Stains of Color and Cleaning on Porto’s Facades
A decade ago, while the autarchy was led by Rui Rio, Porto faced a strong urban cleaning campaign. At the time, the Anti-Graffiti Brigade was created, to be responsible for relentlessly cleaning any traces of graffiti and street art from the city’s walls, with no distinction between vandalism and/or artistic expression.
Although this brigade was officially terminated in 2014, city council technicians still frequently cover graffiti from facades with paint, often with a different color than the building’s original one. The paintings that are created by these municipal cleaning actions create stains of color, which raises questions regarding the legality and legitimacy of these interventions. Why are the paintings (stains) left by the Municipal Chamber allowed, while graffiti is considered illegal, if both create a modification to the original facade? This contradiction invites us to a deeper reflection about who truly holds the right to shape the urban landscape (Lefebvre, 2012).
- 1. Praça dos Poveiros, 2023. Ana Muska.
In August 23, 2013, Law n. 61/2013[1] was approved, marking a significative change in the way that graffiti and other urban interventions would be treated in Portugal. This law criminalizes the act of “graffiti, postings, engraving, and other forms of alteration, even if temporary, of the original characteristics from the exterior surfaces of buildings”, imposing fines that can reach up to 25.000€. The intention from the legislative was to combat what was perceived as “vandalism” and protect the city’s facades from “visual pollution”. However, by classifying all visual interventions in the public space as a crime, the law also restricted the freedom of expression of many artists, that saw the city’s wall as a legitimate space for creation.
For those who wish to make a legalized artistic intervention, whether if artists or building owners, there are significant barriers. It is necessary not only to obtain the approval of the property’s owner, but also to have a project approved by the city council and to pay a fee. In Porto, this fee was regulated in 2013, and included in the Tabela de Taxas Municipais (Municipal Fee Table) from the Código Regulamentar do Município (Municipality’s Regulatory Code). According to this regulation, the minimum cost to license a graffiti or mural of up to eight square meters is 40 euros, with an extra charge of five euros for each additional square meter and for each 30-days period. This approach, which equates urban art with advertising, made the legalization of such artworks practically unfeasible for most artists.
- 2. Rua do Dr. Ricardo Jorge (B), 2023.
- 3. Rua do Mirante, 2023. Ana Muska.
It is within this context of combating graffiti that the Anti-Graffiti brigade is born, with the objective of cleaning the city of any graffiti, regardless of its nature or artistic quality. The brigade relentlessly removed tags, throw-ups and even complex murals, aiming to keep the city’s facades “clean”. This strategy motivated many protests (Martins, 2013) from artists and residents who saw graffiti and urban art as legitimate ways of expressing individuality (Simmel, 1903) and enriching the public space.
Civil resistance can be understood through the ideas of Michel de Certeau, who explores how ordinary people interact with the urban space in ways that challenge power structures. In the book The practice of everyday life (1980), Certeau makes the distinction between “strategies”, the practices of dominant powers to control space, and “tactics”, civilian practices to subvert this control and reclaim the public space as a place for personal and collective expression. In Porto, the Anti-Graffiti Brigade represented a “strategy” of control, while graffiti and other forms of urban arts were “tactics” of resistance and subversion. As a form of protest, some people drew a line along freshly-painted walls by the brigade. For them, the cost was only 3€ (the price of a spray can), meanwhile, for the autarchy the cost was way higher. In 2013, the city of Porto revealed that the brigade’s budget exceeded 150 thousand euros in a year (Lusa, 2013). The tactics of resistance (Certeau, 1980) exemplify how citizens can challenge the institutional strategies and the hegemony over the city’s aesthetic.
- 4. Travessa de Cedofeita, 2023. Ana Muska.
- 5. Rua do Dr. Ricardo Jorge (A), 2023. Ana Muska.
With the election of Rui Moreira in October of 2013, the autharchy’s stance in regards to urban art has changed, as reflected in his campaign, which included paintings from urban artist Mr. Dheo. After Rui’s election, the Anti-Graffiti Brigade was formally disbanded, but the cleaning of the city’s walls has contined with a different approach. Under the new administration, only interventions deemed as “vandalism” — such as tags and throw-ups — were removed, while characters and more elaborate illustrations were preserved. Parallelly, the Programa de Arte Urbana do Porto (Porto’s Urban Art Program) was created, and since 2014 has promoted over one hundred artistic interventions, with the participation of national and international artists. This program can be seen as an attempt to establish a controlled “order”, limiting the spontaneity and free expression in the public space, in line with Sharon Zukin’s (2009) observations on the control of urban culture as a way of managing the aesthetics and gentrification of cities.
- 6. Travessa de Cedofeita (A), 2022. Ana Muska
Despite these changes, the practice of selective cleaning continues to generate controversy. The decision about what should be removed still rests in the hands of members of the [municipal] chamber with no artistic background, that act as curator of Porto’s streets without proper knowledge. This raises important questions about the role of the State in defining what is legitimate art and about who truly holds the right to the city — a core concept in the theories of Henri Lefebvre (2012/1968) and David Harvey (2012). When a municipal worker decides to erase an artistic intervention and to preserve another, they exercise an act of curatorship, excluding citizens from the decision-making process regarding the cultural value in the public space. Even though these actions are executed by workers on the ground, they reflect broader decisions and institutional guidelines. Therefore, it emerges the need to question the extent in which these decisions are guided by a clear criteria or if there is room for subjective interpretations that affects the urban landscape. The relationship between the apparent autonomy of the municipal workers and the institutional orientation of the [Municipal] Chamber is crucial to understand how the public space is managed and who, ultimately, has the power to shape the urban space of the city.
Porto’s situation, marked by the stains of graffiti and the controversy surrounding urban art, points towards a deep conflict over the control of the urban space. How can we understand the diversity and vitality of the streets not only as challenges to be managed, but as elements that contribute to the urban dynamic? Urban art, in this context, can be seen as an intrinsic part of the city’s identity, something that does not exist just to be tolerated, but that has the potential to be celebrated. This perspective gives way to a critic reflection regarding the role of art in the public space and how different voices — be it artists, residents or authorities — can be valued in a more inclusive process of city building.
- 7. Rua do Morgado de Mateus (A), 2024. Ana Muska.
- 8. Travessa de Cedofeita (B), 2022. Ana Muska.
The question of inclusion is crucial within this context. When the decision regarding what constitutes legitimate art rests on non-specialized workers, there is a risk of marginalizing forms of expression that do not fit into the dominant aesthetic norms. This can result in the exclusion of social groups that utilize the urban space to manifest their identities and resistances. Zukin (2009) adverts about the possibility of a public curatorship that perpetuates social inequalities, favoring certain groups while detracting others. David Harvey (2012), however, reinforces the need to ensure that the right to the city is accessible to all, emphasizing the importance of citizen participation in urban transformations.
The challenge to define what should be preserved or removed in the city streets raises questions about who decides and what interests are represented. Does the public space curatorship truly reflects the diversity and plurality of urban voices, or is it reinforcing the dominant norms and aesthetics? And how does the power dynamics that shape the urban landscape affect the freedom of expression and the rights of citizens to influence the space in which they inhabit (Lefebvre, 2012/1968; Harvey, 2012)? These questions indicate that Porto, as well as other cities, faces the dilemma of balancing order (Zukin, 1996) with respect for the diversity of urban voices. The tensions surrounding urban art might reveal something deeper about the way cities manage creativity and dissidence. The true question may not be the resolution of this conflict, but the ability to embrace the complexity of the urban space as a reflection of the varied experiences and identities that co-exist within it.
Ana Muska Castro, 2024
(CECS/Universidade do Minho)
Note:
[1] Law nr. 61/2013 from August 23 at Diário da República. Available at: <https://dre.pt/pdf1sdip/2013/08/16200/0509005092.pdf>
References
Certeau, M. de. (1984). The practice of everyday life. University of California Press.
Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution. Verso.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great american cities (1.a ed.). Random House.
Lefebvre, H. (1968/2012). O direito à cidade (R. Lopo, Trad.). Letra Livre.
Lusa. (2013, março 21). Não será por falta de verba que Câmara do Porto deixa de limpar “graffiti”. PÚBLICO. https://www.publico.pt/2013/03/21/local/noticia/nao-sera-por-falta-de-verba-que-camara-do-porto-deixa-de-limpar-graffiti-1588671
Martins, A. J. (2013, maio 24). Graffiters ameaçam responder à destruição de pintura de Hazul. PÚBLICO. https://www.publico.pt/2013/05/24/p3/noticia/graffiters-ameacam-responder-a-destruicao-de-pintura-de-hazul-1817360
Simmel, G. (1903/2012). The metropolis and mental life. Em The urban sociology reader (2a Edição, pp. 23–33). Routledge.
Zukin, S. (1996). The Cultures of Cities. Wiley.
Zukin, S. (2009). Naked city: The death and life of authentic urban places. Oxford University Press.
LOCALIZAÇÃO
LOCAL: Porto
LATITUDE: 41.1579438
LONGITUDE: -8.629105299999999