M2rock
Seidojin

(2/1/05 5:10 am)
Reply
  Defining Parkour?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 OK, the first person to tell me this is a recurring topic is banned. Twice 


It seems like so many of the discussions on UF -both great discussions with well formed opinions and thoughtful arguments, and snappy threads with lots of he-said she-said stuff - come down to some way or another either wanting or not wanting a definition for Parkour.

I'm not here to tell anyone they are right or wrong, or that their reasons for wanting a definition or not wanting a definition are valid or not. I am a big believer in thinking things through and having your own reasons for believing in something.

That being said, I will still share my opinion with you, do as you please, however if you are going to argue, I am going to insist that it be in a civil and thoughtful manner. Argue the points, not the people.


I have heard many people (including myself) say that "As I go along my definition of Parkour Changes". This reminds me of two things;
1. Chess. As you go along, the game is exactly the same, 32 pieces, 64 squares, however the possibilities for a game are endless. My point here is that as you learn more of the possibilities, it is not the DEFINITION of chess that changes, it is your understanding that changes. 2. George Carlin "In Your own words" ... a skit where George talks about being asked to describe something "In his own words" and he says "Geroibleodok froightid readsitsh." ... He goes on to say how much easier it would be if he could use the same words as everyone else. It's very funny.Here my point is that we do have language to describe things, and I don't think each person having their very own definition of Parkour is helpful or useful.

I would say "Have your own understanding of Parkour, but let's settle on some basic definition"

If your martial arts teacher told you "This is my version of Kung Fu, you go make your own and then you'll understand" ... on your first day .. you would have quit.

If when we first came here and questioned "What is Parkour" (we all originally questioned this at some point) we were given some definition. a year ago we didn't say "Well I want to make my own definition", even though people who have been here for a year have come to their own understanding.

So, up until now, I have shared my thoughts and ideas on the difference between a definition and and understanding.

Taking this into consideration, I think it is good to put a definition to parkour that we can more or less agree on, if for no other purpose than to clearly and concisely relay some of the points of Parkour to people new to the concept, or people who wish to find out more about Parkour.

After all, in my opinion, this is the purpose a definition should suit, a clear, concise meaning for the purpose of relaying information or concepts or ideas about a particular thing.

Some definitions are very long, wordy, and necessarily boring, like many that we find in physics or phylum of flowers for example. However they are created to do what they need to do, and that is to relay the ideas and concepts of physics or flowers.

Now, when we are first introduced to science in school, we are given a cup of water ad told that it is a liquid, or something on a similar level to this. Then, as YEARS go by, we are told that a liquid takes the shape of its container because the strength of the bonds between molecules is not enough for the substance to hold it's own shape at a given temperature and pressure. then it gets deep.

My point here is that we need to set a "reasonably good" definition for Parkour. Not an all encompassing one that will be enough to apply to every situation, and not one so general that "Parkour is whatever I think it is". I will make a bold statement and say "Parkour is NOT whatever you think t is, it is a definable thing, and if you don't think the same as the defnition, then what you're thinking isn't parkour". I go back to my peanut butter sandwich idea to back that statement up. If I feel that I spread the PB with flow, so carefully as to not tear the bread, then perfectly clean the knife before slicing the jelly, it is STILL NOT PARKOUR 

So, now for the hard part, oh, one thing I almost forgot. I am not a founder of Pakour. I am not an omniscient historian of Parkour. I am not DB, I am not Seb. I do not pretend to be any more qualified for this task than anyone esle in the universe. I seek this task if only to save my sanity, and not have to answer "What is parkour" posts for the rest of my life, but move on to posts about DOING parkour.

Now, even if we, the community of UF do feel that we have successfully come to a definition of Parkour, there will be people who say "You are not DB, you are not Parkour, you are not the founder or the creator or even the maker of the peanut butter and jelly sandwich" Well, yes I am, I made the sandwich.

I think we should strive only to make a definition good enough to suit the needs of the parkour community, and accept that there will be interpretations, misinterpretations (let's not leave too much room) and people who just flat out disagree.

What I think we can achieve is to setup an "Urban Freeflow community definition of Parkour"

If we as members of the community can by and large agree to this, then it becomes in a sense irrefutable, nobody can tell us that it is not our definition. They can say they don't agree, or they don't like it, but not that it is not our definition.


So, I feel that there is a difference between an understanding and a definition. I feel there is a need, or at least a usefulness for a definition. I feel that we as a community represent a large cross-section of traceurs, and are as capable as any other group of coming up with a definition for ourselves of Parkour.

I'd like to hear people's thoughts on this before moving on to "The Task".

hey, where'd that topic run off to?

OH there it is!!!

lets continue on topic, shall we?

sometime shortly after this post I learned better.

lmao you sound as concieted as me...i dunno if thats a good thing or a bad thing....and i think EZ is definatly a bigger wanker!!!


back on topic:

i remember when i used to think flips were teh coolest part of parkour...then i learned that flips weren't parkour but i attemtped to learn one anyway...so i go the gym and sprain my ankle doing a flip and now i hate em!!! I also used to be obsessed with roof jumps...now i think those are pretty crappy too...yeah continue