Why are graffiti accepted as wayspots

Why is it that graffiti are accepted as wayspots? I have very recent examples in the city I live in.

Most graffiti are, first of all, vandalism as they are painted on private property without permission.

Also vast majority of them are of very little artistic/cultural value being nothing but an insult to Cornbread’s legacy.

I think they should be categorically rejected and only accepted through a rigogous verification process. All existing graffiti wayspsots should be removed.

1 Like

Hello! Maybe you want to share with us some examples to let us understand what type of graffitis are you talking about. Meanwhile I recommend you to read this topic about graffitis, urban art, murals, etc.: Unique Art

5 Likes

I’m talking about illegal graffiti, as I described in my original post. As I’m not at home right now I can only give you one example that I can easily access via google maps:


The waypost in question is, iirc, “purple dragon of rahola”. As it is not a commisioned piece of art, and as such it is painted without permission of the owner of the structure, it is vandalism and must be removed. I can later post more recent examples of vandalism being accepted as wayposts.

Niantic should not, and I’m quite certain it legally cannot support or accept the use of it’s platform as means to bring fame to illegal activities, such as vandalism.

Murals and other commisioned pieces of art and culture are a whole other case.

1 Like

I don’t think is necessary to be a comissioned graffiti to be considered a possible candidate. There are some countries where those graffitis tend to be more or less permanent as the local government don’t mind to remove it “soon”. On the other hand, when reviewing that type of graffitis is necessary to consider the quality of it. Maybe it can be a really great piece of art and not comissioned, but also it can be just a vandalistic tag without any type of quality. As we always say, we need to review using our best judgement. Personally I wouldn’t nominate that one and I wouldn’t approve it, while other type of not comissioned urban art I will give it a chance. I come from a country where “vandalistic” art is pretty normal and rarely removed, so I’m talking from my experience, maybe is not the same as yours ^^

4 Likes

Ahh, I’m in Louisville KY, USA, right now, but the place I learned to love graffiti was Philadelphia, USA. So what is Cornbread’s legacy? On one hand the transgressive element, tagging this planet because it’s ART, which you call vandalism, or on the other hand his time trying to get public art funded and accepted, and, oh yeah, decrimanalised working with Philly’s Anti-Graffiti Network and Mural Arts Program? For me the answer is clear…BOTH. If you can convince me that the legacy of Cornbread is for us to see FEWER artists as contributing to “artistic/cultural value” rather than MORE, I’ll stand corrected. But you have a hard job. Meanwhile, if you’ll allow me to make you feel better, Wayfarer demands permanence, so you can reject most graffiti as not permanent.

1 Like

If someone painted this shed and the owner left it there, then they have given permission for it to be there, even if they didn’t request or commission the work to be there in the first place. I would certainly do that on my property if I liked the piece and had the choice to do so. (I know it wouldn’t be an eligible waypoint due to SFPRP, that’s another issue) The question to me is does the owner want it there? If so it’s likely to be permanent, if not permanent it would be an ineligible waypoint. If I’m reviewing and a submitter makes an effort to explain that something is permanent I could be convinced to accept. Either way it wouldn’t have anything to do with whether I personally like the art. Especially as a white guy here in the USA I know there’s a lot of culture I don’t understand.

1 Like

“Cornbread” is Darryl McCray, he is a graffiti artist from Philadelphia and is credited with being the first modern graffiti artist.

1 Like

Many Latin American countries have permanent graffiti, and I’ve seen many that have Wayspots. Most of what I’ve seen has not been commissioned, but aren’t tags, which are ineligible. A good deal are unique paintings (I see a lot of pop culture characters, flowers, cultural references), and help brighten up many areas.

Certain areas even establish places where graffiti artists are welcome to paint; my city has a well-known artist wall in an alley downtown that anyone is welcome to contribute to, including graffiti artists. There’s a plaque marking the wall, and it’s used as the photo for the Wayspot, as that doesn’t change, just the wall art.

Niantic does has criteria clarification on what they call street art, which is similar to graffiti, so it may be helpful to look over that.

I personally do not agree that all existing graffiti Wayspots should be removed, and I can certainly see some being upset if ones that are publicly accessible become ineligible. Graffiti Wayspots do get removed from time to time if they don’t meet criteria, and Wayfarers are certainly welcome to request removal if they believe they are ineligible.

5 Likes

Sorry I wasn’t more clear, yeah I know about him. My question as to what is his legacy was rhetorical, because my answer is obviously different to that of OP! I should have posted something like you did for people who don’t know who he was or who think hiphop culture was invented in NYC! [ducks] My reply was for OP who I felt had a different view, but hey, maybe they lived in Philly for longer than my 25 years. There’s a fairly recent interview with him on a podcast with a name that may get my reply flagged on this site (and maybe rightly so) but if people google Philly podcast Cornbread the Legend - The World’s First Tagger it shouldn’t be too hard to find.

My point in mentioning Cornbread is that at least in the area I live in, most graffiti does not match the artistic level of his work, not by several orders of magnitune. Yet many of them have over the year, and still are, accepted as wayposts.

The fact that a graffiti is not painted over/cleaned does NOT mean that the owner of the property has accepted the graffiti. It usually means they do not have the funds to clean up.

To reiterate: the example shown in guidance as vandalistic grattiti is exactly of the sort most graffiti wayposts are in my region. Utter crap.

Just so you know, in my younger day I had some friends who were graffiti artists, I’m not fully against this form of art. I simply think we need to be strict about accepting these as wayposts.

1 Like

Nice, huh?

If, as a reviewer, I was mostly convinced it was permanent I would accept, all other things being OK. Whether art appeals to one individual, personally, isn’t a reason to accept or reject as far as I can tell.

1 Like

Yep, even a fart can be art, my point here is that it is illegally painted on the wall. It is vandalism.

1 Like

I agree, that appears to be a graffiti tag, most likely put up illegally. I would reject it during review if I saw it. EDRBLOS could just be the artist’s tag or nickname, and most likely wasn’t commissioned by the building.

Yes, there are well-known graffiti artists in our world; many consider Banksy’s works to be graffiti as they are put up illegally, but they’ve become so loved that more and more are being protected. Banksy’s recent series of animals around London have been removed to preserve them; the one at the London Zoo was replaced with a replica and a sign noting “Banksy Woz Ere.”

I took Niantic:s clarification to mean:
If it’s a complete work by a single artist: maybe.
If it’s a hodgepodge by different artists at different times, without a plan: no.