Topic: 5 part Ryan Doyle interview.

[Shae Perkins]

Here's a really decent 5 part interview with Ryan Doyle. He covers a lot of topics surrounding the future of Parkour and other important issues. Definitely worth a gander.

Pt 1- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rgRzQwzNus&feature=related
Pt 2- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D7ly_ucmT8&feature=video_response
Pt 3- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3UA7L_apl0&feature=video_response
Pt 4- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0qA7AdzouI&feature=video_response
Pt 5- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGmocuugOgM&feature=video_response

Enjoy <3

[Kyle M.]

Nice. I'll definitely watch these.

[Chris Slater]

nice series, I really dig what Ryan is all about

[DaveS]

There's some good views on training and approach in this interview, but there's a whole lot of nonsense on the subjects of media and commercialisation.

Parkour works fine without logos plastered over everything, and the argument in favour of involvement with immoral companies is flawed because there are actually three choices, rather than just the two mentioned. You can choose between doing nothing, being involved with immoral companies, or actively working to promote good things. It's the final option that people seem to forget, or conveniently ignore.
If they run nonsense competitions and misleading high-profile media displays then let them. It makes no difference if the community itself is clear about what is useful and what is not, but having respected practitioners involve themselves with 'questionable' activities pollutes the community.

I also had a laugh about parkour being obsolete in comparison to freerunning. Freerunning is parkour, just the movement involved doesn't help you reach anything. Freerunning is parkour for people without clear goals.

[Shae Perkins]

Well, DaveS, I think what Mr. Doyle was trying to say is that himself and the rest of the WFPF would rather be involved with the inevitable commercialization of Parkour and use it the best they can to spread the right messages.

[DaveS]

Yes, that was what he was saying, but I think a poor argument. It's actually impossible to spread the right message through commercialisation and selfish organisations, since their principles run contrary to the philosophy of parkour. It just ends up confusing people by presenting a mixed message at best.

If you want to help people then spread a clear, consistent, correct message.

WFPF and the like are perpetuating the myth that parkour is for display and media purposes, when they aren't also actively trying to mislead practitioners for their own profit.

[Shae Perkins]

The signature at the bottom of your post says "NorthernParkour and the British Parkour Coaching Association". Have you maybe trained with the WFPF? I know a lot of them train around there.

[DaveS]

I see all of the UK WFPF contingent fairly regularly apart from Ryan who I've only exchanged words with a handful of times.

[Shae Perkins]

Hmm, so I guess your comments hold some sort of legitimacy :/ Well, that's sad. I hate to think of those guys like that.

[DaveS]

Just to be clear, I think it's important to separate the practitioners from the organisations and media professionals. I think the majority of the practitioners involved have good intentions. There are a few persons connected to the parkour community who are in it for selfish reasons, but I know people like Danny well enough to know that they don't have a selfish bone in their body, and the worst thing I could accuse them of would be not being experienced enough with communicating through mass media, or not being aware enough of the wider community context.

I just think it's rare that the same can be said of the organisers of these things. For all that it's people like Danny providing the profile for the organisation and events, it's an entirely different set of people who run things behind the scenes. I don't think it's fair to blame practitioners for the actions of directors, producers, editors and the like, who are the ones responsible for all the misleading information.

Publicity is not an absolute issue. It's not a question of using the media being either always right or always wrong, because it always depends on the balance between promotion and education. Who knows, maybe if we work hard enough at providing clear, accurate information then everything will balance out and media-heavy organisations will end up contributing to positive development.

Danny did a much better interview explaining the effort some of them went to to try and communicate some of the good ideals, and I think it's difficult to criticise his intent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkgWjLx5ags

[Mitch Rhoden]

Ehh, I don't really agree with him calling parkour "obselete". He said if we wanted to be efficient we would just "drive to point b." which is true in alot of cases but you cannot drive EVERYWHERE. Eventually you have to get out of your car. And also, cars have been around since before the creation of parkour, so if something is obselete upon creation, doesn't that make it worthless? In a way he just called parkour worthless. Also, point a to point b could just be from one side of the rail to the other, or from the bottom of a wall to the top of the wall. He thinks you have to be running throughout the entire city in order to be doing parkour. You can chill at one spot all day, and still be doing parkour. However, i do think that free runnning is just the more creative side. Parkour is your foundation, your cat leaps, precisions, while freerunning is your way of adding your own flair to those moves.