Explosive art fails to go off

Graffiti. Art or vandalism? Since its fledgling days in New York in the 1970s, this 'outsider' art form has successfully entered the lucrative gallery space. Jean-Michel Basquiat, for one, started out as a graffiti artist and made the million-dollar crossover.

It hasn't, though, had much of an impact in galleries over here, partly because, as a fine art vogue, its time was very much located in the 1980s, when New York galleries were buzzing and the Brit explosion was barely a twinkle.

Bombers (the term simply refers to graffiti scribes) is a collaborative exhibition between the Jeffrey Charles Gallery and New York's Marinez Gallery and brings together the work of six exponents of the New York graffiti scene. Known only by their tags - the eloquently named 'Earsnot' for example - they have, collectively, been practising their controversial art form over the last 20 years.

'Bombers,' claims the press release, 'preaches the real gospel of the street: anarchism, iconoclasm and revolution.' To which you might, legitimately, want to ask: if it's legal, is it still genuinely graffiti? And by taking it into a gallery space, does that defeat its purpose as a subversive activity?

Most pertinent (though perhaps not if you live on a rundown estate), might be the question: if it's a 'revolution', why is it that graffiti artists seem to follow such a rigidly prescribed format? While you join the aesthetic debate, you might also find it interesting to ponder the writing on the wall.