvas provided a unique form of exposure. Their work traveled to different parts of the city, region, or country, creating a dynamic showcase.
Meanwhile, photos were taken and exchanged through interpersonal networks, and some of these images were reproduced in zines, magazines, and books or featured in or referenced in films.
These publications, often produced with limited resources, became vital archives of the movement’s evolution and helped establish graffiti’s visual language. Films like Style Wars (1983) and books such as Subway Art(1984) further cemented the importance of documentation in graffiti culture.
The Digital Revolution Begins
In 1993, a significant shift occurred when Susan Farrell, then a master’s student in computer science at Georgia Tech, began posting her graffiti photographs online under the name Art Crimes. She was later joined by Brett Webb, a student at the University of Southern California. Their efforts coincided with the rise of the World Wide Web, and in 1994, they launched www.graffiti.org, one of the first dedicated online platforms for graffiti documentation.
The site quickly attracted attention from graffiti writers and the news media, including coverage in The Atlantic, Newsweek, and Scientific American. Over time, the domain transitioned to www.artcrimes.com, with Farrell serving as head curator and Webb as assistant curator and system administrator. Though they were passionate about the work, sustaining the project without financial backing became increasingly challenging.
Social Media’s Impact on Documentation and Style
The landscape of graffiti (and street art) image-sharing underwent another change in the mid-2000s with the emergence of social media. The launch of Facebook (2004), Flickr (2004), and YouTube (2005) provided new avenues for graffiti writers and street artists to showcase their work to a global audience. The introduction of the iPhone in 2007, with its built-in camera and subsequent video capabilities, further accelerated the ease of capturing and sharing graffiti and street art in real-time.
Platforms like Instagram, which started in 2010, had a critical transformational impact on graffiti and street art. Reflecting on this shift, Webb noted, “Instagram was a game changer. It was the modern equivalent of sending photos in the mail to fellow graffiti writers.”
This website influenced how work was shared and the nature of the work itself. Practitioners began considering how their pieces would appear on the app, sometimes choosing locations and styles that would photograph well for social media.
However, this digital evolution came with tradeoffs: While reach expanded the reach of graffiti and street art images, the intimate connection of physical sharing networks diminished, and corporate algorithms began influencing visibility.
Seeking Independence from Mainstream Social Media Controls
As mainstream social media platforms became increasingly commercialized, particularly following Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter (X), many graffiti writers, street artists, and enthusiasts felt that the countercultural spirit that had long defined graffiti had been lost. They began seeking alternative spaces to share and view this content.
In response to these developments, over the last few years, dedicated mobile apps, such as Graff Map, Grafy Map, MASA Street Art, Spray Street, and Street Art Cities, that support user photo uploads have become available on the Apple App and Google Play stores. These tools attempt to reclaim the community-focused sharing ethos of graffiti’s earlier days.
For Webb, the creator of the Spray Street App, “I got to thinking that I would like to have a private app catering to photographs for urban art that would not be supported by ad revenue,” Webb explained. “The community needs to have its own tools. If we can move away from corporate platforms, that’s a win.”
The Future
While social media has increased the reach of graffiti writers and street artists, dedicated art photo-sharing apps demonstrate the community’s desire to maintain autonomy over how their work is shared and preserved.
This tension between accessibility and authenticity shapes how graffiti and street art are documented and shared. As new technologies emerge, the graffiti and street art community’s approach to documentation will likely continue to evolve, balancing the benefits of broad exposure with the need to maintain the culture’s independent spirit and artistic integrity.
Photo Credit
Title: Share Key
Photographer: Mike Lawrence
No Soul in the New Hotel?
/by Jeffrey Ian RossI’ve stayed in everything from budget hostels to luxury hotels—and, most recently, so-called smart hotels.
With this last type of accommodation most interactions with the hotel and the room are either automated, and/or customers can do this through their smartphone or computer.
Guests are usually given a code to check in and out and to request specific amenities. There is usually no front desk and no security. Customers can typically program their rooms’ lights, televisions, heating, and air conditioning.
Why do these types of accommodations exist?
There is an underlying logic to this type of hotel. When traveling (especially for business or tourism purposes), you spend little time in the room when you’re busy with meetings or sightseeing.
The appeal is clear: automation promises convenience for guests and cost savings for hotels.
In principle, this arrangement makes sense. Nowadays, when you can book, modify, and cancel a reservation online, and with the convenience of your iPhone, modify it online, having a reception staff and even a concierge seems unnecessary.
But all that glitters is not gold.
To begin with, in-room digital user interfaces are not always intuitive, working, or functioning correctly, and it is not easy to override them. Sometimes, they are in a foreign language and cannot easily switch to English.
Room and bathroom lights can turn on and off at all times of the day and night.
Curtains and blinds open and close at hours you may not want.
And the same is true with televisions, air conditioning, and heating.
Customer service is almost nonexistent. Chat-based exchanges with hotel management are dominant, and you often deal with an AI bot.
Reaching a human is challenging. When you do, they are often offshore, unfamiliar with your hotel, and juggling multiple customers.
You are often better able to solve problems than someone working on a different continent.
Meanwhile, the cleaning staff is typically skeletal. If you have challenges, like the room you just rented was not cleaned, the remediation times may be ridiculous, typically until the next day.
If your smart hotel has a front desk, the staff can be incredibly rude. This is probably because they have been dealing with customer complaints all day (if they work past 8 p.m.).
Smart hotels typically offer less security. If you encounter a challenge, such as being locked out of your room or a stranger buzzing your room at all hours of the night, customer service is often of minimal help. It’s better to put a pillow over your head or call the cops.
So what is going on?
The so-called smart hotel goes against the basic model of hospitality, which makes guests feel welcome. Hotel rooms are not simply places to rest your weary head. They should be frictionless for the customer. It is not supposed to be a stressful experience, and customers should not be subject to numerous hassles.
So what is the solution? Unless you have a friend or relative who has raved about a location, just like you would do with an Airbnb, home exchanges, etc., carefully read all the reviews on different platforms before booking a smart hotel in a city or country you are unfamiliar with. Treat the positive reviews with a degree of skepticism.
Remember that there are also hybrid smart hotel models. I recently stayed at one in San Francisco. From when I checked in to when I left, I interacted with friendly staff who assisted patrons with everything from navigating the computer tablet in each guest suite to restaurant recommendations.
,
Photo Credit
The Three Stooges from the movie The Idle Roomers (1941)
Seven Popular Myths About Contemporary Street Culture
/by Jeffrey Ian RossStreet culture has received considerable attention in the popular press, on social media, and increasingly in scholarly circles.
One of the things where less attention is spent is on a reasonably acceptable definition. In short, Street Culture can be defined as “the beliefs, dispositions, ideologies, informal rules, practices, styles, symbols, and values associated with, adopted by, and engaged in by individuals and organizations that spend a disproportionate amount of time on the streets of large urban centers (Ross, 2018, p. 8).
That said, many questionable myths exist about street culture. These beliefs prevent us from adequately understanding its contributions, limitations, and possibilities for use.
Some popular misconceptions about street culture are listed as least to most important.
Myth 1: Street Culture is Unique to Particular Locations
Many assume street culture is inherently tied to specific communities and neighborhoods because they encounter distinct styles, behaviors, and symbols in those urban areas. However, while some elements—such as streetwear trends, graffiti styles, or body modifications—may have originated in particular locations, they are not exclusive to them. The mobility of individuals, the influence of global media, and the commercialization of subcultural aesthetics have contributed to the widespread dissemination of elements of street culture beyond its points of origin. Rather than being static and place-bound, street culture evolves as it travels, adapting to new environments and merging with local traditions. For instance, hip-hop, which emerged in the Bronx, has been reinterpreted in cities worldwide, leading to distinct regional expressions. Similarly, once rooted in specific urban communities, sneaker culture has become a global phenomenon shaped at the very least by athletic endorsements, hype culture, and corporate branding.
Myth 2: Street Culture is Primarily an American Phenomenon
It may seem like an American phenomenon if one equates street culture solely with the origins of hip-hop and its associated elements (rap, beatboxing, breakdancing, etc.). However, street culture is far more expansive, encompassing diverse expressions like graffiti, skateboarding, parkour, and informal economies. These forms appear worldwide, from Brazil’s pichação and France’s parkour to South Africa’s pantsula dance and Japan’s bosozoku subcultures. Rather than being confined to the United States, street culture emerges in response to urban conditions, social struggles, and creative activities across economically privileged and marginalized communities.
Myth 3: Street culture is restricted to the disadvantaged, excluded, poor, or marginalized sectors of an urban population.
Popular media often portrays street culture as the domain of marginalized and socioeconomically disadvantaged people, frequently linking it to gangs or criminal activity. Although street culture can emerge from economic hardship and social exclusion, reducing it to these conditions ignores its broader appeal and diversity. Many aspects of street culture require significant financial investment, contradicting the assumption that it is solely for the disadvantaged.
For example, lowrider culture—commonly associated with street culture—involves customized cars costing tens of thousands of dollars. Similarly, the sneaker industry, driven by streetwear trends, includes luxury collaborations where shoes sell for hundreds or even thousands of dollars. High-fashion brands frequently draw inspiration from street aesthetics, and affluent individuals participate in street culture by incorporating elements like designer sneakers or graffiti-inspired couture.
By framing street culture as exclusively tied to poverty, we overlook its fluidity and how individuals across socio-economic classes engage with and contribute to it. While some forms of street culture originate in marginalized communities, they are neither confined to nor defined solely by them.
Myth 4: Street Culture is Limited to Urban Centers
Pop culture often reinforces a common perception that street culture exists only in large cities, particularly in low-income areas. Although this view has some merit, street culture thrives in various environments and adapts to different social and spatial contexts. First, street culture extends beyond major cities into suburbs and near suburbs. While neighborhoods like the banlieues of Paris or the Jane-Finch corridor of Toronto share socio-economic conditions with some parts of inner cities—dense populations, high unemployment, and significant immigrant and refugee communities—street culture also emerges in smaller towns and rural regions through informal economies, graffiti, and underground music scenes. Second, street culture manifests in diverse urban spaces beyond the stereotypical “streets.” It influences social interactions in bars, gyms, nightclubs, restaurants, and transportation hubs, shaping behaviors and hierarchies. In schools, students navigate status through language, dress, and affiliations, while in correctional facilities, power dynamics often mirror street norms in a hypermasculine form. These settings demonstrate how street culture is not tied to geography but to social structures that emerge in different institutions.
Myth 5: Street Culture is the Purview of Youth Culture
Media portrayals often highlight youth-centered movements such as hip-hop, graffiti, and skateboarding, reinforcing that street culture is inherently youthful. While younger generations pioneered these movements, street culture is not age-specific. Many older individuals actively shape and sustain street culture in often overlooked ways. These include street vendors, small business owners, homeless and unhoused communities, elderly street performers, artists, older graffiti writers, and urban creatives. Why, then, does the myth that street culture is the domain of youth persist? This can be boiled down to three overlapping factors: Media Representation, Historical Association, and Marginalization of Older Participants. Street culture is not bound by age—it is shaped by all who navigate, inhabit, and contribute to public spaces. While youth may bring innovation and energy to various aspects of street culture, they are not the only participants.
Myth 6: Street Culture is Mostly Streetwear
Street culture is often reduced to streetwear—sneakers, baseball caps, and T-shirts—produced by brands like BAPE, Stüssy, and Supreme. While these brands capitalize on the aesthetic and energy of urban life, this oversimplification serves a commercial purpose and obscures the broader, more complex concept of street culture. Beyond fashion, street culture includes the ideologies, practices, and interactions that shape life in urban public spaces. This encompasses graffiti, street art, street food, and the social dynamics—ranging from community-building to informal economies, as well as the tensions of policing and resistance—that give urban environments their vibrancy. Street culture is not simply a style; it is a lived experience and a form of expression that extends far beyond retail.
Myth 7: Individuals associated with street culture are engaged in creative or artistic activities.
There is a widespread belief that people who engage with street culture are inherently creative, participating in dance, music, graffiti, street art, and fashion. This myth excludes a significant portion of those involved in street culture, such as individuals who work on or adjacent to the streets, those experiencing homelessness, and street vendors. While these groups may not be traditionally seen as engaging in “artistic” or “creative” activities, they contribute to the fabric of street culture in vital, often overlooked ways. For many, street culture is about survival, resilience, and adaptability—qualities that require significant creativity, even if they don’t manifest in the expected forms of music or graffiti. Street vendors, for example, may not be regarded as artists in the conventional sense. Still, their resourcefulness in marketing their goods, navigating social dynamics, and creating vibrant local economies reflects a creative engagement with their environment.
Why do people hold on to these beliefs about Street Culture?
Many misconceptions about street culture stem from mass media’s (especially news and social media) portrayals, which often reduce it to crime or exoticized subcultures. These representations homogenize the lived experience of those who create and sustain street culture.
Until we critically examine these beliefs, myths, and representations, street culture will continue to be misunderstood, limiting its recognition as a legitimate and complex social phenomenon.
While most communication channels do not engage in this kind of analysis, the academic fields of urban anthropology, geography and sociology, and criminology often provide valuable frameworks (or counternarratives) for understanding street culture beyond the mainstream. Indulging in these academic disciplines may open doors of understanding to people interested in learning about street culture at a deeper level.
Photo Credit
Photographer: Nate Bolt
Title: b-boy executing a freeze