Visual Interventions in Public Space: the City as its Inhabitants Oeuvre – Pixação, segregation and reappropriation of urban space in São Paulo

Full text

0
CONGRESO INTERNACIONAL
CONTESTED_CITIES
EJE 5
Article nº 5-518
VISUAL INTERVENTIONS IN PUBLIC SPACE – THE
CITY AS ITS INHABITANTS' OUEVRE
PIXAÇÃO, SEGREGATION AND REAPPROPRIATION
OF URBAN SPACE IN SÃO PAULO
Paul Schweizer
Fabio Vieira

Article nº 5-518
1
VISUAL INTERVENTIONS IN PUBLIC SPACE – THE CITY AS ITS
INHABITANTS' OEUVRE C
Pixação, segregation and reappropriation of urban space in São Paulo
Paul Schweizer
Goethe-Universität Frankfurt
paul.schweizer@stud.uni-frankfurt.de
All images by:
Fabio Vieira
www.fotorua.com.br
contato@fotorua.com.br
ABSTRACT
Políticas destinadas a consolidar o estado de centro de controle da economia global de
São Paulo, empenham-se em limpar os bairros centrais, representativos de todos os
elementos que não correspondem à imagem, assim aprofundando as desigualdades e
exclusões múltiplas que marcam a vida na metrópole. O espaço urbano é vivido como
espaço de constrangimentos, interditos, regras e normas. A própria metrópole, apesar de
ser um produto social, aparece como potência estranha, aparentemente fora do alcance
da intervenção criativa por parte dos indivíduos habitando nela.
Neste contexto desenvolve-se a pixação, um estilo típico de intervenção visual nas
paredes das grandes cidades brasileiras, originalmente praticada por jovens em São Paulo
na década de 1980. Desde então pixadores espalham suas escritas estilizadas em
qualquer tipo de suporte urbano, desde a periferia mais afastada até o topo dos arranha-
céu do centro. Em São Paulo, pixadores de todas as áreas da cidade – jovens e maduros,
mulheres e homens, provenientes das classes médias ou marginais – se encontram
semanalmente em vários “points”, no centro e nos bairros. Assim criam uma rede de
comunicação, colaboração e amizade, que supera múltiplos confines físicos e sociais. De
outro modo, na mídia, bem como no discurso político e jurídico a pichação (aqui
geralmente escrito com “ch”) é discutido como vandalismo, como uma “praga urbana” e
um dos problemas mais urgentes a serem combatidos em São Paulo.
As assinaturas, distribuídos pelas fachadas da cidade geralmente não contêm conteúdo
político explícito, senão os nomes estilizados de grupos e indivíduos. Nesse sentido,
propomos de discutir a pixação como uma prática cotidiana resistente no contexto da
segregação socioespacial e do policiamento
repressivo do espaço público na época neoliberal. Assim, a partir do caso da pixação
paulistana, discutiremos os potenciais emancipatórios das intervenções visuais no espaço
público. As redes de sociabilidade no âmbito da pixação (parcialmente) superam a
segregação generalizada. E mesmo para os sujeitos mais marginalizados as práticas de
apropriação discutidas podem ser a possiblidade de reestabelecer a própria condição de
criador(a) do próprio ambiente cotidiano, constitutiva do humano.
PALABRAS CLAVE: prática cotidiana resistente, pixação, São Paulo, intervenção
visual no espaço público, graffiti

Article nº 5-518
2
“They exist or not, they manifest and express themselves or not. They speak or do not
speak. It is up to them to indicate social needs, to influence existing institutions, to open
the horizon and lay claims to a future which will be their oeuvre.” (Lefebvre, 1996, p. 163).
1. INTRODUCTION
In the outset of the 21st century, cities around the world are marked by the transition from
the domination of industrial capital to financial capital. In this context, urban space has
gained a renewed importance in the process of capitalist accumulation. As urban policies
are primarily concerned with creating an appealing environment for business elites and
large investments, cities are exposed to massive restructuring. So is São Paulo. The violent
transformation of certain districts expels residents and deploys a homogeneous aesthetic
standard. “Concrete and glass are used to create an image of the 'modern' in new buildings
designed for service sector activities, while residential areas areas are shaped in
condominiums.” (Carlos, 2015, p. 27).
1
Inequalities increase and repressive policies are
applied to regulate public space. While Marx depicts the idea of the human seeing him-
/herself “in a world that he[/she] has created” (Marx, 1968, p. 517), most Paulistans might
have difficulties to recognise themselves in their urban environment. The city, though
socially produced, appears as an “alien force” to those large parts of the population, which
do not pertain to the urban elite. City dwellers are deprived of their condition as creators of
the urban, reduced to a mere appendage of the urban machinery (see Marx & Engels, 1959,
p. 468). Urban space is thereby perceived as a space of oppression and compulsions,
devoid of unregulated, creative interventions.
Henri Lefebvre calls for the right to intervene and to appropriate oneselves of the creation
of the city, when he suggests “that in a rapidly urbanizing society, a quest for a life beyond
alienation is now best understood as a struggle for 'the city' as oeuvre: a collectively
produced work of art.” (Kipfer, 2009, p. xxxii). A city, thus, produced by its inhabitants
who, in fact, produce themselves through creative engagement with urban space and with
each other. It is in this sense, that this paper discusses the practice of pixação as an
exemplary practice of (re)appropriating urban space.
2. SÃO PAULO – THE CITY AS ALIEN FORCE AND ITS
REAPPROPRIATION
São Paulo is a torn city, a “fragmented corporate metropolis” – as Milton Santos appointed
in 1990 (Santos, 1990) – a “city of walls” (Caldeira, 2000) characterised by “generalisation
of segregation” (see Vasconcelos, Corrêa, & Pintaudi, 2013; Ribeiro, 2015, p. 175).
Paulistan middle and upper class live within enclosed spaces protected by walls equipped
with guards, security cameras and eventually electric fences. The city's centre undergoes
extensive policies labelled as “revitalisation”, “requalification” or “revalorisation” that, in
fact, enhance inequality and multiple exclusions (Alves, 2015, p. 143ff; see Fix, 2007). In
the 2000s, policies titled “Operation Clean”, “Integrated Operation Legal Centre”, or
“Operation Suffocate” were applied to “clean” the centre by violently ousting homeless
people, informal street vendors and garbage collectors (Fórum Centro Vivo, 2006). The
peripheries, on the other hand, reach far into the city's hinterland. Spatial distance
1
All translations from Portuguese and German by the author.

Article nº 5-518
3
combined with high prices of local transport make participatory access to the centre
unattainable for the marginalised classes.
Paulistan critical urban theory applies neo-marxist, levebvrian approaches to grasp the
metropolitan experience. These theories offer a rich tool kit to analyse not only the
multiple inequalities and exclusions manifested in capitalist urban space, but also the
implied processes of the population's alienation from its city. Simultaneously it is proposed
to consider the (potential) elements of reappropriation inherent to capitalist production of
urban space.
Social inequality realises itself in differentiated access to the city, not to be understood as
mere physical “may go”-access. If exchange-value-driven production of urban space
deprives the popular classes – in particular however not exclusively – of the right to the
city, this involves the individuals exclusion from the social production of the city, that is,
the production of the human him-/herself through the production of his/her living
environment (see Marx, 1968, p. 516f.). Thus, the city, though socially produced, appears to
its inhabitants “as an alien fate”, not as their common product, “managed by them as their
common wealth”, but instead dominating them (Marx, 1983, p. 92). As a result, urban
space is experienced as a “space of constraints, interdictions, rules and norms” (Ana Fani
Alessandri Carlos, 2013, p. 95). Access to the urban is reduced to functions of labour and
consumption, the city dweller relegated to a mere existence as consumer and work force
(see Marx, 1962, p. 217), “destituted of the creative activity, constitutive for the human”
(Ana Fani Alessandri Carlos, 2013, p. 96). But, as Lefebvre puts it, while at the one hand
there are “the forces that aspire to dominate and control space: business and the state […],
in the opposite camp are the forces that seek to appropriate space” (Lefebvre, 2011, p.
392). We will here examine one practice of appropriation of space that, developed in the
specific context of São Paulo, might indicate towards and inspire practices in other urban
settings.

Article nº 5-518
4
PIXAÇÃO
“Man is creative activity; he [or she] produces himself through his activity.”
(Lefebvre, 2009, p. 136).
The word “pichação” derives from “piche”, Portuguese for tar or pitch. In today's parlance
it means as much as “scribblings”, with a pejorative connotation. The modification of
spelling from “pichação” to “pixação”, with no change in pronunciation, designates the
specific subculture of pixação which arose in Greater São Paulo since the 1980s, and very
soon in other major Brazilian cities. Ever since, pixadores spread their signatures across
every conceivable surface in public space of Brazilian cities, from the centre to the
peripheries. In Europe pixação is often referred to as a Brazilian form of graffiti. This
designation is only of limited use, since in Brazil, there are forms of graffiti and street art,
similar to those in North America and Europe – regarding techniques, stylistic patterns and
eventually their adaptation by the art market. By contrast, pixação, in many ways, remains
unique and deeply rooted in the specific context of Brazilian cities. Unlike political or
humorous pichação (written with “ch”), which arose in the 1960s, pixadores write names
of individuals or groups, usually devoid of an explicit (political) message. Soon they
developed their own stylistic pattern and new techniques to “scribble” the hardest-to-reach
and most emblematic walls of the city. The intricate typography which is usually drawn
with black coating colour, evades hegemonic aesthetics – in contrast to New York graffiti
of the 1970s, which soon took up elements from pop culture and advertising industries and
was usurped by commercial culture itself. Even though pixação is nowadays present in
public space of all Brazilian cities, Paulistan Pixo still enjoys the greatest visibility in the
(international) public discourse. During the last years pixadores networked throughout
different cities. Movies like “100 Comédia Brasil” (Cripta Djan, 2006) document their
travels and meetings with pixadores from various cities. Yet, scientific interest in pixação
stays largely limited to São Paulo and few other big cities like Rio de Janeiro (Coelho de

Article nº 5-518
5
Oliveira, 2009, see 2015), Belo Horizonte (Pennachin, 2011) and Salvador de Bahia
(Alencar, 2012). In the different local contexts very heterogeneous forms of pixação
emerged, respectively adapted to the particular local circumstances. The lettering in
Salvador da Bahia is often expansive and prolonged by curved lines, in Rio de Janeiro on
the other hand it is compact and relatively small. São Paulo's urban landscape differs greatly
from Rio de Janeiro or Salvador de Bahia, in particular by the level of verticalisation.
Accordingly, the typography of pixação in São Paulo usually follows a straight horizontal
line, trying to occupy all space available. In this way they accomplish best visibility and
legibility at extreme altitude. Paulistan Pixo gained particular attention by the practice,
common in São Paulo, to climb the façades of the centre's skyscrapers without any backup.
Social scientists and journalists have made ambitious assumptions about the motivation of
pixadores. Articles on pixação lately published in European media bear titles such as: “The
alphabet of anger” (Fischermann, 2015) or “São Paulo's 'angry' alternative to Graffiti”
(Siwi, 2016). The pixador Dilan
2
objects to these lurid tales of disadvantaged youth
motivated by its “anger against the city” (Siwi, 2016): “We love the city. Doing pixo we
amuse ourselves.” (Telephone conversation, 10/01/2016). Alexandre Barbosa Pereira
(2010) emphasizes that the majority of pixadores in São Paulo pertain to the marginalized
classes and live in the “quebradas” in the periphery of the metropolis. It is certain that
many young people from the periphery strongly identify with pixação. “Graffiti, art? I don't
know much about that stuff. I throw my pixo on the wall!”, explains a teenager in the
northern periphery during an art project (March 2015). In the 1980s and 1990s many
pixadores worked as “office boys” (couriers) in the centre and met after work on the so-
called “points”. These meeting places still exist today and provide pixadores, even those
from the most remote areas, with the opportunity to meet, to exchange ideas, to get
organised in “grifes” (crews of pixadores) and to joint for their nightly ventures. Every
Thursday night hundreds of pixadores meet at the central “point do centro” – information
is shared, stories told, “folinhas” (leaflets) are scribbled and exchanged, arguments,
discussions and celebrations are performed... Other weekly “points” take place in more
remote districts. Through the common practice pixadores have built up a network of social
relations that integrates the entire metropolitan region. Even though the identification with
the “quebrada” (i.e. one's origin in a poor peripheral district) and setting oneselves apart
from “the boys” (as members of the middle and upper classes are pejoratively called) are
very present in the scene, it is important to note that pixadores are not an homogeneous
group. Neither are they only male nor exclusively young, poor and of Afro-Brazilian origin.
Pixação in juridical and media-discourse
“A spectre is haunting in Brazil – the spectre of Pixação.” (Tiburi, 2011, p. 40).
The philosopher Márcia Tiburi states Marx' and Engels' famous metaphor to underline
how much pixação hits the sore spot of Brazilian bourgeois society, provoking debate, hate
speeches and calls for harsh measures. Back in 1988, Mayor Jânio Quadros announced that
he would punish pixadores with the “toughest severity”, predicting they would soon
“scribble on the chain” (in jail) (Abrahão, 1988). In 1998 graffiti and pixação were
subsumed under the new federal “crimes against the environment”-law as acts of “soiling”,
“defacement” and “against urban order and the cultural heritage”. In an 2011 amendment
to the law, graffiti was decriminalised, when performed with the intention to “artistically
2
Names changed by the author.

Article nº 5-518
6
valorize” the painted object. Pixação remains a “crime against the environment”. Further
amendment to increase prison sentences for pixadores are regularly claimed.
Commenting on the repression of Pixação Teresa Caldeira (2013) remarks that current
cleansing policies in São Paulo, unlike the ones of late 19th century would not focus on to
the bodies of the “dangerous classes” (Chalhoub, 1996), but on the mass of signs in the
city. This argument may be approved only partially. As shown above, recent policies as
“Operação Limpa” aim well at removing certain groups' bodies from public space of the
central districts of the city. Using the example of pixação, the control of the signs (see
Baudrillard, 1978; Caldeira, 2013) is surely an important endeavour of current policies. But
even herein the control of the signs is ultimately exercised on the bodies of the subjects.
While in Brasília laws to increase prison sentences for pixadores are debated, the question
of the statutory penalty seems to matter little on the streets of São Paulo. In the
“quebradas” even teenagers, who indicate to have made pixo only a few times, know what
happens when they are caught: the famous “ink bath”. “If the cops come, you better get rid
of your caps [valves of spray cans]!”, explains a young pixador (March 2015). Police
painting seized pixadores' hands, face or genitals with their own colour is reported to be a
common practice. Further abuse includes insults, slaps, threats, macabre “games” like
“Russian Roulette” or even executions. In July 2014 the pixadores “Jets Ald” and
“Abnormal Nani” that had been captured by the police and had surrendered, were shot in
the upper floor of a residential building (Franzen, 2015)
3
.
Pixação as means of political protest
3
On the common practice of extrajuridical executions in Brazil see Delgado (2009).

Article nº 5-518
7
After the aforementioned murder, pixadores used their social networks, to organise
themselves. In several demonstrations hundreds of pixadores and sympathisers departed
from the weekly meeting point, to march through São Paulo's centre. Thanks to this
mobilisation the case gained some media attention, which might have been decisive for the
criminal proceedings being instituted against the officers involved. Yet they have not been
condemned until today. In recent years, pixadores in São Paulo and other cities have
organised themselves in similar occasions. Most recently, in May 2016 when, after the
imprisonment of several pixadores in the city of Belo Horizonte, pixadores organised
demonstrations, not only against the criminalisation of pixação, but also to protest against
the impunity of crimes committed by the political and economic elite.
Besides applying measures typically used by social movements to claim their specific rights
as pixadores, some of the actors of pixação are also actively involved in broader protest
movements. It would be hasty to affirm that pixação thus became explicitly political.
Rather, one can observe that, in some cases, pixadores' knowledge, techniques and
resources have been harnessed for social movements. A crucial moment for pixadores
political involvement were the nationwide protests in June 2013, which commenced in
answer to the local government's plans to increase transport prices. The protest brought up
to 3,000,000 people to the streets of Brazilian cities – in São Paulo up to 250,000 in a single
demonstration (Secco, 2013). Pixadores participated in demonstrations, designed banners
and wrote slogans of protest on the walls of the city.
It was in this context that the “Pixo Manifesto Escrito” (“Pixo Written Manifesto”) arose.
This symbol is used by various pixadores, as – in contrast to usual pixo – its use is open to
everybody, to undertake explicitly political interventions on the city's walls. The fact that
these actions are detached from the individual pixador's identity, reduces the risk of
political persecution, but also highlights the general social relevance of the supported
struggles. Pixador Brito explains:
“The idea is that it [the Pixo Manifesto Escrito] should be something for all. Just as
the symbol of anarchy. Something that has no owner. Who identifies with anarchy,
knows what to do, right?! [...] At that time [in June 2013] everybody just went out
and did it...” (Personal interview, 15/03/2015).
Since the protests of 2013 the Pixo Manifesto Escrito has been applied targetedly on
demonstrations or actions in support of specific political struggles.

Article nº 5-518
8
Pixação as resistant everyday practice
“The practices of resistance are many and they emerge according to existing
conflicts. They may consist in the simple act of transgression of laws and norms, or
in participation in wider organizations“ (Ribeiro, 2015, p. 184).
Social scientists have repeatedly attempted to define the political importance of Pixação –
as “the politics of the poor” (Franco, Djan Ivson Silva, Rafael Pixobomb, & Joanna
Warsza, 2012), “urban protest” (Larruscahim, 2014), “an alphabet of class struggle”
(Warsza, 2012) or struggle for “the visual right to the city “ (Tiburi, 2011). Indeed, the
involved actors, applied techniques, personal backgrounds and motivations are most
diverse. Therefore, by no means we intend here to establish a definite or universal
interpretation of pixação.
Even though some pixadores have recently engaged in explicit political interventions, many
indicate that their motivation is essentially to experience and enjoy (themselves in) the city.
In this sense, we propose to discuss pixação not exactly as “class struggle” – at least not in
the narrow sense – but rather as a set of resistant everyday practices. Practising pixação,
adolescents and adults (contrary to the common belief, many pixadores are in their 30s or
40s) experience and live their city. They scour even those neighbourhoods that generally
remain inaccessible to the social group or class they belong to. As pixador Dilan states:
“They put an electric fence, they put a camera, an alarm system, what ever... We
will always try to leap them. This is why pixo is guerrilla. The city segregates itself
further and tries to segregate us, but we climb over these walls and break this
segregation.” (Personal communication, 15/02/2015).
In the context of “generalized segregation” (Lefebvre, 2003, p. 140), pixadores move
through and across segregated and enclosed urban space. By leaving their signs in
apparently unattainable places, they emphasise possible transgressions of material and

Article nº 5-518
9
social boundaries and, by doing so, indicate further paths towards the superation of
segregation
4
.
“...and the network that we form through pixação”, Dilan evokes, “pixação connects all
regions of São Paulo.” (Personal communication, 15/02/2015). While “urban enclavism”
(Stavrides, 2016, p. 18ff) constrains city dwellers to live within their confined enclaves,
pixadores' social networks, as described comprehensively by Pereira (2010), constitute a
strong resistant torque. The relations established on the weekly “points”, enriched and
reinforced by common experiences reach beyond not only physical but also social
boundaries. Talking about an oldschool pixador, who is said to be “boy” – a “rich kid” –,
Wilson, a pixador from the infamous Capão Redondo district in the poor south west of the
metropolis, affirms:
“Pixação is an instrument in which all are united. Rich, poor, you may live in the
periphery, you may live in the centre, that's what I think is cool about it... In
pixação there are no exclusions, no racism, it is for all!” (Interview, 23/03/2015).
While it is clear that this optimist appraisal might fail to take existing competition and
eventual conflicts between pixadores into account, it represents an important aspect of
pixadores relations to each other and to the city as common habitat. Besides lines of class
and eventually race, it is spatially bound identity that segregates city dwellers, even those
who share common life conditions. Paulistans range of action is typically quite restricted.
In contrast, pixadores do not just transit physical spaces that they might usually not have
access to, but furthermore support intense relations with inhabitants of these territories.
Moreover, they meet people from all over the city in the centre or, by establishing “points”
in the periphery, create alternative centralities. Finally, they (re)appropriate centrality and
the city as a integrated common habitat, by co-creating the city. They leave their mark not
only within the tiny radius of their micro-local enclave, but meet up in the centre or distant
peripheries to intervene in those spaces as well.
To use Ana Fani Alessandri Carlos' words pixação might be understood as a practice
through which the individual regains some of the sociability lost in the exchange-value-
driven city (Carlos, 2001). Consequently, the resistant potential of pixação lies in its impact
on the relation between the practising subjects and their everyday urban living
environment. While São Paulo as “city of walls” (Caldeira, 2000) appears, to most of its
inhabitants, as an oppressive alien power, practices like pixação, we argue, might help to
grasp the city as a collective social product, created and yet to be created by human
appropriation.
4
As Lefebvre puts it: “[…] the possible is also part of the real and gives it a sense of direction, an orientation, a
clear path to the horizon” (Lefebvre, 2003, p. 45).

Article nº 5-518
10
CONCLUSION
Concluding we suggest that through practices of collectiv intervention in public space, even
those parts of urban population who are largely excluded and condemned to invisibility
might regain visibility in the cities public space. Furthermore, these practices might equip
actors with resources and experience that proliferate their self-perception as political
subjects with the right and ability to stand up for their cause or in support of related
struggles, as it is the case of some pixadores in the last years.
Yet, in most cases pixação does not transport explicit political content, but signatures of
individuals or groups. Its content therefore consists in no more – and no less (!) – than the
performative proof of these individuals or collectives existence. Their existence, however,
not as mere bodies moved around in the city between moments of wage labour,
consumption and domestic reproduction. By leaving their mark in urban public space,
pixadores express and promote their condition as subjects of urban society, that is, creators
of their everyday environment and, ultimately, of themselves. By intervening visually in
public space, we argue, urban dwellers might reappropriate the city as product of human
creative activity (see Marx, 1968, p. 516f.). Thus, moments of pixação may give a glimpse
of the city “as a collective work of art” (De Angelis & Stavrides, 2010, p. 28), the
“perpetual oeuvre of its inhabitants” (Lefebvre, 1996, p. 172).
BILIOGRAPHY
Abrahão, R. (1988, October 4). Juneca e Bilão vão ‘pichar a cadeia’. Suplemento Do Diário Oficial Do
Município de São Paulo, p. 1. São Paulo.
Alencar, R. (2012). Pixo logo Existo: notas etnográfi cas sobre pixadores de Salvador. In Desafios
Antropológicos Contemporâneos. São Paulo.
Alves, G. (2015). Transformações e Resistências nos Centros Urbanos. In A. F. A. Carlos (Ed.),
Crise Urbana (pp. 143–154). São Paulo: Editora Contexto.

Article nº 5-518
11
Baudrillard, J. (1978). Kool Killer oder Der Aufstand der Zeichen. Berlin: Merve-Verl.
Caldeira, T. (2000). City of Walls: Crime, Segregation, and Citizenship in São Paulo. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Caldeira, T. (2013). Rewriting the City. Retrieved from
http://www.cityscapesdigital.net/2013/05/12/rewriting-the-city/
Carlos, A. F. A. (2001). São Paulo hoje: as contradições no processo de reprodução do espaço.
Scripta Nova: Revista Electrónica de Geografía Y Ciencias Sociales, 88. Retrieved from
http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/sn-88.htm
Carlos, A. F. A. (2013). A Prática Espacial Urbana como Segragação e o ‘Direito à Cidade’ como
Horizonte Utópico. In P. de A. Vasconcelos, R. L. Corrêa, & S. M. Pintaudi (Eds.), A cidade
contemporânea: segregação espacial (pp. 95–110). São Paulo: Editora Contexto.
Carlos, A. F. A. (2015). A Reprodução do Espaço Urbano como Momento da Acumulação
Capitalista. In A. F. A. Carlos (Ed.), Crise Urbana (pp. 9–24). São Paulo: Editora Contexto.
Chalhoub, S. (1996). Cidade Febril: Cortiços e epidemias na Corte Imperial. Rio de Janeiro: Companhia das
Letras.
Coelho de Oliveira, G. R. (2009). piXação: arte e pedagogia como crime. Universidade do Estado do Rio
de Janeiro, Centro de Educação e Humanidades, Faculdade de Educação, Programa de Pós-
graduação em Educação, Rio de Janeiro.
Coelho de Oliveira, G. R. (2015). PiXadores, torcedores, bate-bolas e funkeiros: doses do enigma no reino da
humanidade esclarecida (doctoral thesis). Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro UERJ, Rio de
Janeiro.
Cripta Djan. (2006). 100 Comédia Brasil.
De Angelis, M., & Stavrides, S. (2010). Beyond Markets or States: Commoning as Collective
Practice (a public interview). An Architektur, 23, 3–30.
Delgado, F. R. (2009). Lethal force: police violence and public security in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo. New
York, NY: Human Rights Watch.
Fischermann, T. (2015, December 3). Das Alphabet der Wut – Sie wohnen in Slums, bemalen
Häuserwände und fühlen sich vom Staat verraten: Wie die Sprayer von São Paulo um Geltung
kämpfen. Zeit Online. Retrieved from http://pdf.zeit.de/2015/47/sao-paulo-jugendliche-favelas-
sprayer.pdf
Fix, M. (2007). São Paulo cidade global: fundamentos financeiros de uma miragem (1a. ed). São Paulo:
Boitempo Editorial : Anpur.
Fórum Centro Vivo. (2006). Violações dos Direitos Humanos no Centro de São Paulo: propostas e
reivindicações para políticas públicas – Dossiê de Denúncia (Dossiê de Denúncia). São Paulo: Fórum Centro
Vivo. Retrieved from http://www.polis.org.br/uploads/977/977.pdf
Franco, S., Djan Ivson Silva, Rafael Pixobomb, & Joanna Warsza. (2012). The Politics of the Poor
– in conversation, March 29 2011, São Paulo. In A. Żmijewski & J. Warsza (Eds.), Forget Fear – 7th
Berlin Biennale of Contemporary Art. Köln: König.
Franzen, N. (2015, September 4). Sprüher in São Paulo von Polizei ermordet? amerika21 –
Nachrichten Und Analysen Aus Lateinamerika, p. 6.2.2015.
Kipfer, S. (2009). Preface to the new edition. In H. Lefebvre, J. Sturrock (Trans.), Dialectical
materialism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Larruscahim, P. (2014). From graffiti to pixação – Urban protest in Brazil. Tijdschrift over Cultuur &
Criminaliteit, 4(2), 69–84.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities. (E. Kofman & E. Lebas, Eds.). Cambridge: Blackwell
Publishers.
Lefebvre, H. (2003). The urban revolution. (R. Bononno, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Lefebvre, H. (2009). Dialectical materialism. (J. Sturrock, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Lefebvre, H. (2011). The Production of Space. (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.
Marx, K. (1962). Das Kapital – Kritik der politischen Ökonomie – Der Produktionsprozeß des
Kapitals. In MEW 23 (p. 955). Berlin: Dietz.
Marx, K. (1968). Ökonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte aus dem Jahre 1844. In MEW 40 (pp.
465–589). Berlin: Dietz.

Article nº 5-518
12
Marx, K. (1983). Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. In MEW 42 (pp. 47–770).
Berlin: Dietz.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1959). Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei. In MEW 4 (pp. 459–492).
Berlin: Dietz.
Vasconcelos, P., Corrêa, R. & Pintaudi, S. (Eds.). (2013). A Cidade Contemporânea – segregação espacial.
Retrieved from http://editoracontexto.com.br/cidade-contemporanea-a.html
Pennachin, D. L. (2011). Subterrâneos e Superfícies da Ate Urbana: uma imersão no universo dos sentidos do
grafiti e da pixação na cidade de São Paulo. Uniersidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Escola de Belas Artes,
Belo Horizonte.
Pereira, A. B. (2010). As Marcas da Cidade: a Dinâmica da Pixação em São Paulo. Lua Nova, (79),
143–162.
Ribeiro, F. V. (2015). Produção Contraditória do Espaço Urbano e Resistências. In A. F. A. Carlos
(Ed.), Crise Urbana (pp. 171–186). São Paulo: Editora Contexto.
Santos, M. (1990). Metropole Corporativa Fragmentada – O Caso de São Paulo. São Paulo: Nobel.
Secco, L. (2013). As Jornadas de Junho. In Cidades Rebeldes - Passe livre e as manifestações que tomaram as
ruas do Brasil. São Paulo: Editora Boitempo.
Siwi, M. (2016, January 6). Pixação: the story behind São Paulo’s ‘angry’ alternative to graffiti. The
Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/jan/06/pixacao-the-story-
behind-sao-paulos-angry-alternative-to-graffiti
Stavrides, S. (2016). Common space: the city as commons. London: Zed Books.
Tiburi, M. (2011). Direito Visual à Cidade – A Estética da PiXação e o caso de São Paulo. In
Filosofia Pop (pp. 39–53). Editora Bragantini. Retrieved from http://www.redobra.ufba.br/wp-
content/uploads/2013/12/revista_redobra12_virtual.pdf#page=40
Warsza, J. (2012). An Alphabet of Class Struggle. In A. Żmijewski & J. Warsza (Eds.), Forget Fear –
7th Berlin Biennale of Contemporary Art. Köln: König.