Page History

"I became aware of the vast differences in people's responses to the \[subway\] work. Different people saw different things in the drawings. \[...\] All kinds of people would stop and look at the huge drawing and many people were eager to comment on their feelings toward it. This was the first time I realized how many people could enjoy art if they were given the chance. These were not the people I saw in the museums or in the galleries but a cross-section of humanity that cut across all boundaries" (Haring, "Art in Transit").

It was this experience that propelled Haring to open the [Pop Shop|http://www.pop-shop.com/drupal/?utm_source=haring&utm_medium=website&utm_campaign=haring-home] in 1986. A retail store located in New York City's [SoHo District|http://www.sohonyc.com/], the Pop Shop sold "T-shirts, toys, posters, buttons, magnets," and other paraphernalia "bearing \[Haring's\] images." Haring looked upon his shop as "an extension of his work" and his philosophy: it was "intended to allow people greater access to his work, which was now readily available on products at a low cost," explains his web site biographer. It was a place where "not only collectors could come, but also kids from the [Bronx|http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.02d9ee26d69924f6a62fa24601c789a0]" ([Jade Dellinger|http://www.amazon.com/Jade-Dellinger/e/B002YRFBNS], ["Art and Commerce"|http://www.haring.com/cgi-bin/essays.cgi?essay_id=15]). The Pop Shop was subject to criticism from those in the art world who questioned whether it represented a turn toward the commercialization of art. But in that respect it was hardly different from high-end galleries and auctions -- except for the demographical constitution of the population it catered to. Haring maintained that the aesthetic quality of his work was not compromised with the opening of the Pop Shop, noting that "\[it\] was less about 'purity' and much more an issue of integrity" -- and the intention behind the Pop Shop fell comfortably in line with his sense of integrity.

Those women have "made it" resent being defined by their gender; they view themselves as artists, not "female taggers." Swoon, who found in the graffiti genre a means to assert her "\[independence\] from the ideologies of institutional art," chose an alias with "no feminine connotations" precisely for this reason. But with her emerging prominence in the art world, she was recognized as female, and the resulting "attention \[...\] left her feeling alienated and objectified. \[...\] I never want to make anything that could be pigeonholed as 'women's work.' I'm way too interested in the human experience," she [explains|http://student.dcu.ie/~delanea7/ExtremeUrbanWoman/articles/graffiti.html].

[Nicholas Ganz|http://www.lightstalkers.org/nicholas_ganz], a photographer who has chronicled the world of street art, compiled a book called _[Graffiti Women|http://www.amazon.com/Graffiti-Women-Street-Five-Continents/dp/0810957477]__._ He [contends|http://www.formatmag.com/features/nicholas-ganz/] that the "movement is actually not \[as\] male dominated as people think." The problem is that women in graffiti aren't garnering the sort of recognition that male graffiti artists have received. It is true: While women street artists such as [Lady Fever|http://www.ladykfever.com/] (who has fashioned her artistic identity after Lady Pink) and [Girls On Top|http://www.britishhiphop.co.uk/news/latest/frisson_gallery_girls_on_top_exhibition.html], a female graffiti artist collaborative, have shown their work in multiple exhibitions, they are harder to find. Perhaps the media is just not paying enough attention.