Just wondering why brands are trying so hard to incorporate street art (to the point of stealing it)

Back in April, the street artist Futura, won a case against NorthFace. The outdoor brand had a campaign called Future Light, featuring an atom-like drawing as the logo for their new product. Futura argued the campaign infringed on his copyright as it was eerily similar to the atoms he uses in his art and his name. Essentially, he was able to establish that it generated confusion, that led people to assume his connection to the campaign.

I am not necessarily interested in the legal proceedings. What is interesting to me more so is the way that brands are striving to incorporate street art in to their clothing brands. This, along with the recent case of Banksy, is yet another example of a brand incorporating street art somehow. Other, legitimate, collaborations between brands and artists (estates) include Basquiat and Gap, Keith Haring and Lululemon, Kenny Scharf and Dior. As an uninformed observer it seems like this is intentional means for designers to tap into youth culture. To embrace street art, or to cover your clothes in a graffiti print, is a way to appeal to those who to (at least seam to be) rebels or just enjoy art. In considering the cases of Futura and Banksy, I can’t help but consider the irony.

Photo by Anderson Guerra on Pexels.com

Both Futura and Banksy are steeped in the street art culture scenes, well known for their designs. And both now have fought and won cases to protect their work from commercial interests. As corporations attempt to incorporate the street aesthetic, they do so to appeal to the masses. In trying to co-opt or use the work of others, how does that not go against the individual spirit within graffiti communities?

In a way, this approach to incorporate this aesthetic to appeal to young people seems akin to the teachers who try to work hiphop and rap into every math lesson. Because that’s how you reach the teens right? While it may work, sometimes you just look like a fool who’s trying too hard. I wonder how a corporation could ever incorporate street art in ways that are relevant to the communities the artists hope to inspire. How do you avoid being tone deaf? Especially when taking work without the express consent of the artist?

I admit, I know nothing of graffiti, street art, or street culture at all. Perhaps my judgements are completely off base. (If so, then tell me.) But I am curious about this topic as a form of marketing strategy. If you have anything to say about this, something to add to this conversation, let me know in the comments.

Sources used:

Holland, O. (June 10, 2021). The Futura is now: Pioneering New York street artist is finally getting his dues. CNN Style. https://www.cnn.com/style/article/futura-street-artist/index.html

Van Meter, W. (August 31, 2022). Graffiti artist Futura was a peer of Basquiat and Haring—and then left the art world completely. Now, at 66, he’s making his way back. Artnet News. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/graffiti-artist-futura-interview-2165730

While I didn’t use this source, you might find it interesting:

Ferrier, M. (May 12, 2015). From the car park to the catwalk: how fashion embraced street art. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2015/may/12/from-the-car-park-to-the-catwalk-how-fashion-embraced-street-art

If you want to read more content like this, here are some more you might like:

And here are my most recent posts:

Leave a comment