Introduction

What, how, and why we learn is a long-standing topic of debate that involves the concept of motivation. “Motivation” comes from the Latin motivus, which is derived from the term movere; that is, motivation is the engine of our actions (Segura Munguía, 2006). According to mainstream 20th-century psychology, motivation is caused by a feeling of dissatisfaction or incompleteness, which generates the tension that incites an individual to do something (Maslow, 1972). In this study, we focus on the motivation to learn. As researchers, we believe that if we identify the main elements that make learning attractive, we will be able to develop better conditions for teaching and learning, in which students’ needs are taken into consideration. In other words, the aim is to be less concerned with transmitting “learnable” knowledge and more with how to transmit it better.

Because of the diversity in how we learn and what motivates us, totalizing theories have not provided a satisfactory answer to the problem of motivation, transmission, and learning. This article makes a proposal about learning in relation to a very specific topic: graffiti painting in the Pamplona writers’ community. Defining graffiti is a difficult task that is a topic of ongoing debate among academics (Fransberg et al., 2021). In the Pamplona context, however, graffiti can be defined as a cultural practice and production aimed at a small audience, using closed codes and writings that are executed on public surfaces (Abarca, 2010). It is, therefore, a subculture in which a number of individuals paint anonymously but are known to other members of the subculture or community (Merrill, 2015). The graffiti we refer to in this article are thus different from, for example, political graffiti or writing found in public toilets, which are intended to be understood by the majority of the public.

Graffiti is a very specific discipline that has both an esthetic component and a social and community component (Hasley & Young, 2006). The esthetic component concerns the techniques, colors, and shapes that writers use, whereas the social community component relates to the norms and relationships that are established in a hidden way within the collective. In this article, we focus on both elements for two reasons. First, the esthetic component implies a very visual element in learning to paint graffiti. A writer who paints graffiti that are esthetically and technically advanced will acquire a certain degree of recognition; a writer whose technique and esthetics are simpler, less elaborate, or less attractive will receive a lesser degree of recognition. There are other types of recognition within the graffiti community, including the number of years for which a writer has been painting or the frequency with which they paint (Avramidis & Drakopoulou, 2012). Thus, a writer with a long career is acknowledged as an “old school” writer, and one who paints frequently gains recognition through their work being seen in many locations. Second, the community component, which involves relationships, norms, and unwritten laws, provides a series of data on the surrounding elements that are vital for learning. In other words, what enables writers to learn are the relationships that exist between writers and the rules that govern the functioning of their community. Thus, writers are surrounded by a series of elements that enable them to learn to be graffiti writers.

Graffiti writing is a fugitive act and can be compared to fugitive learning; that is, learning that occurs in the subalternity of oppressive institutional structures (Patel, 2016; Zaino, 2021). Although graffiti writing has an artistic component that could be taught, the illegality of the practice prevents it from being taught through formal educational institutions. Hence, graffiti writing is typically learnt in a more marginal and solitary way than other disciplines and reinforced by a community that operates outside official social channels.

The recognition by members of the community of the esthetic elements of graffiti is linked to emotions. It has recently been argued that ego is one of the main elements of graffiti (Liñero & Pérez-Izaguirre, 2021). Ego can be defined as the exaltation of the writer’s self, manifested in each of the works produced and measurable according to a series of parameters. Among these parameters, MacDonald (2001) highlights the risk in painting the works, the quantity of works produced, and the quality of the style. Based on a series of interviews with graffiti writers, Hasley and Young (2006) mention pleasure, joy in the shared practice, and pride in the recognition of their work as positive emotions related to graffiti. Rebelliousness and boredom are also mentioned, although less frequently, as negative emotions related to graffiti writing. The ego is linked to emotions, which serve as an engine that allows the writer to obtain an evaluation of their esthetic production from themselves and from the other members of the community. Emotions also help motivate writers to learn more and improve their practice.

We see learning in the graffiti community as an area relevant to understanding what, how, and why we learn. Insofar as the practice of graffiti is not a compulsory discipline and yet is widespread in many regions of the world, it provides considerable insight into what makes people learn, and into what attracts writers enough to continue making esthetic interventions in the street (in most cases, illegally). In particular, graffiti often implies painting during the night, and in adverse weather; investing in paint (in Pamplona a spray can costs €3–4); risking fines, accusations, and arrest; and taking the time to find places to paint. It also provides data on how learning takes place, that is, the techniques, methods, influences, and experiences that make a person learn.

It should be noted that not everyone who has contact with the graffiti world learns to create graffiti, and some choose not to become part of a graffiti community. There is a broader debate concerning the preferences, pivotal moments, and other elements that explain why people decide to learn something or not. It is beyond the scope of this article to discuss such reasons. However, we believe that the practice of graffiti and the learning that takes place within it has received too little attention (exceptions include Avramidis & Drakopoulou, 2012; Christen, 2003; Valle & Weiss, 2010).

We believe that qualitative research is an appropriate way to investigate what the practice of graffiti can tell us about learning. It allows us to delve into what the writers (learners) themselves say; entering into dialog with them allows us to discover different approaches to learning.

Keys to Understanding Learning Conditions in the Graffiti Community

Fundamental questions for understanding a graffiti community relate to the specific world that generates that subculture. For instance, writers choose to “baptize” themselves with an “also known as” (a.k.a.), the name with which they will sign their works and become known (Martínez-Carazo et al., 2021). This pseudonym is used as their signature in public places. Depending on the complexity, size, and shape of the signature, it is considered to be a “tag” (a signature made with a magic marker), a “pomp” (rounded and simple letters that can be produced quickly), or a “piece” or “masterpiece” (a complex and elaborate signature that may even be accompanied by puppets). Some examples of these can be seen in the work of Ferrell (1995) and MacDonald (2001). Masterpiece signatures can be dedicated to other people, and it is common for them to bear the acronym of the crew to which the writer belongs. A crew is a group of writers that functions as a reference for both its own members and other writers and crews. According to Avramidis and Drakopoulou (2012), there are three main reasons for graffiti writers to associate in crews: to achieve popularity, status, and recognition more quickly; to foster the development of technical and behavioral knowledge that will help other writers to develop their practice and relationships; and to become accomplices who protect each other from the difficulties caused by the illegality of the practice.

The sense of belonging and loyalty that crews generate can lead to tense interactions between writers. This can be seen in the case of so-called “toys,” those who are new to graffiti. When they start painting, toys usually do not belong to a crew and are often regarded negatively by the graffiti community as inexperienced, as intervening inappropriately in public spaces, or as having little technical skill. Although these elements are not the main focus of this article, this contextualization is necessary for understanding the motivational principles for graffiti writers and for identifying how different roles relate to levels of learning.

Motivation and Emotions in Learning Graffiti

In the field of educational psychology, Ryan and Deci (2017, 2020) proposed an influential model in the theory of motivation. Motivation is a temporary and variable state that has an emotional as well as a cognitive component and produces movement with a specific direction (Dörnyei, 2020). The model by Ryan and Deci (2017, 2020) was designated as the self-determination theory (SDT) and is much used on school learning and teacher-student relationship. The model is based on the idea that motivation needs internal and external elements to occur in an individual; that is, a series of internal and external conditions are necessary for motivation to develop. At school, for example, motivation starts from certain basic characteristics of a student (such as curiosity, an inclination to seek new challenges, or previous education) and from conditions that have to do with their teachers (such as how they support students to work autonomously). In the graffiti community, there are no teacher figures, let alone a legal institutionalization of teaching. Instead, as Avramidis and Drakopoulou (2012) argue, crews may exercise a certain pedagogical power based on group unity, which allows them to be considered as institutions within the subculture. Hence, motivation to paint comes from different internal and external sources.

Internal conditions are related to intrinsic elements of motivation, including emotions. Benita (2020) contributes to the theory of motivation by alluding to emotional regulation. For the author, if someone feels an excess of emotion, or if emotions dominate them, then they will not be autonomous, since autonomy requires awareness of emotions. One of the most important concepts in the role of emotions as a driving force for motivation is flow theory, according to which the flow of motivation is directly affected by emotions, and this causes the individual to be totally immersed in the activity they are performing (Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). Thus, for example, for the writer Suso33 graffiti has been a way of externalizing repressed energy. For many graffiti writers, writing is a way of releasing energy from a repressive environment that represses modes of expression and behavior (Ferrero, 2015). Hampton et al. (2013) note the addiction associated with the discipline of graffiti, which stimulates writers, especially teenage writers, to maintain a regular practice. They also observe that painting as part of a community helps to form a group identity, a feeling of togetherness, and recognition from other writers.

Learning in graffiti can also be defined as experiential. Following Kolb (2014, p.38) “learning is the process by which knowledge is generated by transforming experience” and is an emergent process created in relation to lived experiences. It involves and facilitates the process of adaptation to one’s own life and is based on a synergetic transaction with other people or the environment, which provides the drive or motivation to continue painting.

In a similar vein, Atkinson (1964) expectancy–value theory proposes individual motivation, expectations, and the value the individual places on the task as the drivers of achievement. Similarly, Bandura (1994) refers to the role of self-efficacy in achieving an objective or goal. Thus, when it comes to expectations, individuals need to see themselves as capable of achieving a goal, which involves being motivated. Self-efficacy is developed through real and vicarious experiences and social persuasion, implying the importance of somatic and emotional states in the individual’s actions. Emotions, the context within which experience is gained, and personal perceptions mediate an individual’s judgment about their ability to achieve their goals.

As regards to external elements of motivation, these come from something outside the writer that causes a reaction in them, such as the media and elements of society in general, or the problems that arise from the commercial exploitation of a writer’s work. The media have played a considerable role in disseminating the practice of graffiti through books, films, magazines, and the Internet, as shown by Snyder (2006). In other words, graffiti have been exploited as a marketing tool. An example of this can be found in Mitman’s (2018) study of a group of writers in the USA who began to intervene on surfaces they would not usually have painted. They were motivated by the commercial use that the brand H&M had made of graffiti by the writer REVOK (by including it in the background of one of their online advertisements).

Learning spaces are particularly relevant in this case, as Lave and Wenger (1991) point out, because they link individuals to a learning community and reinforce their sense of group belonging. Thus, the learner becomes a regular, an expert whose knowledge, skill, and identity belong to a community of practice, in this case, graffiti practice. This takes place in a social world that reproduces, transforms, and changes at the same time, enabling novice individuals to join the community.

Contextualized Methodology

Research Approach

This is a qualitative study based on the ethnographic method. This method allows us to delve into a specific reality, analyzing cultural, community, relational, and individual aspects, (Shagrir, 2017) in this case, that of the graffiti community of Pamplona, through dialog with the writers themselves. However, this presented a challenge, since it is difficult to make and maintain contact with a community that carries out illegal practices. Not surprisingly, access to the community is restricted, as few of its members want their real name to be associated with their a.k.a., which could get them into legal trouble.Footnote 1 It is almost impossible even to determine how many writers there are in a graffiti community, as the number fluctuates constantly.

In this case, the research was made possible by the contact established by one of the ethnographers with a graffiti writer from Pamplona in 2019. The initial idea was to understand how the practice of writing is learned in that community of practice. Interviews were conducted with 13 writers, ranging from novices (toys) to the most experienced (old school) writers, whose ages ranged from 15 to 43 years. Most of these writers belonged to one or more of 12 crews of 5 to 10 writers, although some did not belong to a crew. Please note that in this article, the crews were not the focus, since some Pamplona writers have more than one crew and not all crew members live in Pamplona. Racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic origins were not taken into account, since there were no significant differences among the participants. The level of education varied from secondary (in the case of the minor writer) and higher education.

Twelve of the writers who took part in the study are men and one is a woman. The differences among them in terms of experience and crew membership made it possible to access a wide range of views on learning (from which, however, a considerable number of common themes emerged). Gender disparity, in particular, is a very marked element in the Pamplona graffiti community, in which there are many more men than women.

The research was approached heterogeneously according to the background of each of the researchers. Author 2 had known the graffiti community for more than 20 years and Author 1 was new to the practice. This allowed for a dual perspective: the proximity of Author 2 provided elements that were new to Author 1, who could see these with distance and equanimity. In both cases, being partially immersed in the graffiti community through activities, events, and meetings nurtured the research on learning within this community.

Research procedure

The first interviews gave us some insight into the jargon used by the writers. Most of the writers found it strange that two people from outside the community would ask them questions about learning, and in each interview we had to clarify what we meant by that term. In most cases, their answers related to their own experiences from their beginning of their involvement in graffiti to the present day. In other words, they talked about their own learning trajectory and how they had become part of the graffiti community. The interviews also allowed us to explore other elements of learning, such as the people and practices that had influenced the writers.

The interviews were complemented by punctual field observations carried out while the writers were painting. Conducting these observations was difficult, as the writers do not go out every day to paint and were, understandably, unwilling to take two observers to certain locations.

In accordance with the deontological guidelines of the Asociación de Antropología del Estado Español (Spanish Association of Anthropology; ASAEE, 2014), which met in Tarragona (Catalonia) in 2014, this work requested “the informed consent of the participants in the anthropological work, even without the need for a signed written format, in which case the suitability of oral informed consent, very common in ethnographic work, must be justified. Informed consent should be obtained prior to beginning work with participants, and their right to withdraw it after the fact should be respected.” Hence, oral consent was obtained from the participants to conduct and record the interviews and field observations. The researchers informed them of the objectives of the research and guaranteed their confidentiality and anonymity throughout the process. In this article, participants were assigned pseudonyms. These pseudonyms are the names of cities used by an aerosol brand to denote different colors.

Analysis

The interviews and field diary were transcribed and analyzed using NVivo software. Initially, the discourses were organized under five basic categories: (i) learning the technique, (ii) the learning of novice writers, (iii) graffiti in school, (iv) learning the innate elements of graffiti, and (v) the tensional relationship between what is learned and the innate of graffiti. The whole discourse and its primary organization in this paper aligns with its objective, which respond to what, how, and why one learns, as well as the emotions and motivation involved, and these pointed to two major categories, corresponding to what is learned and what is not learned. The corresponding hypotheses proposed are (1) there are certain elements in graffiti learning similar to any other type of learning, and that (2) graffiti provides important elements of learning that are hidden in other practices.

Results

The results are presented in terms of two categories that emerged from the analysis: (1) what is learned and (2) what is not learned, according to the writers. These categories are then used to address what, how, and why learning takes place, and the emotions involved in the learning process.

In graffiti there is a range of emotions that drive writers towards motivation, from the more basic scientific emotion of curiosity, to emotions such as pride and frustration, which help overcome bumps in the road to feeling good (joy) about oneself and one’s practice. In other words, emotionality is used as a vehicle to achieve goals via commitment and persistence with the practice.

What can be learned

When the Pamplona writers were asked whether graffiti can be learned, most of them showed a certain ambivalence; they expressed the view that a number of aspects could be learned, but that some could not. In relation to the former, most of the writers mentioned technical and didactic questions about the learning itself.

The writers initially alluded to the self-taught way of learning in graffiti, and many mentioned that no one had taught them, demonstrating pride in their self-improvement in having learned on their own. However, at the same time, they mentioned learning through observing others, and by finding out about other writers or their painting techniques through magazines and the Internet. These direct and indirect observations prompted them to create their own work. This implies a certain solitude and an inner motor of motivation to continue improving one’s own technique through repetition and trial and error. For example, when Manchester was asked how he learned, he replied as follows:

Of course, you learn technical things from someone and no one. I haven’t had anyone who taught me this way in particular, with whom I’ve painted many times, from whom I’ve learned. You learn over time. We live in a time when information is everywhere, and almost everything new I learn, I have looked for it myself. I mean, and all the time after that, of course, every time you paint with the older writers, I think you’ll keep a few things.

Similarly, Sevilla highlighted the autonomy of the learning process, and particularly the moment when a writer identifies a series of elements that help to consolidate their practice:

Then [at a time when I had already painted a lot], I started to do a little research on my own, and then I started to learn in a self-taught way. The theme of the light, the shadow, because in the end, it’s a three-dimensional effect [that you get when you paint].

Like Manchester, Sevilla talks about autonomy, being self-taught, and making personal efforts to improve his technique.

Another writer, Tallinn, spoke about the period in which he developed his own style. He expressed the view that in order to develop a distinctive style, it is essential to learn early:

At the beginning, what I was looking for was painting faster to get cleaner, to make a good line, to make a good filler, and once it was more or less clear that I had […] a certain ability to be able to promote myself and make a cool piece, that’s when I said, “Okay, it’s time to find your own style and to want to do what you like,” you know?

Knowing that you can draw a curved line, knowing that you can make a straight line without shaking or fucking up or dripping all over yourself, knowing that you have that ability, now, from there, [to] create your own style.

In this excerpt, Tallinn makes direct reference to the emotions involved in wanting to paint well but not succeeding because of a lack of skill. The frustration that a writer feels is evident through the use of swearing when they want to paint a particular line but cannot. Learning takes the form of practicing in order to be able to paint well technically. Once the technical difficulty is overcome, the writer can go on to develop their own style. Although Tallinn does not make the point directly, the process involves emotions that are related to self-improvement and to the power of those emotions to motivate the writer to continue writing.

When narrating their experience of painting their first piece, most of the writers alluded to fear, shared pleasure, rebelliousness, or tension. They narrated their first time in a very romantic way, with a certain naivety, and where the process was unplanned. Underlying the conversations with the writers was a need to experiment with the practice, as they were very curious about it. For example, Wellington spoke about the emotions linked to painting his first piece and mentioned that he experienced anxiety combined with enjoyment and relief at not being “caught” doing something illegal. The technical aspects were also linked to learning, self-improvement, creating his own style, and enjoying the journey:

Little by little, you’re learning. You’re learning, you’re creating your own style, and that’s also interesting. And a little bit, well, from what you see, or what you learn, and that [the first time I painted graffiti] was fun. [There was] a lot of tension, [but] nothing happened. […] Yes, yes, you have happy memories of it, the first time.

Perugia also mentioned the importance of self-improvement in the process of learning to paint graffiti:

Yes, of course. […] If I began to paint by improving what I was doing, it was largely because of what others were doing. Not only the style, but the way of … the type, those tricks that others teach me. [The people who taught me are still painting] and they do it, and they influence it. Then they already have their way and … and the work they make of them. However, come on, thanks to that beginning with them, I improved, because I was very bad [laughs].

Perugia refers to people and their influence on Perugia’s technique, which is an extrinsic element. What Perugia learned was to master the technical and esthetic elements; how they learned was from peers, in this case their crew; and why they learned concerns self-improvement and the search for refinement.

Some of the writers were not inclined to teach the novice writers or toys, as they assumed that initiation into graffiti must be self-taught in order for the writer to really show interest in the practice. However, other writers showed some inclination to teach new members of the community. Baden added a more explicitly didactic element to the learning of graffiti techniques, mentioning that he had taught novice writers how to paint:

[When you’re with a young writer] you say, “Come on, let’s use some cans, take this one, or no, don’t take this one. Take this color, this color, that color. You don’t do it like this, you do it like this.” […] Yes, I’m sometimes a bit of a teacher … I sometimes like to teach people about things. Yes, but that’s within the character of each one.

In this excerpt, Baden talks about teaching graffiti (the what) by passing knowledge from adults to younger people (the how). This is a way of teaching and, therefore, of learning graffiti. Baden admits to enjoying the process; however, he implies that not all writers are willing to teach others.

Other writers focused on the different modes of learning that take place along the way. These writers, who had broader experience, recounted different modes of learning they had encountered over the years. According to them, the new generations have an advantage when it comes to self-learning, something that seems to be a hallmark of this practice. Mets, for example, referred to the abundant guidance that new writers have access to today, in contrast to the lack of materials for learning that were available to writers of his generation:

Nobody taught me how to paint. Now you put on YouTube “how to paint graffiti” and you will have about 3 million references on how to paint graffiti … So, now a kid who has been painting for two years has all the tricks that it has taken you 15 years to develop. You know?

According to Mets, the current generation of novice writers is at an advantage with respect to how to learn the technical elements of graffiti painting, because straightforward instructional videos are readily available on the Internet. This implies that learning can be motivated in different ways: through perseverance for previous generations, and through the immediacy of videos and Internet platforms for today’s new writers.

What Cannot Be Learned

When the writers were asked about elements of graffiti that cannot be learned, the majority spoke about nonesthetic aspects. Such aspects are vitally important within the world of graffiti; they function as rituals of intervention and behavior that enable continuity of practice. Such innate characteristics were not named directly by any of them but, according to the writers, these characteristics differentiated them from the rest of society and involved emotions and traits such as curiosity, persistence, and skill. The excerpts below show important hints related to this.

When Amsterdam was asked about whether graffiti can be learned, he answered as follows:

You can learn to paint graffiti, but to live it … you have to live it, I don’t know. You can’t learn to live it. […] Yes, you can learn to paint, like you can learn everything […], because at the end of the day it does have a technical part that you can learn.

Here, the writer touches on the experiences and emotions involved in different facets of the what, how, and why of graffiti learning. He claims that although one can learn techniques for painting (which is an element of what), one cannot learn to live something (an element of how), because one cannot learn to have an emotion. It is worth mentioning that during an observation session, while Amsterdam was immersed in finishing the piece, one of the researchers asked him what he was thinking when he painted. Amsterdam was so invested in the practice that he did not notice the question. A short time later, he answered that he had been concentrating and replied that graffiti was his “outlet.” This expression indicates that the practice can help an individual to disconnect from other areas of life, linking it to tranquility, enjoyment, and taking time for oneself. It is also associated with things that a person chooses but does not learn, simply assuming them as an essential part of feeling at ease with oneself.

In similar terms, Thessaloniki emphasized that graffiti resembles an art:

In the end it [graffiti] looks like an art. Well, can it be taught? Well … You can copy something, but always to be good, good/excellent, you always have to contribute a little bit more.

That is, according to Thessaloniki, the technical elements of graffiti can be copied, but (as Amsterdam also mentioned), graffiti itself cannot be learned and involves something that is intrinsic to the writer.

Indianapolis agreed that graffiti cannot be learned:

It [graffiti] can’t be learned. [For example,] Violadores del VersoFootnote 2 have a phrase about rap that is very good and describes it very well: “You don’t know how to play the instrument, and there is no class where you can learn” [no sabes tocar el instrumento y no hay ninguna clase donde puedas aprenderlo], which means … it’s not, that is, as it is something much more sociological or human than something purely … In the end, in graffiti, the plastic part is much more anecdotal than what’s behind it. Many people don’t know it, they are not aware of it, they think that what they like is painting and so on, and then they don’t realize that there is another story behind it.

For Indianapolis, the plastic element of graffiti is the part that can be learned. However, it is not the most important part, because it is not the most human element. This is in line with the points made by Amsterdam and Thessaloniki in the excerpts above. The part that cannot be learned is innate, and writers carry it within them; this is what makes them members of the community.

Catania also referred to learning techniques, with an explicit emphasis on the emotional element of the addiction or “getting hooked” that allows a practice to persist:

Well, learning technique and all that, obviously everybody can learn it. But then, you have to take it inside yourself, you know? I mean, maybe you try it, and then some people stop because they don’t like it or because they don’t see anything in it or … But if you try it and you get hooked, or you really see that it’s what you like, well, that’s also what it is. It’s necessary, isn’t it? That you … I mean … I don’t know, I don’t know how to explain it. You have to carry it inside. I don’t know, it’s in that way, I don’t know. Not everyone can do it, I don’t know, I don’t know. Try it, everyone can. You buy a bottle [spray can] and that’s it, but I don’t know.

As in the preceding excerpts, Catania expresses the view that certain elements are necessary for a writer to persist (the why of learning). In order to persevere with their painting, the writer must have something “inside” that makes continuity of practice possible.

As can be seen from these excerpts, the writers emphasized elements that are present in the writing community but that, by definition, not everyone has access to. If one cannot learn to live graffiti (as Amsterdam and Catania explained), if the artistic elements of graffiti cannot be learned (as Thessaloniki argued), or if the human or sociological part of graffiti cannot be learned (as Indianapolis claimed), then people who lack those innate or exclusive elements will not have access to the practice of graffiti.

Baden expressed the view that everyone has potential that can be developed, and that graffiti is a specific instance of this:

We are born with infinite potential. […] That potential, no matter how much society wants to repress it, things come out, like graffiti, or other things that … you can see that there is a tap of energy that cannot be subdued. In other words, graffiti is a tap of energy that cannot be subdued.

Baden’s choice of words alludes to something innate that has to do with an individual’s characteristics and energy. In no case can a person’s potential be repressed by an external element, because it is always there, boiling up inside, and it needs to come out. This potential is specific to the individual, something innate that each one of us needs to express. It is linked, therefore, to emotions of freedom and rebelliousness.

Conclusions

In this article, we focus on some key elements in learning graffiti (what, how, and why we learn) because we believe that this sheds light on other kinds of learning. Learning is linked to emotions and affects, that is, to the elements that we feel inside us and that connect us to the outside world. Following Ryan and Deci (2017, 2020), it is also directly related to motivation, in the sense that when we understand learning, we gain insight into what motivates us internally and externally.

This learning occurs in a subaltern way and outside formal structures; hence, it can be compared to fugitive learning (Patel, 2016; Zaino, 2021). According to the Pamplona writers who participated in this study, there are elements of graffiti that anyone can learn and these refer to extrinsic motivation. These include technical aspects, for example, which paint to use, particular tricks, or a certain style. Ways of doing graffiti can also be learned by observing what others do, looking at videos on Internet platforms, with your peers in a crew, or through experimentation. However, it is clear from the interviews that these writers believe in an innate driving force that makes them special when it comes to this activity. That is, a particular aspect of intrinsic motivation is highlighted. They hold that an individual either has or does not have this force. It is not the purpose of this article to discuss whether this belief is accurate. What is significant is the need for individuals to believe that they have an innate “something” that differentiates them from other people and that makes them special enough to be able to continue with a practice.

In a learning process, it is important for learners to feel they have a certain capacity to face the challenge of any practice, to feel special, and to believe in their idiosyncrasy and distinctiveness. This requires being able to learn autonomously and not always being dependent on external reinforcement; in the terms of Ryan and Deci (2017, 2020), “intrinsic motivation pertains to activities done for their inherent interest and enjoyment” (p. 2). In other words, the practice of graffiti reinforces writers’ intrinsic motivation and enables them to regulate their own emotions (Benita, 2020), expectations, values (Atkinson, 1964), and beliefs that allow for their self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994).

This is also visible in the community, in that many of the more experienced writers do not help novices. What a priori may seem like a scary and demotivating factor ends up becoming one of the drivers of motivation, making learners more autonomous (Ryan & Deci, 2017) and persistent in their practice. Therefore, what motivates an individual to learn depends on their beliefs of their strengths, and their ability to discover and practice them.

External motivation or reaffirmation is not valid or cannot be accepted by the learner if they do not believe they are capable of doing it, that is, if they do not assume that they have the potential to do it. An emotional range is needed for intrinsic motivation, and this is related to self-improvement. To be intrinsically motivated requires some emotional regulation (Benita, 2020; Ryan & Deci, 2020), which is key in learning graffiti. Based on the case presented, it is not only necessary to have typically positive emotions, such as calmness or enjoyment, but emotions such as pride, fear, frustration, rebelliousness, or tension used in a positive way can also play a vital role in learning.

Therefore, the conditions in which learning takes place need to be set carefully, in line with Bandura (1994). This implies not putting the emphasis on knowledge, but on the affective and experiential components of learning (Kolb & Kolb, 2009) that make writers immerse themselves in their own graffiti practice (Csikszentmihalyi, 2014) and achieve internal motivation.

It is, therefore, the construction of internal motivation that is an aspect to be taken care of, because this can situate lifelong learning and build up the conditions in which we relate to diverse content and knowledge within any community of practice.

The limitation of this study is that it was based on a specific graffiti community by taking a selection of discourses and experiences of writers. However, the what, how, and why of human learning is common, and certain qualitative elements can be extrapolated. In other words, learning is a quality of all human beings. This is not to say that learning from graffiti can be exported to another community in its entirety, but taking some aspects can provide insights into how to motivate intrinsic learning.

According to the hypotheses stated above, (1) some elements of graffiti learning can be observed in other learning contexts (i.e. school), for instance, imitation, refinement of a practice, or the power of emotions, such as curiosity or pride, as propellants of learning, and (2) graffiti provides important elements of learning that in other practices are hidden, such as the self-belief that one has a gift for performing a practice.

Future research may focus on whether the disciplinary, obedience, and control elements of formal learning institutions prevent motivation from developing. This study provides the basis for a pedagogical proposal to work in a different way on motivation in other learning contexts, and its main contribution is in showing that the learner must feel that they have the potential to develop a what, a how, and a why regarding what they learn.