This article explores how graffiti removal practices—often seen as mundane concealing tasks—can produce visually compelling outcomes that are reminiscent of what they attempt to erase. These unintended visual outcomes, marked by awkward color patches, rough textures, or transparent traces, challenge the boundary between erasure and expression. Hereby, they raise critical questions about authorship, intention, and the role of the viewer that stem from long-standing debates within visual culture and art theory, particularly throughout the 20th century. Focusing on examples of removals in Istanbul and Paris, the study employs a form-based visual analysis to classify different types of graffiti removal across the city. This classification is not merely descriptive; it also serves as an interpretive framework to understand how these architectural surfaces contribute to the visual narrative of the urban landscape. These surfaces, stuck between the cycle of creation and annihilation, form a self-sustaining urban gallery, where repetition, layering, and erasure create an ever-evolving urban palimpsest. Despite lacking deliberate artistic intention, they give rise to a spontaneous visual language that reshapes the city’s collective memory. Rather than being the opposite of graffiti, removal becomes its partner in a continuous dialogue, both contributing to how the city is read, remembered, and perceived. Thus, by turning our attention to what remains, this study invites a reconsideration of how the accidental textures, traces, and color remnants produced by graffiti removal generate a spontaneous urban visual language.
Burcu Kayhan (Mon,) studied this question.