Is Cairene Graffiti Losing Momentum?

[Late graffiti artist Hisham Rizq, killed in July 2014, painted by Ammar Abu Bakr. Captured 12 September 2014] [Late graffiti artist Hisham Rizq, killed in July 2014, painted by Ammar Abu Bakr. Captured 12 September 2014]

Is Cairene Graffiti Losing Momentum?

By : Mona Abaza

Clearly Cairene graffiti has lost momentum during this year. Having been the faithful barometer of the revolution over the past three years, graffiti has recently faced transmutations and drawbacks that run parallel with the political process of restoring “order” in the street. The heartbreaking story of the recent death of a cheerful and bright young graffiti artist, nineteen-year-old Hisham Rizq, completes this sad picture. He had disappeared a week before his corpse was discovered in the morgue of Zeinhom in Cairo in late June 2014. The official cause of his death, provided by the government, was that he drowned in the Nile. The story was hardly believable. In today´s Egypt, some forty thousand people remain incarcerated in prisons, while many others are reported to have died in police stations of heart failure, crammed in confined spaces in the unbearable summer heat. Rizq, it was speculated, was probably arrested while protesting and consequently killed by the security forces.

What makes the story even more depressing is that Rizq was a dedicated activist of the April 6 Youth Movement, one of the main catalysts of the January 25 Revolution. Rizq was equally active in various other political organizations, as well as in the Association of Revolutionary Artists (Rabitat Fanani al-Thawra) who continued to contribute to the graffiti scene in Cairo. He was not only celebrated as a street artist, but was equally well known as a participant in numerous demonstrations. For example, he was recently seen protesting against the government after General Sisi became president.

In fact, Rizq was not the first young man barely twenty years of age to be killed by the security forces in the past three and a half years. Evidently, a particular group of bright young women and men has become the target of the regime. However, for the circle of graffiti artists, Rizq´s death marked a dramatic turn, signalling the danger of street politics under military rule, perhaps even marking the end of street art, after such a mesmerizing blossoming over three years since the January 25 Revolution began. A memorial celebration was held in Abdin Square, another public space that turned into an outdoor art hub known as Al-Fann Midan (Art is a Square) festival for the past two years. A Ramadan iftar banquet was also organized in memory of Rizq the “martyr” on Youssef al-Guindi Street, which cuts across the iconic Mohamed Mahmoud Street. Finally, a huge portrait was recently painted by his friend, graffiti artist Ammar Abu Bakr on Mohamed Mahmoud Street itself. This street had witnessed the most violent incidents in 2011 and 2012, leading to numerous killings and the wounding of thousands, and had also turned into a “memorial space” (see Abaza, Jadaliyya, 10 March 2012, 12 June, 2012, 25 January 2013, 30 June 2013).

 

 

\"\"
[The wall of Mohammed Mahmoud Street, a few meters from the entrance of the gate of the American University in Cairo. A poor child, (most probably a street child) eating a falafel sandwich. Captured 25 November 2013]

Rizq´s death coincides with the Sisi regime´s massive campaign to “clean up” Downtown Cairo, by closing down some cafés and forcefully evicting street vendors, who constitute some five million people surviving within the informal sector, accounting for thirty percent of the total economy according to Ahram Online. These vendors were recently relocated to a confined area near a bus station in the Turguman quarter. This decision to remove the street vendors was welcomed in various circles since it did visually relieve the centre congestion and eased the flow of traffic. Downtown Cairo does indeed look calmer and more orderly now. However, several architects and critics pointed out that this was purely a superficial aesthetic move, since no long term, realistic solution has been proposed for the millions of jobless in Egypt’s streets. This was the argument of architect Omar Nagati, who has worked closely with the newly founded Syndicate of Street Vendors, though he acknowledges that the community of street vendors is infiltrated by mafia elements.

 

 

\"\"
[Reallocated Downtown Street Vendors in al-Sahaafa Street. Captured November 2014]

With the exception of the recent portrait of Rizq drawn by Ammar Abu Bakr, it is no coincidence that the centre of Cairo has witnessed a massive whitewash of its walls, together with a destruction of graffiti. However, the walls of Mohamed Mahmoud Street had hardly changed since last November 2013, with the exception of Rizq´s portrait. Unlike in previous years, their whitewashing has not been counteracted with ironic, irreverent new paintings. Dare one say that the last portrait of Rizq (picture1), marks the tragic end of an era in Egyptian street art? Is there a collective sentiment of exhaustion, and fear of violent police retaliation? Or is it that the repetitive portraiture of martyrs in the city, their growth in size as time went by, has lost the powerful effect it produced at the start of the revolution? Also, is there a relationship between the decline of the graffiti in Mohammed Mahmoud Street and the most recent graffiti in downtown Cairo, which seems to be turning into a sort of decorative art, whose political messages are increasingly blurred? For example, groups of students from the Faculty of Fine Arts are now often seen painting the stairs of bridges and coloring the walls in poor, popular quarters.  Is this going to replace graffiti to become the next most admired endeavour in Egyptian urban life, perhaps precisely because it is rather depoliticised compared to graffiti? And how can we interpret the article in Ahram Online, published a year ago by Chahinaz Gheith, differentiating between the graffiti of 2011 and the most recent words written on walls that she describes as “abusive,” a form of a “visual pollution,” a “war of words,” and “obscenities,” including sectarian statements like “all Copts are bastards”?

\"\"
[Cropped adjusted Panorama of Mohammed Mahmoud Street. Caption: Panorama of Mohammed Mahmoud Street. Captured 22 February 2013]

These speculations should be addressed in relation to one major issue, not necessarily restricted to street art, but rather, how long can street mobilization through protests endure after so many killings, disfigurations, mutilations, and sufferings that have gone without restoring justice?

Egypt appears to be experiencing a collective trauma, if not an insurmountable malaise, in which denunciation and witch-hunting are becoming quite familiar. There is a growing exodus of human rights activists, artists, intellectuals, and political activists, who feel personally threatened by the new regime in Egypt. Earlier this year, singer-songwriter Ramy Essam, who became famous in Tahrir Square, moved to Sweden, citing the mass arrests and censorship as his reason. In May 2014, the much celebrated graffiti artist Ganzeer left the country for the United States, fearing for his life after that he underwent a defamation campaign on national televisionIn a recent interview, Ganzeer explains the gravity of the situation as follows:

 

“As street artists, I think we are less targeted than others who might be affiliated, but at the same time, it is not like it is an entirely safe thing either; you know you take risky actions, and it has been risky since the first day. Maybe now it is only far riskier because it is very obvious that the police have been given carte blanche to take any means necessary to ensure security—or, at least Sisi’s security—and so that means there is more of an inclination from their side to keep an eye out for street artists more strictly than before, or slap accusations or crimes on them that may not be true.”

 

Particularly concerning has been the recent issuing of a draconian law curtailing the activities of NGOs and human rights organizations. A large number of young activists, including leaders of the 6th April Youth Movement who protested against this protest law, have been arrested. There was even the recent brief arrest in Cairo of the well-known French journalist Alain Gresh, chief editor of Le Monde Diplomatique. He was discussing current events in a café with two Egyptian women, and was publicly denounced by a woman at another table, before being questioned by police. This collective feeling of being personally targeted, while the circle of one´s acquaintance contracts day after day, is what Basma Abdel Aziz warns of in her recent article in Al-Shorouk newspaper. The feeling of being threatened is not only targeting those who are politically active, it is extending to include those who remained silent by refusing to join the pervasive state propaganda machinery. Thus, as Abdel Aziz has argued, many raise the question: when would it be the right time to depart for good?

The authorities’ decision to conduct a relentless “war on terror”, as retaliation for the escalating terrorist attacks against the army, has certainly contributed to a collective feeling of angst. So too have the actual attacks, whereby numerous Egyptian soldiers on both the Eastern and Western borders have not merely been killed but many beheaded, indicating that the so-called Islamic State organization, and/or its identified supporters, have reached the country. Dare one say that with the pervasive media propaganda, popular sentiments have shifted towards the opinion that the respect of human rights and the right to protest remain secondary with regard to the greater cause of national security threats? This might explain the more conservative artistic campaigns of the Fine Arts students, while the rage of some of the marginalized, or the sectarian, political players in Egypt might tell us more about the less savory wall statements.

As Sherief Gaber argued in a recent presentation at the American University in Cairo, for those who still maintain faith in the revolutionary path, the decisive struggle revolves today around ‘political memory’, given the pervasive smearing campaigns against activists and human rights advocates. The battle over recording and archiving for an alternative narrative of what truly happened during the past three years is becoming a paramount endeavor to counteract the current invasive propaganda machinery.

Of course, there are many pessimists who believe that the “restoration” of the ancien regime has already taken place, epitomized in the acquittal of Mubarak and his cronies, together with the fierce comeback of the internal security apparatus. Having said that, the problem remains. Who killed the protesters during the first days of the January 2011 uprisings? Who is accountable for the carnage of the night of the “battle of the camel” on Tahrir Square in February 2011? Furthermore, the longue durée, complex and unpredictable processes of insurrections compel us to raise the question: what sort of alternative forms of struggle should one adopt under military rule? Considering this moment of perilous street politics, how should the struggle for change look? How can the emerging political parties, civil society actors and cultural workers survive under the recent anti-terrorist and NGO´s laws curtailing freedoms?

I end this piece with my starting point, with Hisham Rizk, to argue that it was not a coincidence that his death was once more a warning sign, instigating departures together with sentiments of defeat. From day one protesters have been systematically confronted with killings and violence, and a number of activists and observers have been reflecting on whether to adopt passive or violent strategies in resistance. And violence continues to persist. One day before the commemoration of the fourth anniversary of the revolution, a young and beautiful activist, Shaimaa El Sabagh, member of Socialist Popular Alliance Party, was shot dead by police forces in Downtown Cairo while she was participating in a march. She died while carrying flowers, to be deposited for the martyrs of the revolution in Tahrir Square. The excessive cost involved in street politics is primarily being paid by young men and women like Shaimaa, or like Alaa Abdel Fattah, Ahmed Douma, Yara Sallam, and Sanaa Seif, along with many more who remain nameless, who have been sent to prison for several years for daring to protest against the regime. If short term perspectives seem to be deadlocked in pessimism, long term visionary speculations cannot afford to be.

A series of forthcoming articles will attempt to reflect on both the external and internal paradoxes and struggles for recognition continuing within the field of street art in Egypt today. They will interweave these with the powerful external factor of the commodification of revolutionary art, which calls for further research into Cairene urban life in the context of the incompleteness of the revolution.

Occupy Gezi as Politics of the Body

Since the Gezi resistance started with bloodshed on 31 May, it has had an “anti-depressant” effect, as a friend of mine puts it, as much as it has been nerve-racking. During this period where each day has been prone to new crises and normalcy was completely disrupted, we simultaneously experienced the peaks of ecstasy and the depths of sorrow.

Analyzing such an intense event naturally requires taking some distance. Pending systematization, however, the vivid memory of each day impels one to put on paper multifarious ideas that resonate well with the resistance. Each morning, many bodies with sleep deprived eyes wake up in Istanbul, Ankara, Antakya, Urfa, and Denizli to take to the streets once again, after having quickly checked the latest news in the social media. They are astonished and impressed that they can still walk, run, stand up, and carry provisions for those in the parks. Exhausted bodies rejuvenate with every new threat that the government utters, and with thousands, tens of thousands of others they begin flowing to Taksim, Kızılay, Kuğulu Park, Gündoğdu, Abbasoğlu, and Yeniköy Park carrying home-made gas masks, swimmer goggles, anti-acid solutions, and whistles.

No one does or can govern these bodies. The masses that gather in public spaces are not formed by virtue of transferring tax money into the wallets of partisans. No one provides shuttle buses for them; no one gives them flags, or feeds them with sandwiches. No one assigns them the slogans they shout out during the demonstrations. Bodies that take heart from knowing that they are not alone do not count, or count on, numbers to meet with others in communal or virtual spaces. One standing man suffices for thousands of others to take to the streets. After all, “one” is also a number…

The government, whose tactlessness prompts these resisting and standing bodies to convene again and again every single day, could not have missed the significance of this body politics. These bodies naturally do have a language, even a few languages that are at times congruent and at others incongruent; however, as a whole, they constitute a politics of the body. The rage and dreams that have been embodied in tweets and graffiti since 31 May turn into material realities through the physical existence, visibility, and endurance of the bodies. If history is being rewritten, then its subject is the body.

Four of these bodies lost their lives during this war that the government has waged on society. Thousands of bodies have been beaten up: some lost their eyes, some received irretrievable injuries. Skins were burnt under the water from the cannons, “laced” with chemicals for maximum harm; lungs were choked with tear gas. Pounded arms, legs, and heads got crushed and broken. The long-term effects of the tons of chemicals dumped on bodies are still unknown. What is known, however, is that these chemicals killed hundreds of cats, dogs, and birds, and that they did harm to countless insects, butterflies, and other smaller organisms.

The apparatuses of the state, and the vehicles of death that responded to Gezi’s politics of the body, attempted to imitate the life force that they failed to extort. In response to the huge numbers that filled the parks and squares and astonished everyone without exception, they hoped to gather partisans together in scripted rallies. They began comparing head counts; they calculated representative percentages. When the calculations did not match, they increased the number of police in body armor and helmets and moved them from protest to protest. They built walls of flesh and steel against the wave of resisting flesh. When that did not work, they offered these bodies—which have been in contact with each other physically and virtually through meetings, banners, and tweets—a mise en scène of dialogue, the conditions of which were more or less already determined. They could not even wait for this attempt to yield fruit; two warnings and a command were enough to launch an assault to remove the bodies that produced an alternative sociability from the park, from the space in which physical resistance could be transformed into a life style. They freed the public space of the public. They collected all the banners, pictures, and colors one by one to erase them from social memory. They stripped all the trees, each dedicated to victims of state violence; they appropriated the barricades that were named after tens of people who had undergone physical and psychological torture, and they tore them to tatters. They destroyed the efforts to keep alive the memories of Fikret Encü, who was a victim of Roboski; Metin Göktepe, who was tortured and killed in detention; Dicle Koğacoğlu, who could not take all the sorrow inherent in this society any more; and the Surp Hagop Armenian Cemetery, which was destroyed by Turkish racism.

The only thing that remains is a politics of the body—but the bodies that produce this politics differ from what Giorgio Agamben calls “bare life.” They are not “mere” bodies that the arbitrary will of a sovereign can isolate from society, oppress unceremoniously, or push to the margins of the symbolic world. Rather, they evoke what Ernst Bloch calls “the upright man,” the collective Prometheus. Bloch writes:

Nothing is more fortifying than the call to begin from the beginning. It is youthful as long as it is; to it there belongs a young and aspiring class. It is innocent of the bad things that have happened, for it has never had a real opportunity to be guilty. When this happens, justice has the effect of a morning; it opposes itself to that eternal sickness which was handed down before it. Beginning anew is freshness through and through; it is a first if it appears completely ahistorical, and if it seems to lead back to the beginning of history….It carries the image of the pastoral mood, of the shepherd, of the simple and upright man; one can play with it even in the dark.[1]

Gezi is the struggle of disorderly bodies, those who do not have any dispositif other than their own bodies, against the death machines. If the machines are regulatory instances that follow commands and extort public spaces of mobility with force and violence, then the force they face is the resistance of life itself. Life flourishes at the most unexpected moments and places, just like weeds that crack the concrete and spring out of it. No apparatus of the state can succeed in dominating life absolutely.

The state seeks order; it can control only those whom it orders. It cannot cope with the demand of "freedom"; it has to ask questions such as “freedom for whom,” “freedom for what,” or “freedom under what circumstances” in order to tuck freedom into neat boxes. Order draws borders, fixes identities, and defines. It attempts to establish a hierarchy. By telling parents to take their daughters and sons home from the park, it both brands the resisting bodies as "children" and tries to trigger into action the nucleus of society: family. Through its rhetoric of security, it attributes the risks of its own making to the resisting bodies. It hangs its own flag or banner on the bodies that it prefers knocking down rather than protecting. It punishes those who do not obey; it uses punishment as retaliation. It operates through censorship, threats, and propaganda.

Life, on the other hand, is a constant flux. It challenges borders and moves beyond them. It opens up to circulation those spaces that are closed off due to construction; it paints such destructive vehicles as bulldozers pink; it transforms steps into tribunes, pieces of iron into wish trees, and trees destined to be cut down into monuments. It walks on highways and bridges that are closed to pedestrians. It does not like the empty and the sterile; it covers them up with banners, slogans, tents. It leaves its mark on every surface. It disrupts silence at times with pots and pans, and at other times with a tune from a piano. It plays with identities and definitions; it makes them fluid; it renders them indistinguishable. It can make fun of both itself and the established order thanks to its humor. By changing one single letter in a word, it can ridicule the heaviest of symbolisms. When the state apparatus sends a riot-intervention vehicle to pour tear gas on it, life stops to catch its breath for a while and goes right back to resisting. When a body grows tired, it gets replaced by a reinvigorated one. Life turns into thousands of fingers that tweet and take photographs when the state apparatus sends down vehicles of propaganda. It stops its wheelchair to grab the flag that fell on the ground while escaping from tear gas. It apologizes when it steps on someone`s foot while running; it calms down those who panic.

It is obvious that these bodies that fascism wants to militarize will not assume any ideological identity. When they do not drink alcohol, they ridicule conservatism; when they lie under a TOMA, they make fun of liberalism, which claims that life is the most valuable good. Orthodox Marxism cannot decide under which class struggle these "çapulcu" bodies are to be subsumed. As long as they stay in physical contact, as long as they remain as collective Prometheuses, as long as they—have to—continue the resistance, they grow accustomed to each other`s colors, languages, and genders. They disrupt the behavioral rules that ideologies and institutions expect from them. The natural or moral instinct of protection that has been attributed to mothers loses ground when female bodies participate in the resistance alongside their children. The nationalist and the Kurd exchange anti-acid solutions in gas-filled hotel lobbies. The upper-class college kid drinks the water handed over by the kid with an Anonymous mask without needing to ask what neighborhood he’s from. Soccer fans save their curses for the police rather than for their rivals.

What comes out of all this is trust, not chaos. That`s why the bodies multiply with every gush of tear gas, spaces expand with every police attack, and the quality of contact among the bodies increases with every propaganda speech. The life woven together by bodies born in Gezi is so tenacious that the government is right in fearing it. The power of these bodies stems from their capacity to mutualize endurance, rather than vulnerability (as Judith Butler envisioned they would). One would need to look into the extensive interstices of this politics of the body, rather than into macro-level discourses, to begin deciphering it.

NOTES

[1] Ernst Bloch, Natural Right and Human Dignity (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987), 61.

[An earlier version of this article was published on 26 June 2013 on BIA ("Independent Communication Network"). The link to that version can be found here. This article was translated from Turkish by Gülfer Göze.]