The status of graffitiology, as already established by Mitja Velikonja in his book Political Graffiti, is unstable. It is located between several different and quite diverse branches of social sciences and arts. Painters, art historians, political scientists, communicologists, anthropologists, sociologists, linguists, as well as researchers from fields that are “in between” could find themselves in its waters. But – possibly and perhaps precisely because of the aforementioned – it remains underrepresented, its subject less studied. It seems as if, on the one hand, it is a “no man's land.” On the other hand, researchers who would engage in the study of graffiti quickly become aware that their expertise in one area, or perhaps even several of them, is not enough to properly deal with the topic that interests them, and so they turn to others. Also, the subject of graffitiology itself – graffiti and street art – is not appreciated. It does not have the social status that would attract first researchers, and then publishers, and financiers who would support research or publish it. As a result, the terminological apparatus is insufficiently developed and established, which is another obstacle for those interested in this topic. Combined with all of the above, the pressure associated with the “publish or perish” system of scientific evaluation leads to researchers not even engaging in the study of graffiti, thus creating a vicious circle. Thus, one part of human expression remains underreasearched even though it, like any the other, deserves researchers’ attention.