By Anthony Boutall, CapX
It is easy to scoff at the middle-class pretensions of Canterbury Cathedral’s current graffiti display. As Joseph Dinnage, the deputy editor of this publication, notes on X, it looks as though the cathedral has been turned ‘into a South London youth club c.2005’. The style of the temporary graffiti they have plastered on the ancient cathedral pillars is so laughably contrived and cartoonish that the whole enterprise falls flat on its face from an aesthetic standpoint alone.
For this reason, it is unintentionally comical to read the Dean of Canterbury, David Monteith, refer to the sticky-back graffiti as possessing ‘authenticity’ and ‘rawness’ because ‘it is unfiltered and not tidied up or sanitised’. Although I am sure his thoughts are well-intentioned, you can almost imagine the 57-year-old priest unveiling the graffiti work while donning a backwards cap over his dog collar and posing with Ali G, c.2005.
But there is a more serious concern that many of us have when we see and hear this type of thing. The idea expressed by the Cathedral Dean – that graffiti ‘allows us to receive the gifts of younger people who have much to say and from whom we need to hear much’ – is a terrifying insight into these people’s thinking. It insists that, since we can associate criminal graffiti in run-down areas with some young people, it is the channel through which we should reach all young people.
As well as being risibly cringeworthy, it is palpable nonsense and hugely counterproductive. The focus on marginalised young people specifically makes it even less palatable.