Know Hope: von “Street-Art” bis “White Cube”

“Since about the year 2000, Street-Art as a global, unauthorized artistic practice in urban areas has increasingly moved toward the centre of the art world. The journalistic media, in particular, with the debate about individual design and influence on public spaces, has revived a discussion on the art of street space characterized with the stigma of vandalism since the beginning of the Graffiti movement. Street-Art has largely been able to cast off this reputation and has been discussed as a true contribution to the New Urbanism and the history of art. Whereas Graffiti does not generally seek acceptance in the wider population or the established art context, Street-Art is regarded as “”much more open”” for styles and aspiring street artists by its depicted aims and the general public. Parallels and similarities to institutional art depict one aspect of the perception represented here. There is much evidence that Street-Art, through the subculture, mimics an Art-World where both parallels and differences to established art are manifested, whereas their main characteristic is that they can also exist independently. The phenomenon of Street-Art between subculture and established art can be explored with the example of the artist Know Hope, who moves between Israel, the United States and Europe, his contexts switching between the street and the White Cube. Here, the thesis is proposed that Know Hope has inter-connected the contexts that each in turn characterize his art. The process of viewer perception appears to be involved in this method. Analyzing the works of Know Hope, the focus is on the condition of perception, applied with the question of effect aesthetics. It can be understood, in analysing the work, the means with which the artists tries to involve the viewer and from signals in the work that guide the process of perception. One characteristic of Street-Art is the experience with and connection to a particular location on the street, where the constants of space and time play a special role. It is in these “external conditions of access” where the viewer first approaches the work (What consequences does this location offer the piece? How can the piece be considered here?), and, secondly, the “inner requirements of perception,” by which the artist and the work influence the perception process (How does the viewer participate in the intra-visual communication? How far will the recipient be stimulated to engage in the composition of the work? To what extent will the recipient become an agent beyond of the place of perception?). This work is thus not just to be considered in the context of art history. For Street-Art, it is proposed that context is an integral part of the art itself. It is not always opposed to the established Art-World, but it cannot be fully understood through the art establishment alone. It depicts its own world that has grown out of the subculture of Graffiti, even as it has grown significantly apart from that subculture. The work of a street artist remains in an elemental moment as the room is not just the environment, but also crucial to how the art is perceived. How can the context of the street be maintained in the White Cube? This question proposes that Street-Art loses its authenticity when the art is subordinate to a new art context and its rules. This transition into the world of the White Cube, while tolerated, entails a tightrope walk between Street-Art as a pure concept of style versus its contextual conception. As such, the “”Interface of ‘Context’ and ‘Text'”” can be applied here to determine if Know Hope, with his work in the White Cube, represents a direction in Street-Art and qualifies as a street artist, and if so, why.”