Commercialization of Parkour [Archive] - SF Bay Area Parkour Community Forum

hillexallen

03-22-2009, 10:01 PM

Could you please explain how the organizations are changing parkour?

1. Before: Parkour has no teacher certification system. After: Parkour Generations creates the ADAPT system so they can make money off of people who want to be "certified", which doesn't actually mean anything.

2. Before: The global parkour community has established that parkour is a non-competitive discipline. After: Urban Freeflow sponsors the Barclaycard Freerun Championships so they can make pk/fr competitive and make money selling tickets and signing athletes.

3. Before: Parkour is a discipline. After: The WFPF and MTV team up and represent parkour in this way so they can make money of of their game show:

"MTV is filming "PARKOUR" ULTIMATE CHASE Special in Los Angeles hosted by professional snowboarder Todd Richards and MTV's own Nitro Circus member Andy Bell-- Get FREE tickets to attend.

Are you a huge "Parkour" fan and want to attend MTV's Parkour Special "ULTIMATE CHASE" hosted by Todd Richards? As seen in the opening scene in JAMES BOND movie Casino Royal. If you love stunts preformed right in front your eyes and want to be a part of the actual set then this show will blow your mind. YOU CAN NOT BE AFRAID OF HEIGHTS TO APPLY. 2 teams of Professional Parkour stunt guys will complete in competition right in front your eyes

For FREE tickets go to www.ONSETPRODUCTIONS.com to apply. Click on the MTV Parkour logo and sign up. After you sign up, make sure to request tickets to the date you want to attend. MTV will NOT provide travel to this event. Read below the definition for Parkour.

WHAT IS PARKOUR?
PARKOUR- Parkour is a "movement" more akin to a religion (or martial art). And like many religions, most followers of Parkour take it fairly seriously. Part daredevil, Part Special Forces. Born in the suburbs of Paris and having evolved from Military training techniques Parkour turns the urban jungle into a playground. Moving as quickly and efficiently on, thru, over and around anything and everything in one's path. Walls, Stairs, cars, rooftop are all part of your course. Expanding from Parkour, Freerunning emphasizes the creativity and acrobatics of movement in the very same setting."

If you need more examples, I can get them for you. Believe me, there is no shortage! :naughty:

parkour can't be bought! viva la vida!

Unfortunately, it can, and it is in the process of being bought. If we don't want the the purchase to be completed, we need to do something more than claim that parkour can't be bought and leave it at that. So, you can start by sending a letter to MTV here: http://community.mtv.com/Discussion%20Thread/Parkour-Is-NOT-a-competition/0D3FCFFFF01AC2B53000900B29E41 You can also contact Urban Freeflow and Parkour Generations and boycott the game show. Doing something is WAY better than doing nothing.

By now, it should be BLATANTLY OBVIOUS that companies are trying to control parkour to make money. So, I think it is time to do something.

BENNY

03-22-2009, 11:07 PM

the MTV parkour thing sounds kool, except the fact they are pitting 2 teams against each other, not the spirit of parkour, no no no!

parkour in movies and stunt demos are kool, i dont consider those commercializing it. those parkour gameshows are bad ideas tho, i would not want parkour turned into like the x-games or what not.

i have no problem with traceurs signing to do stuntwork for films or public showing, but definate NOT signing to COMPETE in parkour, that is just crap!

as for the certification things they are doing, i dont really believe in it.

palu

03-22-2009, 11:56 PM

Hillexallen, I'm having a difficult time following your examples. The angles at which you've addressed these organizations is entirely negative, and it sounds like you have done little research. First off, before Urban Freeflow, no one had heard of parkour. If it wasn't for them, there would be no American parkour scene to speak of. While they may 'sign on' athletes, I don't believe it to be a 'money maker', but more or less sponsoring those who show a good representation of free runner athletics. Secondly, the group Parkour Generations exemplifies one of the greater aspects of parkour; they have strong will. Parkour Generations was contacted by Westminster Sports Council, part of the London central government (as I understand it), to do a class at a local school. The way PK Gen trained the students was very accurate to the way the original practitioners would. These workshops not only trained the kids how to practice and condition for parkour correctly, but undoubtedly help enrich their spirits. Bringing the ideas of parkour to the next generation and passing forward ideas is a part of parkour that many people pass up. What really matters it what you think of parkour as a practitioner. As for the Adapt certification, there is nobody saying you must have it to be an instructor. It is there for those who do though, and again, they have brought it to the people. The have created an outlet for all those people who require it or have wished it was there. Where is the harm?
There are many things that I don't believe in, and many things that I don't trust. I embrace those that I do though. I enjoy parkour and how I approach it reflects my opinion.

Ascent

03-23-2009, 06:52 AM

hillexallen

03-23-2009, 09:39 AM

aslo, i think they made the certification to help grant credibility to those who want to teach.

What gives them the authority to say that anyone is a good teacher? Where does the "credibility" come from? If someone does not teach the way that Dan Edwardes wants people to teach, that means he is not a good teacher?

@palu: I understand that Parkour Generations and Urban Freeflow have done many great things! I am not against parkour organizations! I am against parkour companies that try to claim authority and change the discipline in their favor so they can make money, as all three of the companies I mentioned have done.

Corndogg

03-23-2009, 09:51 AM

1. Before: Parkour has no teacher certification system. After: Parkour Generations creates the ADAPT system so they can make money off of people who want to be "certified", which doesn't actually mean anything.

2. Before: The global parkour community has established that parkour is a non-competitive discipline. After: Urban Freeflow sponsors the Barclaycard Freerun Championships so they can make pk/fr competitive and make money selling tickets and signing athletes.

1. Of course it means something. It means that ADAPT certified instructors follow their method and principles of teaching. Its up to individuals to decided if they want a certified instructor or not, or what value that certifiation has. Its kinda like a degree when you get out of college - its just a piece of paper, but it means you have followed and completed a path, and then companies put weight on it. Is PKGen a Standford? Or a community college? Up for individuals to decide at the moment.

2. False. Maybe a majority of the global parkour community have established pk as non-competitive, but you can't say 100%. You just can't, unless you've talked to every traceur in the world. So as long as there are 2 people in the world who think there can be competitions in pk, it'll happen. It takes 2 to tango - if the company set up the competition, and 100% of the global parkour community was against it, why were there still contestants? Are you saying the contestants are not "real traceurs" are arent really a part of the global parkour community?

I don't think theres a need to draw lines and create sides. Ideals should always be strived for, but reality needs to be compensated for. And proactive, constructive plans on what to do about it is better than just boycotting things left and right. To me a boycott is just putting up an obstacle, but arent we as tracuers supposed to get around obstacles? Compromise doesnt mean you are selling out or giving up your ideals.

Ascent

03-23-2009, 02:46 PM

im out :) these things are too troublesome.
peace love train hard!

hillexallen

03-23-2009, 02:48 PM

False. Maybe a majority of the global parkour community have established pk as non-competitive, but you can't say 100%. You just can't, unless you've talked to every traceur in the world. So as long as there are 2 people in the world who think there can be competitions in pk, it'll happen. It takes 2 to tango - if the company set up the competition, and 100% of the global parkour community was against it, why were there still contestants? Are you saying the contestants are not "real traceurs" are arent really a part of the global parkour community?

If Urban Freeflow's goal was to help the community instead of make money, they would be supporting the cause that the majority of traceurs, including the founders support!

If parkour is by definition as non-competitive discipline, and many people could make a very good argument that it is, anyone who practices parkour competitively is not really practicing parkour at all.

Corndogg

03-23-2009, 03:10 PM

i agree with both of those statements to a large degree.

its a hard thing to define though i think. im sure a lot of people think UFF have helped, as palu noted. and there are a lot who think they are focused on $$ instead. who gets to be the judge and jury on that issue? you? me? david belle? a global poll? hard to say.

competition too is a hard thing to define. does that mean no competition is the only way thats "right"? what about ninja warrior, which isnt really a pk competition? does the competition have to have the word "parkour" in it? what if it says "freerunning"? is there a difference between practicing parkour, and applying parkour in specific instances (like a competition)? is there any possible competition framework that is acceptable?

what is the ultimate goal of defining thing as this/that, yes/no, black/white? what negative impacts will competition bring that you are trying to solve? it seems like there are other solutions instead of boycotting - except that they require working together, and compromising.

no, i dont have the answers to all these questions, but im hoping to gain clarity through this continued discussion. my mind is open!

Meatlad

03-23-2009, 05:34 PM

ADAPT, as I understand from when Dan Edwardes was here, was made because city and national agencies wanted to teach parkour classes. As they use public funds, they needed some assurance that the instructors they're hiring are qualified. When you have a certification course, you know people are skilled and have a certain number of hours teaching, and are vouched for by other teachers. Keeps tax money from being used to hire a teacher who turns out to be bad.

One could criticize UFF for not supporting the community, but really, what have they done to harm it? Those freerunning competitions haven't changed the way I train, or who I train with. Is the concern that somehow the result of commercialization/competitions will change the attitude at jams?

If so, I'd like to focus our collective energy finding ways to ensure a safe, respectful, non-"extreme" attitude at jams, rather than stop commercialization or competition. Seems a couple steps removed, and we can be more effective at guiding our culture by working locally.

Beretta

03-23-2009, 06:49 PM

If someone does not teach the way that Dan Edwardes wants people to teach, that means he is not a good teacher?

hillexallen: I remember you initially found his visit inspirational and had a good opinion of him. You even wrote about how he had a positive affect on you, and helped look at parkour and freerunning in a more open-minded way. Now, when I read your posts you seem to be very angry at PK Gens, UFF and anyone associated with them. You anger seems to run so deep that now you're getting angry that not everyone is as enraged about these "sins" as you are.

Honestly, this saddens me. I don't know what happened to make you so angry at all these people you've never met, and one who was kind enough to teach you for free and make himself available to answer any questions you had: Dan Edwardes. You often speak about looking up to David Belle and how important it is for Parkour instruction to be free, now you are disparaging (falsely) someone who learned from David Belle's student (Stephane Vigroux) and taught you for free. Dan Edwardes explicitly said he did not expect or think it was necessary or advisable for Americans like ourselves to travel to Europe for ADAPT certification. When beginners asked him how they should proceed in their training, he motioned to the more experienced traceurs present and said (I'm paraphrasing): "Stick with these guys, they'll show you the right way." He didn't ask for a cent, or try to sell us anything, and he never once made any suggestion that his way was the only way to teach Parkour.

I remember you pointing out to Chris on BAPK that you weren't quite sure what product Dan Edwardes was trying to sell. You were defending his credibility when it was suggested to you he was a mere salesman. Now you are making that same accusation. What changed?

Everyone on here loves and lives Parkour just as deeply as you do, so does Dan Edwardes and everyone at PK Gens. I hope you can find a way to understand the world that allows your thoughts freedom of movement through a world that is neither binary nor linear. Passion destroys people, and it cannot coexist with peace.

I hope we as traceurs create peace within ourselves that allows us to accept the differences within our community, rather than fracture into vitriolic, insulated cults unable to communicate with eachother.

hillexallen

03-23-2009, 08:21 PM

I remember you pointing out to Chris on BAPK that you weren't quite sure what product Dan Edwardes was trying to sell. You were defending his credibility when it was suggested to you he was a mere salesman. Now you are making that same accusation. What changed?

First of all, I really appreciate that Dan Edwardes came out to SF that day and trained with us without asking for anything at all. That demonstrates the true spirit of parkour.

Chris made me realize that Parkour Generations was trying to establish themselves as an authority using lies about how parkour and freerunning came to be. Dan Edwardes told the people there that parkour and freerunning are the same thing, which is false. However, I fell for it "hook, line, and sinker." Later, I did the research for myself and saw that parkour and freerunning are in fact different things! Parkour was created by david belle, and freerunning was created by Sebastien Foucan because his style of parkour was different, and thus a separate discipline was created when people started to follow Foucan's style. In David Belle's own words:

We took two separate roads. Sebastien wanted to be on his own and do his own thing. Like any sport, such as a martial art, you have a base, and then it evolves into different disciplines. The same thing is happening to parkour, and that's normal and natural.

By appealing to people who practice parkour as well as people who practice freerunning, Parkour Generations can attract more followers who will support them when they try to make themselves an authority using things like ADAPT. Even if you think their goal is not to make money, it is the practitioners who should control this discipline, not a company. Can we agree on that?

Again, I have no problems with Dan Edwardes as a person, but I think that we should not let him and his company decide who is fit to teach parkour and who is not.

Also, what do you people honestly think about the way MTV and the WFPF are representing parkour through their game show?

Beretta

03-23-2009, 08:53 PM

Again, I have no problems with Dan Edwardes as a person, but I think that we should let him and his company decide who is fit to teach parkour and who is not.

Dude, no offense but that's a seriously funny typo!:laugh: (I know you meant you don't think we should let him...)

I've done the research through movement, and I still believe that parkour and freerunning are the same. And I know that almost everyone disagrees with me, and I'm ok with that.

I think to say that "Dan & his company" are out there spreading lies is blowing things out of proportion. To say that Parkour Generations says things that are different from what David Belle says, is I believe more accurately expressing what you mean.

David Belle is incredible, and a huge influence on me, however I don't agree with the notion I see online sometimes that whatever David Belle says about parkour is the only possible truth. When people quote him too often I simply tune out, as at that point I assume they've given up the right to think for themselves.

What do I think about MTV & parkour & WFPF or whatever?

I don't watch TV. I try to buy clothes not made in sweatshops. I live in near poverty in order to be able to have a career that is morally okay with me. I haven't listened to the radio by choice in a year or more.

So, generally speaking I'm against the exploitation and commercialization of almost anything. Nonetheless, I don't expect others to feel the same and I know that the stains of environmental destruction and the oppression of workers are on me, due to the degree to which I am a consumer in this modern world.

Do I look forward to more "bros" showing up in parkour? No.

BUT I never would have discovered Punk Rock, which saved my life, if I hadn't seen Rancid on MTV and heard the Ramones on the radio. I've seen this kind of debate rage for years in the punk scene. (In parkour, we're lucky to still be a community and not a scene.) People get so worried about "poseurs" and "sell-outs" that they begin adopting sillier and sillier costumes, ideologies and music. Eventually they're so concerned about not being a "poseur" that the entirety of their behavior is dictated by what they're against, rather than what they're for, until finally they are against everything: including anyone new.

There's enough joy and beauty and good stuff to go around. If new people show up after seeing a game show, some will certainly be knuckleheads. Not all of 'em, though. A growth in parkour practitioners is just another obstacle. I'm glad the people that were doing PK before me were kind enough to put it out there on TV, YouTube, etc. If they hadn't I'd never know how wonderful life can be.

If I had to make a prediction, I'd say that there may be a brief explosion. Parkour may be a trend for awhile, but for the casual zoo human it will be too much work. However, a lot of people will find out about PK through exploitative, commercial, sensationalist & silly media and some of those people will discover the joy and beauty that you and I have. If MTV is the only way for those few to find salvation through parkour, then hallelujah for MTV.

Either way, I'll still train (like I've said before.)

hillexallen

03-23-2009, 09:04 PM

haha

Thanks for the correction. Yeah, that could be a possible flaw in my argument...

I think that beretta and I will have to agree to disagree about Parkour Generations. We have different thoughts about the differences, or lack therof, between parkour and freerunning, which is perfectly acceptable.

I will also still train, like Beretta. We should all follow his example. I still think it is very important to think critically and debate, though.

Beretta

03-23-2009, 09:42 PM

Word.

Debate is good, as is learning to disagree--even completely--with people and yet still share what we have in common. It's taken me a long time to even be willing to try to find common ground with those I've disagreed with, so you're waaaay ahead of the game, man!

Zack Weldon

03-23-2009, 10:09 PM

Dan Edwardes told the people there that parkour and freerunning are the same thing, which is false. However, I fell for it "hook, line, and sinker." Later, I did the research for myself and saw that parkour and freerunning are in fact different things!
I remember dan saying that Parkour and freerunning were originally the same thing. l' art du deplacement. They were doing palm spins from almost day 1 and thought nothing of it except that it is the art of movement not parkour or freerunning! As I understand it they were the same thing until the split and not much later Sebastian coined freerunning.

2nd Chance

03-23-2009, 10:37 PM

it is the practitioners who should control this discipline, not a company. Can we agree on that?

I can totally agree to that. But I don't think that they are controlling the discipline, and I don't think they CAN. They can try to institutionalize it with classes and certifications, definitions, sessions, etc, etc... But just the mere fact that we're having this conversation, does that not show that we still have a say in it?

palu

03-24-2009, 10:54 AM

I believe what Dan was saying regarding freerunning and parkour, is that they are so similar and derived from the same original discipline, that the original practitioners are 'above it'. They don't care what you call it, it's the same to them. Furthermore, a serious practitioner shouldn't let the name bother them as well. Why worry about a couple of names when it is the art that you should be worrying about? Don't let silly obstacles come into your path. The purpose of the Yamakasi was strength and freedom with movement. They called themselves Yamakasi for the strength aspect, and to embrace the freedom of movement, L'art du deplacement is simply the art of movement; there were no restrictions by name alone. Aside from that, Dan Edwards is a man, not a company. Although he represents PK Gen, picking him out and using his name as a target is... a little disrespectful. I think you may have overlooked the hypocrisy in your original statement. PK Generations are the practitioners. They are full time traceurs, and are, in my opinion, pushing the scene in a good direction. If you have a problem with their organization, they have a contact page, and I fully encourage every traceur to be proactive.

hillexallen

03-24-2009, 11:16 AM

I watched the video a couple of days ago. Dan Edwardes, in the beginning of the video, said that the word "freerunning" originally had the same meaning as "parkour" and "l'art du displacement". Later in the video, he said that parkour, freerunning, and l'art du displacement ARE the same thing. Either way, no matter what tense he uses, he's getting the idea into people's heads that it is all the same thing.

I practice flips, efficient movements, everything else, and don't worry about classifying it while I'm training! It doesn't matter what you call what you practice! But, I don't think it is fair to spread lies about parkour's origins in order to gain support for a company. Traceurs deserve to know what they are practicing and where it came from, even if it does not affect their training directly.

I already said that I have no personal problems with Dan Edwardes, I am not using him as a target, I never called him a company, and I don't think it is disrespectful to talk about his visit and about how I, as well as others, think he is trying to market his company.

@2nd Chance: I think if they have enough money, they can control anything.

Lonnie

03-24-2009, 12:40 PM

You guys should watch this if you haven't already: Stephane Vigroux on the history of parkour, art du displacement (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d1AxUPPcF8)

palu

03-24-2009, 01:32 PM

I already said that I have no personal problems with Dan Edwardes, I am not using him as a target, I never called him a company, and I don't think it is disrespectful to talk about his visit and about how I, as well as others, think he is trying to market his company.

I don't really see how he's trying to sell us anything. Can you elaborate on this?

2nd Chance

03-24-2009, 03:31 PM

@2nd Chance: I think if they have enough money, they can control anything.

Fair enough, I don't agree, but I can see what you mean. But my next question, ARE they controlling it now? I would say no.

hillexallen

03-24-2009, 04:47 PM

I don't really see how he's trying to sell us anything. Can you elaborate on this?

Sure. Outdoor classes (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/classes.php?p=outdoor), indoor classes (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/classes.php?p=indoor), women's classes (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/classes.php?p=women), private classes (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/classes.php?p=private), stock footage (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/services.php?p=movies), acting in ads, music videos, movies, and TV shows (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/services.php?p=tv),
live performances (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/services.php?p=events), and consulting (http://www.parkourgenerations.com/services.php?p=consulting). They might also charge for ADAPT certification, I don't know if they do or not.

@2nd Chance: I don't think they control it now, but they have WAY too much power compared to everyday practitioners.

Beretta

03-24-2009, 05:03 PM

A person only has as much power over me as I allow him.

T.K.

03-24-2009, 05:36 PM

right on im with beretta on that one ... no one can control me or tell me how to train. Ill do it my own way .. thats the whole point of parkour. Personal achivement!!

hillexallen

03-24-2009, 06:18 PM

Unfortunately, advertisements can control us without us even knowing it! It has happened to every single one of us.

An example: Phil Knight of Nike is one of the best advertisers in the world. If you go to Niketown in San Francisco, there is a huge escalator that leads up to the first floor. Everybody who enters the shop goes up the escalator. Alongside the escalator are TV screens, flashing images of professional athletes using Nike equipment. You can go there on any given day and watch hundreds and hundreds of people turning their heads SUBCONSCIOUSLY to look at his advertisements. He can control people without them knowing, just by flashing some images on a TV screen. He can even take advantage of people's natural curiosity and make them go somewhere to check out something that looks cool or interesting.

If they have money, they will advertise. If they advertise, you will probably know about them. If you know about them, you are much more likely to buy from them than buy from a company that doesn't have enough money to advertise.

It's sad, but advertising can and does affect each one of us.

Beretta

03-24-2009, 07:58 PM

Well, did all those times you watched David Belle (in Nikes, I believe) jump across street-width roof gaps convince you to strap on some MaxAir Zoom Pumps (or whatever you whippersnappers wear these days) and leap to your death?

We all bear final and ultimate responsibility for our actions.

Also I have to say, I find that the less I participate in TV, consumerism, etc., the happier I am. I've found that bringing up the topic can be very divisive, and it's hard not to offend people by suggesting that the products they buy or use are destroying meaningful things (i.e. parkour, the planet, etc.) Often times I find it is better to "be the change you wish to see in the world," as Ghandhi said. Also, I find I'm happier when I focus on what I want, rather than what I don't.

I used to belong to a group called Anti Racist Action, and it often bugged me that we weren't "The Diversity Council," or whatever. When we talk about what we aspire to, we often inspire others to join us.

I'd suggest that you might attract more people, and get friendlier and more useful responses, to a discussion about building a "grassroots" or "organic" parkour community. Then we could talk about ways to grow the community from within, and inspire others to take action to reclaim their natural right, as humans, to move freely. That's way more fun to talk about than "how do we fight off giant, evil, tacky robots."

Beretta

03-24-2009, 07:59 PM

Did I say "robots"? I meant corporations. ;)

RyogaVee

03-24-2009, 08:23 PM

I did an hour long videotaped interview with a production company that’s trying to put together untitled Parkour show together. I’m gaged on talking about it at the moment. However they assured me its NOT the MTV project that many are in a buzz about. A lot of what is being argued here was brought into the discussion.

The past, future and impending commercialization. By one way or another we all are here because Parkour was introduced to us by a form of commercialization. YouTube, commercials, movies, ect. We are here because someone else wanted to share their talents with the world. And the only way that could happen is if someone or something was backing that effort.

Much of my interview hovered on how I usually train alone and how that affects me as a Traceur. I prefer it because it allows me a level of freedom that I can’t get being associated with a troupe. I’m not ready to conform and be just a number. I don't want to put on a t-shit and rep someone elses dream. I want to live mine. Plus I’m having way too much fun showing my personality while training at the same time.

Most of the other Traceurs signed on for the project are aligned with teams, Tempest, 3Run, Tribe, ect… most corporately sponsored. I see it as a natural progression of our discipline and NOTHING will stop it. As long as we do feats that someone wants to view, there will always be someone thinking of a way to promote, and profit off of it. And if you think about it, once The Simpsons does it, it’s pretty much mainstreamed.

As T.K. and Beretta mentioned, I can’t be controlled. My path is mine and mine alone. No one can tell me my way is right or wrong by how I move, dress, or act. T.V. Movies, Dan Edwardes, Parkour Generations, G4TV, Viacom, and Turner Broadcasting and only show me so much. But will never alter or change who I am as a person, Traceur, artist or personality.

In other words, the commercialization of Parkour can show you a path, you chose how to run it.

hillexallen

03-24-2009, 08:34 PM

Thanks, Ryoga.

I agree with most of what you said. However, I think there is a difference between making money off of parkour, like 5.10, K-Swiss, and companies that hire traceurs for ads do, and changing parkour in order to make money off of it, like UFF, PK Gen, and WFPF are doing.

I think the first one is ok! I think the second one isn't, though.

Congratulations on the interview.

One question about "controlling yourself": If advertising didn't work, and couldn't control you, why would companies pay millions of dollars for a thirty second advertisement on TV? They have research teams and study the effects of advertising very thoroughly, so if everybody's actions are controlled by nothing but himself, why do they even bother to pay so much for advertisements?

RyogaVee

03-24-2009, 08:41 PM

Beretta

03-24-2009, 11:40 PM

One question about "controlling yourself": If advertising didn't work, and couldn't control you, why would companies pay millions of dollars for a thirty second advertisement on TV? They have research teams and study the effects of advertising very thoroughly, so if everybody's actions are controlled by nothing but himself, why do they even bother to pay so much for advertisements?

Because most people are still plugged in, which is my point. Owning a TV, reading a magazine, listening to the radio, living in a city with billboards, etc. are all choices which individuals, like you and I, make. A choice. You can unplug yourself from the matrix to whatever extent you choose. Most people seem to prefer being what we like to call "zoo humans." That's their decision. I choose my own path.

I probably haven't seen a TV commercial in at least a month, maybe a year.

Advertising influences behavior, and I'm not going to suggest that the lifetime bombardment of advertising I've received hasn't affected me. But, McDonalds, et. al is not responsible for me becoming either the hooligan I used to be, or the peaceful warrior I am now. The glory and the shame are all mine.

Freedom ought to be a verb, not a noun, because it only matters when it is exercised. We have to free ourselves from the mental slavery of "consume, work & die."

T.K.

03-25-2009, 01:12 AM

damn beretta .... you speak my language. Ryoga this is why i like training with you ... you dont let anyone or anything change who you are. I use to and now iv learned. I choose who i want to be and what i want to do. Like beretta i dont watch TV or read magazines. Yea i watch anime and movies and such on PC... and i play games and such but i didnt let commertialization tell me what i like to do. I do parkour cause i love it and its become a lifestyle for me... a very fun one. They day i let someone choose my path for me is the day im dead... cause then they unfortunatly control your body lol.

hillexallen

03-25-2009, 09:41 AM

If you talk to your friends, see a billboard, watch television, listen to the radio, use the internet, or read the newspaper, you can be influenced and possibly controlled by advertisers. I think that the less you do these things, the harder it is for companies to influence and control you.

In the end you make your own decisions, but clever advertising can make you think what the advertiser wants you to think.

Lonnie

03-25-2009, 11:47 AM

Sounds like you guys agree then... Good topic, even better discussion!

Meatlad

03-25-2009, 04:43 PM

Freedom ought to be a verb, not a noun, because it only matters when it is exercised.

I'm making that my Facebook status for tomorrow.

Corndogg

03-25-2009, 05:23 PM

In the end you make your own decisions, but clever advertising can make you think what the advertiser wants you to think.

"The Machine" :ohnoes:

As you've said, just knowing it exists, and being aware of what companies and ads are trying to do, is a great step in the right direction. Definitely key to question things, and not take what they tell you at face value. Theres motivation behind it, sometimes good, sometimes bad.

MadScience

03-25-2009, 11:27 PM

I don't like the black/white approach of this thread. I don't think any of the possibilities debated exclude each other.

We can have competition with non-competition. We can have multiple "authorities" and still make up our own individual minds. There will be corporations and schools who will make money off parkour. And there will still be local groups that organize and train together free of commercialization. Products will be made and sold to traceurs, and yet the sport will still be known as needing nothing. We will have traceurs and Freerunners training side by side, and there will be groups that are exclusively one or the other. There have already been parkour competitions and there will be more. Yet the vast majority of traceurs freely choose not to compete.

We are stronger as a community for embracing this diversity. By being inclusive and welcoming all the options we will maintain more control of our sport. And it is very important to allow every one their own way. I think the ADEPT program is great for those who need or want it, it fills a need. But I don't care to participate and have no need for it. And parkour does lend itself to time trial and obstacle courses rather well, and maybe I would be willing to compete if the opportunity was available. But I respect your decision not to.
And any organization or company to organize and gain national publicity will influence public perception, that is inevitable. And PKGen does a very good job of responsibly promoting the core values of our discipline. Better them than than some of the other groups who have tried.

Actually, on that subject. Seriously, there will be training certifications. There has to be for the reasons mentioned already. There are already schools and classes and there will be more. There are already several commercial parkour teams, and there will be more. Given all that, can you name any group better qualified or closer to the heart of parkour than PKGen? Given that there will be national organizations who speak for parkour in the media, would you prefer some other group? I'm of the opinion that PKGen is about the best national group we can realistically hope for. They may not be perfect, but we have already seen several groups do much worse. Stop trashing them because you don't want to see any national organization. Its gonna happen, if you don't want to participate, then don't.

Beretta

03-26-2009, 07:22 AM

Snaps to MadScience! Well said Kevin.

I agree that this subject is not black and white. It is neither binary, nor linear. Your points are right on. Some of these things are inevitable and beyond my control; in light of that, I'd rather focus on what I can do to improve my own community.

Ascent

03-26-2009, 12:10 PM

Meatlad

03-26-2009, 03:17 PM

T.K.

03-26-2009, 03:59 PM

ahhh helmets scary ; ;

BENNY

03-26-2009, 04:43 PM

Well said Kevin. A lot of good points and good discussion here. I'll bring up a specific effect of commercialization that I'd like to get you guys' take on: helmets and pads for parkour.

Once upon a time no one wore helmets or pads for skateboarding, bicycling, skiing and snowboarding. Granted those are all generally more dangerous than parkour due to the speeds involved. But sooner or later a helmet maker is going to realize there's a market for their product in parkour and a precedent in those other sports. Maybe even push for helmet laws like there are for bikes. That's pretty much the only real effect of commercialization I'm concerned with. If there isn't an existing need some companies will try to create one just so they can fill it.

Given that concern, I can only think of keeping the accident rate low for parkour by emphasizing safety more heavily in classes and by jam warm-up leaders.

Any other thoughts on this?

helmets and pads for parkour is a absolutly terrible idea. they exist for skateboarding and skating because in those sports, users are on wheels, and movements are indirectly controled through the wheels. loosing control of movement is easy and when falling, knees, elbows and head is the parts that are valnerable to impact and lacerations.

these would be utterly useless in parkour, since of all the bails i've ever had, ive never scratched my elbows, knees occasionally, but rarely. if trained properly, a trraceur would rarely hit any body part that would fit any sort of padding wear.

paddings are cumbersome, getting in the way of real training, making you less nimble, and more suseptible to bailing. :nono:

Meatlad

03-26-2009, 05:10 PM

For the record selling helmets and pads isn't what concerns me, if it turns out they help keep people safe and are comfortable then it'll be good to have that option, it's being forced to that concerns me. I don't want it to be an unnecessary barrier to entry at a class, parkour park, or just trying it out.

Jackal

03-30-2009, 11:04 AM

Helmets... For parkour? Completely useless, considering you're a real traceur. Parkour isn't an extreme sport, like skateboarding or biking; it's a training of the body. It doesn't involve taking risks (that'd be more along the lines of what we call free running), but instead working within your known limits to expand those limits. You don't see your 'Aunt Martha' walking into Yoga class with a helmet, do you? I guess what i'm saying is that, if parkour was represented as it should be, it's not going to come down to helmets and pads being required by law.
As far as the commercialization of parkour goes, well, i'm not too concerned about whether one chooses to make a profit off of it or not. That's their choice to make. I'm only worried about how misrepresentation could affect it for the rest of us.

msgr33

03-30-2009, 10:29 PM

I think the helmets and pads discussion should be moved to its own thread unless the posts are specific to how they are related to commercialization (I'm unclear how they are aside from parkour being used as an impetus/excuse to buy).

Relating to commercialization, I think helmets sales in most sports has more to do with commerce and competition than safety. Companies know that if they get (ie convince or mandate through governing bodies) high visibility athletes to wear their products, they will sell. For example, no one seems to use the "what happens in competition doesn't effect me" argument when talking about bicycle helmets; racers as a group were probably the last to don protection even though for most riding (a 40+mph sprint notwithstanding), they are probably the practitioners with the highest skills in the most controlled environment. In the end, despite resistance from pros and amateurs alike, helmets were made mandatory in racing thus the common image of a cyclist isn't everyday clothes and hair blowing in the wind, it's lycra and foam hats and most recreational cycling clubs require helmets even on the most relaxed rides. Without actual statistical data, I cannot tell you if the injury and death rates have changed or in what direction, but I will assert that if parkour had started in the USA instead of France, it may have been stunted (no pun intended) by liability concerns well before it made its way beyond our shores.

If you're wondering when the move to protection is going to happen, it's already happening (http://www.squidoo.com/d3o_parcouring), with sponsored athletes (http://www.d3o.com/internal.php?cont=26_devathlete&section=6), even.

To continue with the off-topic part of this protection discussion: Parkour is about risk, I really do not understand why so many people are stuck in the idea that it's not. If there were no risk, would it be so popular with young men? Probably not. But parkour is not about taking risks, it's about managing risk. Is there anyone for whom risk is not an integral parameter in their training? Is that not one of the main ways we build our mental toughness? In my personal experience, my injury rate in parkour is as high or higher than any other sport I've pursued and well higher than what I've sustained skateboarding, snowboarding or bicycling (though, given the number of injuries I've had in the decades I've been active, I'm probably still much lower than others training at similar intensity levels).

Meatlad

03-31-2009, 12:29 PM

Yes, I would like to stay focused around how product development and marketing will influence our actual practice of parkour. As far as helmets or pads go, I am more interested in what people think about the phenomenon and likelihood of any new need being identified or created to be capitalized on. Not just bad, but "good" commercialization - identifying an actual need that hasn't yet been solved by a product but could. Product developers always start with the questions "what is the problem that our product needs to solve?" or "what is the opportunity for improvement our product can capitalize on?" The actual functionality of the product comes second.

As far as the off-topic thing about helmets & risk, I do think parkour is about managing risk, but I also can't deny there's an appeal in taking risks that we'll likely never need to take. Safely mastering a risky move creates a sense of confidence and strength that carries through to the rest of your life. Most of what we practice will never be practical and is inherently more dangerous than walking around the obstacle. Helmets would mitigate some of this risk, but I suspect there would be push-back because the risk is a large part of the appeal. Commercialization of helmets could, among other things, prompt a soul-searching of the motivations of traceurs.

Just Steve

03-31-2009, 07:32 PM

Sorry to add more to this off topic thread but have you guys/gals seen this? Armour Skin for Parkour Training...
http://www.worldwidejam.tv/traininggear/tshirts/korpertech/korpertech.order.1.html

Ascent

03-31-2009, 07:44 PM

cool shirt :)

hillexallen

03-31-2009, 08:12 PM

That's really cool.

Just Steve

03-31-2009, 08:27 PM

Reminds me of my kids, Power Rangers outfit with all the built-in muscles! :)

hillexallen

04-01-2009, 09:32 AM

MTV is having a hard time finding people to come and watch their show, "The Ultimate Chase". (:thefinger:) They are even offereing to pay attendees $40! :eek3:

If they were trying to get traceurs to come, they probably should have figured out that we are not "huge “Parkour” fans" who "love stunts preformed right in front our eyes", but rather dedicated practitioners who have a passion for our discipline. What a shame...:rolleyes:

I think this might be an indication that practitioners are starting to figure out that MTV and WFPF aren't going to do much good for the discipline.

If you tried banging your head against a wall, and it hurt, then you tried it again, and it hurt, why should you even CONSIDER trying it again? :nono:

I want a change THROUGH parkour, not a change OF parkour. I think others are starting to agree...

Beretta

04-01-2009, 05:37 PM

This MTV thing has been popping in my head a lot lately. The more I think about it, the more I'm glad it's happening. Whether it's "pure parkour" or not, and no matter how many "Hey bro, can you jump off that?" types show up in parkour afterwards, I believe it will have a positive effect.

More people will know about parkour. Some will try it, and a few will stick with it and some of those few will be amazing, open-minded, intelligent, free spirited, barefootin', hard running, talented, dedicated traceurs and traceuses, just like all of you, my amazing friends.

I can't wait to meet these newcomers and welcome them into the fold. Maybe one of them will be my new best friend. Maybe more women will get into this life. The unknown is scary, but I'm more excited about these new friends we'll all get to meet soon enough.

The challenges of bad attitudes, exploitation, misinformation and a popularity explosion are just obstacles. We will overcome them, again and again. It's what we do.

hillexallen

04-02-2009, 12:30 PM

hillexallen

04-02-2009, 12:36 PM

Whether it's "pure parkour" or not

Parkour is not a competitive extreme sport, so the game show does not even involve ANY parkour at all, let alone "pure" parkour.

I also don't like the way I am being labeled as having a bad attitude, and being negative. I would not be debating here if I did not have a strong passion for parkour. Why should you frown upon somebody who defends parkour because he loves it? How is that being negative?

I would appreciate if you questioned my arguments, not my motivation for arguing.

Beretta

04-02-2009, 12:49 PM

There are several point I want to make in response to Beretta's post:

1. The type of person who watches MTV regularly and who is attracted to parkour as the show portrays it may not be the same type of person who would be willing to be a dedicated practitioner of REAL parkour.

2. I don't think that attracting too many practitioners to parkour right now is a good idea. More practitioners will lead to more tresspassing and disrespect, which will olead to a bad reputation and possibly laws against parkour. I think that we should first build up a good reputation, THEN attract more practitioners. Unfortunately, many traceurs are allowing MTV to do whatever it wants to with parkour's reputation. Can you agree with this?

3. Unfortunately, there are obstacles that CAN'T be overcome. I think that right now, we have enough power over our discipline to stop the companies from taking it over. But, if we allow them to take it over, they will be an obstacle that CANNOT be overcome, and they will have the power to change parkour and its reputation in any way that allows them to make money.

In response to your response, :wink: :

1. The operative word is may. Also, more than one type of person watches MTV. Just like with Jump London and Jump Britain, I'm sure there will also be a lot of online viewing.

2. There are potential problems with new traceurs. I'm sure David Belle, Sebastian Foucan, the Yamakasi and more were worried when they began exposing their art to the world. However, you and I don't trespass or disrespect society our the international parkour community, and our practice has not yet inspired legislation. I don't agree that an influx of new practitioners will lead to more trespassing, disrespect and the creation of a bad reputation for parkour, though I am well aware that it may.

3. All obstacles (http://definr.com/obstacle) can be overcome. Limitations (http://definr.com/limitation), however may not always be overcome. I think the important questions are: "Is commercialization a limit or an obstacle?" which is easier to answer when one considers "Who imposes limitations on me? Nature? God? Myself? Others?"

Finally, let me say that I am just as, if not more, worried about the excessive influence of those who claim to have a monopoly on the "REAL" or "TRUE" version, vision or practice of parkour. Open mindedness and free thinking are essential parkour skills. No one practices what the Yamakasi created so many years ago, including them. Parkour evolves, like any language, and reactionary conservatism within parkour is not just unnecessary, but ineffective. Parkour will change whether we want it to, or not.

hillexallen

04-02-2009, 02:20 PM

1. I agree. I also think that too many of the people who are likely to watch the show are probably not the people we want people to think of when they think about parkour.

2. I am 99.9% Sure that if we attract more people, especially if they are the "MTV type", there will be more tresspassing. If one in ten traceurs tresspasses, and there are only ten traceurs in the world, only one traceur will tresspass. But if we attract more traceurs and there are 100 all of a sudden, there will be ten who tresspass. :laugh: (Sorry for being so algebraic.) More tresspassing will definitely lead to a worse reputation for parkour, and there is a good chance that it could lead to anti-parkour legislation.

3. In that case, companies are limitations.

Parkour will change whether we want it to, or not.

The question is whether WE will change it in a way that helps us to practice it, or whether the compnies will change it in a way that allows them to make money.

Corndogg

04-02-2009, 02:48 PM

hillexallen -

do you distinguish between "us attracting" and "people being attracted to parkour"? i guess the difference im trying to make is "us attracting" = someone is interested, and gets connected to a community vs. "being attacted" = they see a video and they just go out and try it. what percentage (knowing that theres no current data to support) do you suspect will connect to a community vs just go out on their own?

i think for those that go out on their own, and thus dont have the same info we do and could hurt themselves, property, others, image etc we can try and change that, but there will ALWAYS be "rogue" people. what percentage are we really talking about here? because on the flip side, if they do connect with a community, i dont think theres any community out there that is doing a "bad" job ie promotes recklessness, no training, tresspassing, disrespect for the environment, authority etc. so im pretty confident that as long as we can drive newcomers to a community, things should turn out pretty well. so its kinda what you said before - lets make sure our communities are strong and sending out the right message, and build a solid rep, and thus be less concerned about the rogue X (small) percentage. 80/20 rule, right? except in this case i suspect its more 90/10 or higher.

hillexallen

04-02-2009, 03:33 PM

It doesn't matter what the percentage is in my opinion. Plus, I'm not good enough of a statistician to figure that out.

But I know that as long as "rogues" exist, the more total traceurs there are, the more total "rogues" there are. The problem is that people who care about people tresspassing on their property don't notice how many good traceurs there are, they just notice how many traceurs tresspass on their property.

So, if we increase the amount of traceurs in the world, we will increase the number of tresspassing traceurs in the world, and property owners will see more traceurs tresspassing, which will likely make them want to take action, quite possibly with anti-parkour legislation.

hillexallen

04-02-2009, 03:34 PM

hillexallen -
do you distinguish between "us attracting" and "people being attracted to parkour"?

The difference is that people who we attract are more likely to have a strong start, whereas people who are attracted by YouTube videos and game shows are more likely to think of parkour as an extreme sport.

Corndogg

04-02-2009, 03:42 PM

hillexallen

04-02-2009, 06:43 PM

We cannot eliminate "rogues" no matter what.

I say we get a good reputation for ourselves first, THEN grow the discipline.

It is definitely not logical to grow a discipline that nobody has respect for. That would give us skateboarding's reputation! We need to gain respect first, THEN grow!

Kirill

04-02-2009, 09:01 PM

Kirill

04-02-2009, 09:03 PM

so do you think we can 100% stop all "rogues" from ever existing? my guess is no.

so, does that mean we should never grow the sport at all, because we are so afraid of what these rogues are doing? again my guess is no.

so again i go back to - lets focus on making ourselves strong, and set a good example, and not worry too much (not to say not at all) about the small rogue percentage.

at least thats what ill be doing :)
Thats Kaos's mentality. But the thing is- we only have an influence over a small number of people, so we will not be able to set a good example for everyone.

(we dont have to), so we heavily rely on other PK communities to set the same example.

and how will we know if a kid- who is just starting out, can find one of these communities and save his body from damage of incorrect training?

palu

04-02-2009, 11:02 PM

I'm sorry to say it, but I think that almost everyone here started out recklessly. Later we were able to find a community so that we could learn it a bit better. I think that this argument requires a bit of retrospect. It sounds like the opposing argument may be forgetting this piece.

Beretta

04-03-2009, 01:20 AM

+1 Palu.

At first all I did was climb on roofs and jump off shit. SFPK and experience put me on a better path. Also, from speaking with experienced traceurs, I think as more people come in, the community is getting better at introducing quickly to the intensity and dedication of higher level parkour training.

As far as saving the new kids coming in, they can watch Zack's sexy tutorial videos to learn proper safe technique! LOL! :kekekegay:

We'll never be 100% perfect, we'll never "catch" or "correct" every unethical, immoral or unsafe practice out there; but our example will have a positive effect.

The decisions that commercialize, or attempt to, parkour will not be made by me or palu or Illabaca or David Belle. Those decisions will be made by the people who pay movie stars with shoe deals, like David Belle, the millions they earn for performing extremely dangerous stunts far beyond the abilities of most advanced traceurs.

Beretta

04-03-2009, 01:39 AM

I also don't like the way I am being labeled as having a bad attitude, and being negative. I would not be debating here if I did not have a strong passion for parkour. Why should you frown upon somebody who defends parkour because he loves it? How is that being negative?

I would appreciate if you questioned my arguments, not my motivation for arguing.

I missed this post earlier, now that I see it I feel it deserves a response.

While looking the through the thread, admittedly casually, I don't see anywhere where anyone has been labeled or called names. I do seem to remember stating that I'd rather us focus on positive things (in the sense of how we want things to be) rather than negative things (in the sense of fears of bad things that might happen to parkour). This is a principle I use in teaching, both professionally as a special educator and when I teach parkour. If a child hits me, I'll say something along the lines of "I can pay you tickets when you keep your hands down." This is a positive instruction because I am telling him what to do. If I said "don't hit me"
that would be a negative correction, as I would be telling him what not to do. I think it's more effective to focus on the solutions, rather than the problems.

All of us want to be able to engage in a spirited discussion, especially about controversial topics. No one wants to be condemned or judged for having a different or minority opinion. If there are specific instances where people have crossed lines, please bring them up.

2nd Chance

04-03-2009, 01:09 PM

If there are specific instances where people have crossed lines, please bring them up.

Definitely. This is what the staff is here for.

Sorry, back on topic now haha.

Kirill

04-03-2009, 10:39 PM

the staff

??? :redface: :squint:

hillexallen

04-03-2009, 10:42 PM

The angles at which you've addressed these organizations is entirely negative, and it sounds like you have done little research.

Well, I am trying to have a positive impact on the parkour community, and I have done A LOT of research.

I tried to stay really positive with PKGen and UFF both, but in the end I saw what their true goal was...and WFPF is not offering anything different from what UFF and PKGEN did.

I banged my head against a wall once, and it hurt. Then I tried another time, and it hurt, and I really didn't like it. Why should I, and the rest of the parkour community try banging our heads against this wall AGAIN?

There's being negative, and there's being logical. I think you think that I am being negative just for the purpose of being negative, when in fact, I am being negative because it is the logical thing to do. ;)

hillexallen

04-03-2009, 11:03 PM

I heard that somebody sprained his collar bone during the filming of this show. Just one of many examples of how commercialization leads to injuries...

lethalbeef

04-04-2009, 10:04 AM

People get injuries, it happens. When I've gotten sprains, etc through normal training, should I blame it on non-competition? Or anti-competition?

Next time you bang your head against the wall, maybe you could try putting a pillow on it first. Eventually you'll learn to use a hammer instead. This is unexplored territory; while in principle there may be something wrong with it, that doesn't mean that every time it ends in disaster. No conclusions can be made from something with so many variable factors that only has had a few attempts at working...

I don't completely disagree with your sentiment, but your anti-progress/evolution attitude is unfortunate. I don't think that's the kind of argument you should be taking. People DO think parkour is a very interesting idea, activity, community, and we need to foster that instead of butting heads. So if you don't want competitive shows, etc, instead promote the idea of documentaries or something like that. Working with people is the best way to sway them.

Keep up the discussion though, it's important.

hillexallen

04-04-2009, 11:18 AM

your anti-progress/evolution attitude is unfortunate.

It seems like this is another label that is being put on me for trying to help the parkour community make progress in the RIGHT direction.

Can we all agree that if you are competing with somebody, you are more likely to do something stupid and get hurt?

It happened in the Urban Freeflow Championships, and it happened in The Ultimate Parkour Challenge.

It looks like it's a pattern in competitions...

Beretta

04-04-2009, 05:00 PM

As I said before:

Finally, let me say that I am just as, if not more, worried about the excessive influence of those who claim to have a monopoly on the "REAL" or "TRUE" version, vision or practice of parkour. Open mindedness and free thinking are essential parkour skills. No one practices what the Yamakasi created so many years ago, including them. Parkour evolves, like any language, and reactionary conservatism within parkour is not just unnecessary, but ineffective. Parkour will change whether we want it to, or not.

hillexallen

04-04-2009, 05:27 PM

I was open minded to UFF, then I figured out that it was taking advantage of people like me who were open minded to it. I was open minded to PK Generations, the I figured out that it was taking advantage of people like me who were open minded to them.

I was open minded to WFPF until I figured out that they were taking advantage of people like me who were open minded to them.

I am not being close minded, I am simply being logical.

Why should we still be open minded to these companies if they have taken advantage of us time after time?

Beretta

04-04-2009, 06:00 PM

It seems like this is another label that is being put on me for trying to help the parkour community make progress in the RIGHT direction.

1. The type of person who watches MTV regularly and who is attracted to parkour as the show portrays it may not be the same type of person who would be willing to be a dedicated practitioner of REAL parkour.

By stating that there is one "RIGHT" direction for parkour to grow in, or that there is one "REAL" parkour, you are implying that you have the authority to judge for the entire discipline what is right or wrong, real or false. This is an example of "close-minded" thinking.

You yourself disagree with others declaring themselves an authority on parkour:

What gives them the authority to say that anyone is a good teacher? Where does the "credibility" come from? If someone does not teach the way that Dan Edwardes wants people to teach, that means he is not a good teacher?

So, I am asking you to ask yourself the same questions you are asking us to ask of Parkour Generations, the WFPF, UFF and other practitioners. I think every traceur should think long and hard about whether it is appropriate for him to determine what is or isn't the real and right parkour.

My point was that I am as against a group of practitioners defining parkour according to their rules and limitations as I am against a company defining it for me. I think both are ridiculous. Nonetheless, like I've said before, I will practice whether or not any company or group agrees with what I'm doing.

Also, to be clear, I accept that companies will make movies (B13, Casino Royale, Yamakasi), commercials, TV shows (Jump London, the MTV thing), t-shirts, hold classes, etc. Some of them I will like, others I won't, and in the end I will vote with my dollars and or participation. I also won't accuse anyone of destroying parkour for disagreeing with my point of view.

Hillexallen: I still don't see anyone labeling you with epithets. People are questioning your logic and disagreeing with your points, just as you are with others. The criticisms of negativity, etc. have been affixed to your approach or logic or thinking. No one has said "hillexallen is a negative person."

We don't all need to agree to learn from each other, be friends and train together.

2nd Chance

04-04-2009, 08:47 PM

Why should we still be open minded to these companies if they have taken advantage of us time after time?

I fail to see how they are "taking advantage of us." In monetary terms, ($), we choose what to spend on, not them, so that's on us. In terms of their definitions of parkour, I have to defer to Beretta's point; parkour is going to evolve and change over time. Their different opinions on it is just an example.

How else are they taking advantage? While they have opinions that are wildly different than some, they may be similar to others.

Adroit

04-04-2009, 10:42 PM

In terms of their definitions of parkour, I have to differ to Beretta's point; parkour is going to evolve and change over time.

Pretty sure you mean "defer," not "differ" :tongue:

hillexallen

04-06-2009, 12:32 PM

I'll have enough time to post in a little while, but I can't do it right now. Consider this spot <reserved>

hillexallen

04-06-2009, 12:46 PM

we choose what to spend on, not them

You choose, but they control the choices you make!

If advertising could not control your choices, it would not exist! Do you think companies pay 3 millinon dollars for superbowl ads for NOTHING!?

Parkour exists.It is a thing.It has a definition.There are certain things that OBVIOUSLY aren't parkour! Parkour by definition IS NOT an extreme sport! So, if a company makes a game show that makes parkour look like an extreme sport, they are not really making a parkour game show! They are just slapping the name of parkour onto their product so they can make money off of it's "fans", while making us look like extreme athletes.

If you agree that the game show misrepresnts parkour, and you agree that you don't want parkour to be misrepresented, then why are you still going to watch the game show, and support a company that is intentionally misrepresenting YOU?

If you are going to watch the game show, please answer that question or tell me what is wrong about it.

2nd Chance

04-06-2009, 01:42 PM

You choose, but they control the choices you make!

If advertising could not control your choices, it would not exist! Do you think companies pay 3 millinon dollars for superbowl ads for NOTHING!?

Dude, I watch superbowl commercials all the time, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm not going to drink beer, despite the fact that there about 25 beer commercials every hour of the superbowl. They can try, but that doesn't mean they can succeed.

Anyway, you still didn't really answer my question. I don't see any of these companies advertising parkour as an "extreme sport." They are making money off of it, sure, but they aren't tainting the name of the activity. I won't argue the ideology behind it, because it appears that you and me simply have different opinions on whether game shows adhere to parkour or not. However, they aren't making a mockery of the activity itself in the least. Take the game show. It's based on speed, right? Time trials or races, whichever, it will all boil down to speed, to EFFICIENCY, no? Isn't that what parkour IS? I see this only as a way to demonstrate the fruits of a traceur's effort. Is that such a bad thing?

As long as people watching remember to use their brain and have individual thoughts, then there isn't a problem. Problem is, most people are couch potatoes incapable of conscious thought.

Corvan

04-06-2009, 02:21 PM

A long time ago, when i was still in the middle years of school. (middle school) I cannot remember the name of the movie, but i remember seeing these guys climbing walls, jumping them, crawling ledges, etc. And i thought, wow those guys are cool. I see now what Parkour is.

A Company like K-Swiss in my eyes did a good thing. They developed something for a particular group of people to use and enjoy having because it helps us do what we love to do.

Now what other companies do, making Freerunning or Parkour into a compeition, Well it is bound to happen as it has with all physical activities. The best we can do is show what we know parkour is, while companies do what they "want" it to be. We can show our support to communities all around the world of what we know parkour is. We are not judges or final sayers in what truely parkour is, for it is hard to describe. We can simply show what we know.. Commercializtion of Parkour..is ok to a point. Such as a shoe company like K-Swiss and for sure that it works right compared to others. Is better to me then making a rival sport out of it which i do not like and goes against the phiosophy i learned. We strive to better our selfs, not beat the other guy.

Shows like Ninja warrior, is not a parkour show as it was said eariler in this thread. But it is a means of showing what Parkour and or free running can do for you. Physcialy fit is a big one..and probably a good base to start on.

Course this is just my view of all of this but i respect all Traceurs and Free Runners. Just going overboard with this is something i don't want to see happen.

Adroit

04-06-2009, 02:28 PM

From what I've read, I don't believe the show is going to misrepresent parkour. It looks like you or someone in Tadlos Clan posted a note of concern on PKFR's site, and got some good answers from a PKFR Admin, "We won't take on any jobs that put a negative connotation or skewed image on parkour or free running. This TV show had nothing to do with head to head competition or rivalry of any sort." It doesn't sound like it's a competition, which makes the name "Ultimate Parkour Challenge" very deceptive, but even if it does have competitive elements I trust the traceurs involved with the show to represent parkour well.

In short, I don't think we can judge the show until we've learned more about it.

hillexallen

04-06-2009, 03:08 PM

I don't see any of these companies advertising parkour as an "extreme sport."

I don't believe the show is going to misrepresent parkour.

Read this, part of the description of the show, THEN tell me that MTV is not trying to make parkour look like an extreme sport:

Are you a huge “Parkour” fan and want to attend MTV’s Parkour Special “ULTIMATE CHASE” hosted by Todd Richards? As seen in the opening scene in JAMES BOND movie Casino Royal. If you love stunts preformed right in front your eyes and want to be a part of the actual set then this show will blow your mind. YOU CAN NOT BE AFRAID OF HEIGHTS TO APPLY. 2 teams of Professional Parkour stunt guys will complete in competition right in front your eyes!

Do you still think that MTV is not misrepresenting parkour?

Did you, 2nd Chance and Adroit, read the description of the show before telling us that the show does not misrepresent parkour?

The majority of traceurs, including the founders are against competition, so the competitive format of this show also misrepresents our community.

About advertising: By making you think that you are not controlled by advertising, they can control you even more! It seems like you are telling us that advertising doesn't work. Again, if advertising doesn't work, why does it still exist?

I also realized that nobody answered my question about supporting the WFPF and MTV. Will somebody either answer my question or tell me why it should be disregarded?

@Corvan, I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that we should support competition and commercilaization just because we think it is going to happen anyway. BTW, I don't think that either of those things are inevitable.

One last thing

I trust the traceurs involved with the show to represent parkour well.

Unfortunately, the traceurs are not the ones who make the obstacle course, come up with the catch phrases, advertise the show, and shoot and edit the show. Because they can cut out anything they want, the people who produce the show have COMPLETE control over how it represents parkour.

Corndogg

04-06-2009, 03:19 PM

Parkour exists.It is a thing.It has a definition.There are certain things that OBVIOUSLY aren't parkour! Parkour by definition IS NOT an extreme sport! So, if a company makes a game show that makes parkour look like an extreme sport, they are not really making a parkour game show! They are just slapping the name of parkour onto their product so they can make money off of it's "fans", while making us look like extreme athletes.

If you agree that the game show misrepresnts parkour, and you agree that you don't want parkour to be misrepresented, then why are you still going to watch the game show, and support a company that is intentionally misrepresenting YOU?

If you are going to watch the game show, please answer that question or tell me what is wrong about it.

Same story from me. Parkour exists. It is a thing. It has a definition. There are certain things that obviously aren't parkour. So no matter what MTV or mass media or entertainment channels say or misrepresent, does that change parkour? No. Are they misrepresenting me? No, because parkour for me has not changed and I have not. As you've said, it's the traceurs who follow the spirit and philosophy of parkour that control and define it, not the companies, nor the "rogues". So will I watch it as a form of entertainment related to something I love? I would, if I watched TV (I don't watch TV/cable at all :thefinger: only movies). Am I going to spend my time boycotting everyone and everything that misrepresents parkour? No, there will always be someone out there misrepresenting it. Instead, I'm going to spend my time making myself and the community I'm involved with strong and a positive place to learn, so that when newcomers come based on what they've seen on TV and YouTube, instead of a bunch of threads with infighting, endless debates, dont do this vs. do that, this isnt parkour and this is, boycotts etc, they will instead quickly get connected to learn properly and through practicing it, not watching it on TV, they will learn what parkour really is.

Everything still boils down to the same approach and mindset for me:
- I can't control everyone and everything.
- I can only control myself.
- I will do my best to represent parkour properly, and inspire others to do the same from my example.
- I understand that parkour is a guiding philosophy without a strict ruleset, and as such different people will be guided by it differently, and I will respect those differences yet still be bonded together with them by the core spirit of parkour.

Kirill

04-06-2009, 03:26 PM

Dude, I watch superbowl commercials all the time, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm not going to drink beer, despite the fact that there about 25 beer commercials every hour of the superbowl. They can try, but that doesn't mean they can succeed.

Commercials work subconsciously. While watching the Superbowl or other *&#(@, your mind slips into a very passive mode. Also known as Alpha level. IN this mode, your mind is most receptive. Images are directly implemented into the mind without viewer participation- thus the viewer cannot filter the info coming in.

The info in the commercials is absorbed subconsciously into your brain. THe more you watch, the worse this gets.

When you DO go out to drink a beer, you will chose the beer that you have seen most often, because it is familiar to you. A person is known to be afraid of the unknown, so he goes for what's familiar.

Again, all of this happens subconsciously, so you are unaware of it.

sorry for going off-topic-

I support Alex's claims

Kirill

04-06-2009, 03:27 PM

- I can't control everyone and everything.
- I can only control myself.

You can control a lot more than you wish/think you can. :naughty:

Adroit

04-06-2009, 05:08 PM

The info in the commercials is absorbed subconsciously into your brain. THe more you watch, the worse this gets.

I'm taking a class on advertising, and the reverse is true. The more ads you see, the less effective each ad becomes due to an effect called Ad clutter, which causes the brain to shut out or ignore advertisements.

I've now seen a quote saying it does have competition and one that it doesn't, one from MTV and the other from Daniel Arroyo. Either way, I'll take the good with the bad, recognize there will be positives and negatives, and move on. I think that if a bunch of reckless people inspired by MTV to go and try parkour are led to our community we can show them the right way to do things. We'll never have the chance to try and change their ways if they don't try parkour at all.

Corvan

04-06-2009, 05:14 PM

@hillexallen. I can see were you are coming from on this and i agree that if two people are going against each other in compeition, i will not support the compeition against other traceurs, its not what the parkour ive come to learn is about.

I apologize if it seemed i support compeition and Commercialization of parkour.

Beretta

04-06-2009, 05:30 PM

I love competition. Playing tag at the jam yesterday was so much fun! I'm glad I made the choice to participate in that.

hillexallen

04-06-2009, 08:53 PM

I'm taking a class on advertising, and the reverse is true. The more ads you see, the less effective each ad becomes due to an effect called Ad clutter, which causes the brain to shut out or ignore advertisements.

So, you disagreed with one part, but you avoided acknowledging that the rest of what he said is true...does your advertising class agree with the rest of what Kirill just said?

lethalbeef

04-06-2009, 08:57 PM

@hillex: I should have responded earlier; I didn't mean to label you negatively by statement. And it's not an attempt to smear you or anything. But, as I explained in the rest of that post, if you treat the idea of competition, or any new idea that pertains to parkour, the same way as you treat "banging your head against the wall," then I feel like you aren't open to developing those ideas. I didn't mean that you didn't want to help parkour progress in the "right" direction; I meant that it sounds like you didn't want to help parkour progress in EVERY direction. I understand your sentiments, and I support them as they relate to this specific case. This show doesn't sound like it's going to do much to clear up what we feel parkour is. But generalizations are the problem. Staunch anti-competition is fallacious.

And as far as boycotting goes, why do wholesale denial of these things? We can watch, learn, and improve. (But I guess if you don't think we should ever go in the direction of competition, there is no such thing as "improvement")

Also: "avoided acklowledging?" Them's fightin' words.

hillexallen

04-06-2009, 09:32 PM

I found a few things in Corndogg's post that I want to respond to:

no matter what MTV or mass media or entertainment channels say or misrepresent, does that change parkour? No.

It affects parkour by making the public think about parkour in a different way. If people get the idea that parkour is an extreme sport, they will likely have a worse opinion of it which would most likely lead to parkour laws, and disrespect towards traceurs. You are very clever to say that it will not change parkour itself, which is true, but that does not mean that it will not affect the public's perception of parkour, and our ability to practice parkour freely.

Are they misrepresenting me? No.

Actually, the definition of "misrepresent" is "to give a false or misleading representation of usually with an intent to deceive or be unfair" (Merriam-Webster).

MTV is saying that traceurs are practitioners of an extreme sport, so they are telling people that YOU are a practitioner of an extreme sport, because you are a traceur. Because parkour is not an extreme sport they are misrepresenting you. (It is obvious that MTV wants to deceive their audience, just like all companies do.)

boycotting everyone and everything that misrepresents parkour

I do not boycott everyone and everything that misrepresents parkour, if you were implying that. Nearly every TV station that has done a story on parkour has said something that misrepresents parkour, and I don't bother to boycott TV stations. TV stations are doing the best they can to represent parkour and its practitioners. Since their reporters probably don't practice parkour, there is no way they can accurately represent parkour. The problem with the companies, with the exception of Parkour Generations, is that they are INTENTIONALLY misrepresenting parkour so they can make money. That might deserve a boycott, in my humble opinion.

I'm going to spend my time making myself and the community I'm involved with strong and a positive place to learn

I pledge to do the same thing. I would assume, though, that one of the reasons we have a thread called "Commercialization of Parkour" is so that people who want to talk, discuss, or debate things like commercialization can come here and do so, without disturbing people who are trying learn while at jams, and without disturbing people who are trying talk about other things in other threads. I think there is a place for debate in any community, and I don't think that a community can exist without debate.

- I can't control everyone and everything.
- I can only control myself.
- I will do my best to represent parkour properly, and inspire others to do the same from my example.

I agree with #1, and I really appreciate #3. I think that #2 is true, but i also think we should realize that we can AFFECT people around us, even though we may never be able to control them completely. (This comes back to advertising...)

@lethalbeef: Don't worry about it. I now understand what you were trying to say. I don't think that I have should have to support progress in the direction of competition, though. I think competition is an obstacle for parkour to overcome.

hillexallen

04-06-2009, 09:36 PM

I love competition. Playing tag at the jam yesterday was so much fun! I'm glad I made the choice to participate in that.

I don't really think that a game of tag among friends affects our community in the same way that a hyped up, advertised, widely broadcasted, misrepresenting game show does.

Adroit

04-06-2009, 10:09 PM

So, you disagreed with one part, but you avoided acknowledging that the rest of what he said is true...does your advertising class agree with the rest of what Kirill just said?

I only responded to what I knew to be wrong. I've never heard of alpha level, and while I'm highly skeptical of it due to the fact I've never heard about it, I can neither prove nor disprove it.

What I do know is Kirill is on the right track with the beer example. However, you won't buy the beer you've necessarily seen the most of, you'll buy the beer that had commercials which best appealed to your specific emotions. In the end, you're still buying a beer, and the advertisement didn't force you to do it; it just tried to influence which beer you bought.

Beretta

04-06-2009, 11:28 PM

Good and spirited debate as a means for the debaters to get closer to the truth is wonderful. This thread has contained much of that and I'm glad I've read a lot of what's here, and thought about things written within this thread. However, I feel like the argument is continuing well after everyone's had an opportunity to say what they believe and why and ask the same questions of others.

So my question is this: when do we walk away, amicably, in disagreement,
thanking each other for the opportunity to fully exercise our critical thinking capabilities? Or, do we argue until everyone is offended, and lines have been drawn and crossed so many times that forgiveness is necessary, but perhaps unlikely?

Meatlad

04-06-2009, 11:32 PM

You can control a lot more than you wish/think you can. :naughty:

Who is controlling you, Kirill?

hillexallen

04-07-2009, 09:33 AM

Who is controlling you, Kirill?

???

:naughty:

I agree with Kirill that you can influence and possibly control much more than just your own actions.

hillexallen

04-07-2009, 09:36 AM

@beretta: I think it's still a good debate, but we should definitely try to keep it that way.

@Adroit: ok, thanks. :smile:

Meatlad

04-07-2009, 10:15 AM

My question for Kirill comes out of his assumption that if people are out there controlling each other, making people do things and we're all affected, then who/what is controlling his actions?

My point is we're not under the control of anybody. No one forces us to do anything. When someone makes you mad they're not really making you mad. You're reacting to something they did, but it's your choice to react that way. It's your own personal responsibility to determine your own actions and reactions. Something you hear or see might resonate somehow and influence the way you think about things, but short of law enforcement, no one makes anyone do anything.

Corndogg

04-07-2009, 10:18 AM

As Morpheus said "Everything begins with choice."

Beretta

04-07-2009, 12:36 PM

The only thing anyone has to do is die. Everything else is optional, including breathing.

My post above was because I just wanted to make sure everyone was still arguing to get closer to the truth, rather than to prove each other wrong.

Corndogg

04-07-2009, 12:43 PM

I totally choose to breathe. Breathing is sweet. Truth!

Corvan

04-07-2009, 12:53 PM

Can't aruge with that. I love breathing!

Meatlad

04-07-2009, 02:15 PM

I like breathing too but sometimes I enjoy holding my breath. Often when I'm under water or when someone farts.

To the topic though, I think I only choose to be annoyed by commercialization when it influences a law that I disagree with. Which doesn't happen too often. When people unlike me choose to be part of a culture, whether because some stereotype is widely broadcast for the benefit of a company selling something, or some group of "bros" just decides to get into something I'm into, it can be annoying, but that's really my own problem. The solution is me learning to deal with people with different value systems or cultural norms rather than just staying annoyed and wishing they would go away.

hillexallen

04-07-2009, 02:18 PM

First of all, I don't want to talk about breathing etc. If you go look it up on Wikipedia, you will find out about whether you have the choice to breathe or not. (You can't stop yourself from breathing for an extended period of time.)

Let's get back to relevant discussion. Advertising influences you VERY MUCH, whether you choose to be influenced or not!

Again, nobody answered my question: If advertising does not work on YOU, why do companies pay millions of dollars to reach YOU through advertisements? Please SOMEBODY answer that question.

Kirill

04-07-2009, 02:25 PM

Who is controlling you, Kirill?
Many people are controlling me and you. The goverment, for instance. They created a system for us to obey...sometimes called "the post industrial society)

If we dont obey this system, (living off the land and not buying products) we will get punished by not getting recognized by this society. The amount we are worth is measured solely by how much shit we buy.

We can only choose from the choices layed out in front of us.

-now tell me we have supreme control over ourselves

hillexallen

04-07-2009, 02:43 PM

1. If you go look it up on Wikipedia, you will see that breathing is not optional. You cannot kill yourself by controlling your breath.
2. Emotions are also not optional. (I wish I weren't sad when my grandmother died. If I could have controlled my emotions, I would have made myself happy about it. Unfortunately, that's not possible.)
3. You make decisions, but things like advertising influence, and possibly control to some extent, your decisions.

Let's get back to the main question: Should traceurs control parkour, or should companies control parkour? Please answer that.

Corndogg

04-07-2009, 02:46 PM

Maybe someone can bring us back to the main goal of what this thread is about. What are we trying to prove here? That commercialization is bad or good? That we can stop it or not? The method on how to try and stop it?

Maybe let's take hillexallen's statement as truth for now (please correct if wrong) "Advertising does work on all of us." Now what?

If all traceurs boycotted watching the show, would that solve the issue? In my opinion, it wouldn't.

Corndogg

04-07-2009, 02:47 PM

Let's get back to the main question: Should traceurs control parkour, or should companies control parkour? Please answer that.

First define what control is!

Or maybe lay out your entire argument first, instead of trying to get specific, and now disjointed questions answered? We can debate specific questions forever I'm sure, but there's probably a core objective or idea you are trying to drive to right?

Adroit

04-07-2009, 02:55 PM

Again, nobody answered my question: If advertising does not work on YOU, why do companies pay millions of dollars to reach YOU through advertisements? Please SOMEBODY answer that question.

Advertising absolutely works. Name recognition is key; when I'm reaching for my first beer, It's likely that I'll reach for a bud light because I'm familiar with the brand. When I taste it and realize I don't like it, I'm going to go try something else. Advertising can sell you on the first item, but buying it again all depends on your experiences. They pay millions to try and get you to try it once (which is still difficult) and hope that you like it enough to buy it again. Even though advertising influences us we still retain the capability to choose. The only time we don't have the ability to choose is when a company has a monopoly, and those are illegal :cool:

Corndogg

04-07-2009, 03:03 PM

p.s. for the record:

i am against competitions with parkour, in the formats i am currently aware of. but i am open minded to new formats that can still stay true to the spirit of parkour. i don't think these are mutually exclusive.

i am against blatant, exploitative commercialization of parkour. but i don't think that all commercialization is bad.

i think that there will always be ways to learn and practice parkour for free, and that free is best. but as long as there are free options, i don't mind for fee $ options, as long as its not blatantly exploitative. FYI - SFPK is run as a nonprofit, and we are looking into officially establishing SFPK as a nonprofit organization.

so hopefully you dont think im for competition or commercialization. my goal here is to convince people that there are more positive, productive, constructive, collaborative approaches to solving the problem than a boycott, which to me is the end of communication, the closing of your mind, and the absolute last ditch resort to take. i dont think all options have been exhausted yet!

Deejay

04-07-2009, 03:52 PM

Having now spent 2 weeks with Parkour Generations in London and to a lesser degree with Urban Freeflow I think I have a pretty good idea what they are trying to achieve.

I'd be happy to have a chat after a jam with anyone who is interested in discussing the pros and cons of commercialization. I'm not into writing long forum messages... ;-)

Still, the long and sort of it: Hillexallen -- in this case, I unfortunately disagree with you almost 100%.

Not because I have spent time with PK Gen now and therefore is "on their side". I was pro commercialization long before then, because of my education as an economist, my experience in the rotten world of corporate America (and Europe), my involvement in many other sports where commercial and non-commercial interest live successfully side by side, not to mention sheer age where I actually by now somewhat understand how the world works. Less idealistic and more realistic, perhaps.

We may not like it, but SOME LEVEL of commercialization is in our day and age unfortunately the only road to structure, which leads to professionalism and safety, which in turn creates credibility and ultimately gets Parkour better understood and respected.

Feel free to respond, but I will NOT add any more on this subject in writing but as I said, I'm happy to talk real time about it...

I'm, going training now instead!!!

:sfpkvault:

Cheers,
~Ina

Ascent

04-07-2009, 03:55 PM

well stated deejay! im gonna go train too. at least come conditioning in the apartment or something. its raining and i have to do laundry :)

hillexallen

04-07-2009, 05:01 PM

Deejay made some very good points.

Although, I disagree with her that commercialization will lead to more credibility. It sure didn't do that for skateboarding, anyway.

Also, I think that it might be a GOOD thing for parkour to remain unstructured and unprofessional, and I think that safety can be acheived without commercialization, but WITH a healthy and knowledgeable community.

BTW: I have been training today with Kirill. If you don't want to debate the issue, you probably shouldn't post here. If you post

Beretta

04-07-2009, 07:00 PM

It sure didn't do that for skateboarding, anyway.

I disagree. Skateboarding is socially acceptable now. It was not before commercialization. Skaters were seen as destructive, crazy, dirty weirdos, whereas now skaters are seen the same way as soccer players.

I agree with Corndogg, let's please get back to debating the larger issue as a whole. Hillexallen, you repeatedly ask people to answer your questions about specific points, and this is turning into a debate about advertising. Let's talk about commercialization in parkour, please.

Once again, I'm going to state that I think commercialization is less harmful to parkour than the fundamentalist, purist, crusaders within parkour who are campaigning to keep parkour flip-free, money-free and competition-free in such a way as to exclude people and divide the community. A small minority is stating that anyone who doesn't agree with them is not practicing the "real," "true," and "right" parkour. Not only is this divisive, but it also creates a contentious atmosphere in online communities that is inhospitable and may turn away new traceurs and traceuses.

Commercialization, on the other hand, will spread parkour. More people will enjoy the benefits of healthier bodies and minds. Zoo humans may be freed, and in the process, we'll have the opportunity to influence them.

To Kirill and hillexallen, I want to say that I share your frustration with the ill effects of advertising, consumerism, commercialization and economic injustice in our society. In fact I think we have more in common than not. In the end, I just know that I cannot stop the whole thing from happening. Therefore, I feel it is best to concentrate on the positive effects of commercialization and what I can do to strengthen our community.

Corndogg

04-07-2009, 07:36 PM

Having now spent 2 weeks with Parkour Generations in London and to a lesser degree with Urban Freeflow

you tease, spill the beans and tell us about your trip! :fingersx:

2nd Chance

04-07-2009, 09:27 PM

hillexallen

04-08-2009, 10:40 AM

Because they think they can control ME. They can't, but they can try, and they do.

Unfortunately, advertising works on the subconcious part of your mind. Whether you like it or not, you are affected deeply. The more you are aware that you are affected by advertising, the less you are influenced, but if you simply refuse to believe that you are influenced, you won't even notice when your subconcious mind makes choices that are influenced by advertising.

They pay millions of dollars to reach you through advertising because advertising works on you, as well as the rest of us.

hillexallen

04-08-2009, 10:49 AM

Here are some pros and cons of commercialization that I could think of:

Pros:

Wider recognition--> growth of parkour (not credibility, only our behavior can get us credibility, not wide recognition)

traceurs can make money off of parkour

Cons:

Companies have power to change parkour--> misrepresentation of parkour--> wrong kind of ppl get interested in parkour--> bad reputation--> anti-parkour laws, other restrictions

Growth of parkour--> more tresspassing and other bad things--> bad reputation--> anti-parkour laws, other restrictions

"Professional traceurs"--> competitions--> more injuries--> worse reputation--> anti-parkour laws and other restrictions

I had a hard time coming up with pros. Will you guys tell me more pros, so we can put ALL effects of commercialization on a scale, and weight them? I think it would be a good idea if we could look at one picture and see ALL the effects of commercialization, both good and bad.

Meatlad

04-08-2009, 03:05 PM

Good idea, hillexallen!

Pro:
Product development --> something useful is created for us (like better shoes or a park or moveable obstacles)

Someone builds a pay parkour park --> more pk accessibility and hot spots

More classes (indoor or outdoor) --> more accessibility for those who feel unsafe coming to an unstructured jam, or (for indoor) older people more used to exercising in a gym.

Con:
Safety product development --> a large maker of helmets or pads lobbies heavily to create laws for use of helmets/pads just so people will have to buy their product --> less accessibility for common traceur due to associated costs.

...I actually found it harder to come up with real, tangible cons than pros. All pros/cons from my own POV and from what I feel susceptible to or in need of.

Corndogg

04-08-2009, 03:14 PM

Growth of parkour --> could be viewed as both a pro and con. especially if you think of what % of new traceurs will be "good" vs. "bad"

con = more tresspassing and other bad things--> bad reputation--> anti-parkour laws, other restrictions

pro = more traceurs that could help strengthen our rep, support leave no trace campaign, help correct public perceptions etc

Austin

04-08-2009, 03:37 PM

Cons:
As awareness grows, many more places are likely to ban training and other forms of "extreme exercising"

Pros: More people to train with

hillexallen

04-08-2009, 11:40 PM

Skaters were seen as destructive, crazy, dirty weirdos, whereas now skaters are seen the same way as soccer players.

I think that skaters have a bad reputation now, and I know that many people on this forum agree with me, possibly most of them.

I think commercialization is less harmful to parkour than the fundamentalist, purist, crusaders within parkour who are campaigning to keep parkour flip-free, money-free and competition-free in such a way as to exclude people and divide the community. A small minority is stating that anyone who doesn't agree with them is not practicing the "real," "true," and "right" parkour. Not only is this divisive, but it also creates a contentious atmosphere in online communities that is inhospitable and may turn away new traceurs and traceuses.

1. fundamentalist LOL!!! This makes us sound like terrorists...
2. I am not a fundamentalist.
3. I am not a purist.
4. I am not a "crusader".
5. I am not fighting to keep parkour flip-free.
6. I am not fighting to keep parkour money-free.
7. I am not fighting to keep parkour competition-free.
8. I think that ongoing rivalries, a bad reputation for parkour, injuries during competitions, which are all caused by commercialization, will harm parkour more than a campaign to keep parkour free and true.

hillexallen

04-08-2009, 11:45 PM

I also think that there is no proper way to commercialize parkour.

If the contestants in the game show don't want parkour to become competitive, why did they participate in a game show that makes parkour look competitive? I can only think of one reason: $$$$$

I really don't like how the companies are starting to sign athletes either, but my opinion might be different if I were one of the ones getting signed. Again, $$$$$

I still don't think that any of this is about helping parkour, I think it's only about $$$$$

$$$$$ corrupts people and we definitely don't need corruption in parkour.

We don't need more $$$$$ in parkour in my opinion.

Austin

04-09-2009, 09:43 AM

Or they did it to have fun? If you had a chance to train and be a part of a show with the best of the best, you'd do it. Especially if it meant getting your time off of work / school paid for. I think it'll be a good thing when people have sponsorships and can travel around the world teaching and training, getting more people involved, scouting spots nonstop, etc.

hillexallen

04-10-2009, 10:58 PM

That's why it's so hard to stop the companies!

They make competing so hard to resist!!!

You are absolutely right that I would probably compete if I had the same opportunity!

hillexallen

04-10-2009, 11:20 PM

This is one of the agreements of the founding document of PKNA:

Parkour has a specific mindset and intention, a specific definition, and what falls outside of these specifics cannot be Parkour.

There is a lot of talk about being open minded, but I fully agree with this statement. What do you guys think? It is definitely relevant. If parkour is not competitive, then companies are misrepresenting parkour. If parkour is not an extreme sport, the companies are misrepresenting parkour.

Corndogg

04-10-2009, 11:29 PM

This is one of the agreements of the founding document of PKNA:

"Parkour has a specific mindset and intention, a specific definition, and what falls outside of these specifics cannot be Parkour."

There is a lot of talk about being open minded, but I fully agree with this statement. What do you guys think? It is definitely relevant. If parkour is not competitive, then companies are misrepresenting parkour. If parkour is not an extreme sport, the companies are misrepresenting parkour.

i can't really agree with a statement that refers to a definition, if i can't read the definition :fingersx:

i like what they say on overflux (http://www.sfparkour.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1888&highlight=importance+tricking) - "Is the game of parkour so advanced that every obstacle is known?"

Beretta

04-10-2009, 11:29 PM

I think that skaters have a bad reputation now, and I know that many people on this forum agree with me, possibly most of them.

1. fundamentalist LOL!!! This makes us sound like terrorists...
2. I am not a fundamentalist.
3. I am not a purist.
4. I am not a "crusader".
5. I am not fighting to keep parkour flip-free.
6. I am not fighting to keep parkour money-free.
7. I am not fighting to keep parkour competition-free.
8. I think that ongoing rivalries, a bad reputation for parkour, injuries during competitions, which are all caused by commercialization, will harm parkour more than a campaign to keep parkour free and true.

That's exactly why I used the term 'fundamentalist,' to draw a parallel between hard-line thinking in religion and what I see happening in parkour.

If you are not fighting to keep parkour competition-free, then why was there a link in your sig that said "WE CONTROL OUR DISCIPLINE. FIGHT COMMERCIALIZATION HERE! "?

Once again, I'm going to state that I think commercialization is less harmful to parkour than the fundamentalist, purist, crusaders within parkour who are campaigning to keep parkour flip-free, money-free and competition-free in such a way as to exclude people and divide the community. A small minority is stating that anyone who doesn't agree with them is not practicing the "real," "true," and "right" parkour. Not only is this divisive, but it also creates a contentious atmosphere in online communities that is inhospitable and may turn away new traceurs and traceuses.

Also, while you defended yourself against adjectives that I used to describe a larger movement within parkour, not you specifically, you did not address my criticisms of this movement against competition and commercialization. Specifically, here they are enumerated:

1) It's not the opinions of traceurs against competition and commercialization that I find onerous, it is their tactics. It is the fact that they are steering online discussions into ever escalating debates and forcing traceurs to choose sides. Often there is a lack of tolerance for opinions that are seen as less than 100% anti-competition and anti-commercialization. Even when people say "we should see this show before we judge it," they are condemned. Not only is this divisive, but it ignores the fact that sometimes it takes awhile to gather enough information and understanding to form an opinion on such complex issues.

2) When a person says "the right," "the real" or "true" parkour, it implies that those who train or practice differently practice a wrong parkour. This is also divisive. I don't want anyone to control the definition of parkour, not APK, not SFPK, not PK Gens, UFF, Nike, 5.10, MTV, PKNA or BAPK. It is nearly indefinable and I tend to give more respect to a person who shrugs and rolls their eyes at first when asked "What is parkour?" than someone who immediately has a quick and ready answer.

3) This movement is attempting to focus the attention of the parkour community towards problems, many of which are only predicted problems and have not yet materialized, rather than solutions.

I'd be interested to see responses to these critiques from all sides.

BENNY

04-11-2009, 12:01 AM

instead of arguing useless semantics, lets do this: leave parkour as it, but with Rage Froobling, we can commercialize the crap outta it, plus rage froobling is naturally competative sport!

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 01:30 AM

1) It's not the opinions of traceurs against competition and commercialization that I find onerous, it is their tactics. It is the fact that they are steering online discussions into ever escalating debates and forcing traceurs to choose sides. Often there is a lack of tolerance for opinions that are seen as less than 100% anti-competition and anti-commercialization. Even when people say "we should see this show before we judge it," they are condemned. Not only is this divisive, but it ignores the fact that sometimes it takes awhile to gather enough information and understanding to form an opinion on such complex issues.

2) When a person says "the right," "the real" or "true" parkour, it implies that those who train or practice differently practice a wrong parkour. This is also divisive. I don't want anyone to control the definition of parkour, not APK, not SFPK, not PK Gens, UFF, Nike, 5.10, MTV, PKNA or BAPK. It is nearly indefinable and I tend to give more respect to a person who shrugs and rolls their eyes at first when asked "What is parkour?" than someone who immediately has a quick and ready answer.

3) This movement is attempting to focus the attention of the parkour community towards problems, many of which are only predicted problems and have not yet materialized, rather than solutions.

1. I see what you mean. however I tolerate opinions that are less than 100% anti-competition and anti-commercialization. I also think that it IS soon enough to form an opinion on parkour companies in general, probably including the WFPF. Based on their mission statement, posts on the websites, and their actions, we can see pretty clearly what they are trying to do. Again, I think the effects of commercialization would be MUCH worse than the effects of an anti-commercialization campaign. I am not trying to be divisive, I tolerate all opinions, and I am not forcing people to choose sides.

2. Parkour is not "whatever you want it to be". It has a definition. Certain things fall within the definition, and certain things do not. A competitive game show that makes parkour look like an extreme sport does not fall within the definition. There is no right or wrong parkour. There are just two categories: things that are parkour, and things that are not parkour. So, your style of parkour can differ from other people's, as long as you are still practicing parkour. This is my opinion. Do others agree?

3. First of all, the problems have materialized. There are competitions. Companies are misrepresenting parkour. People are beginning to think of parkour as an extreme sport. These are all happening as we speak.

Secondly, we are focusing on what the problems are, and how to solve them. The problem and the solution cannot exist without each other. if we don't agree on what the problem is, we can't solve it. If we don't know how to solve it, we will never make progress. In case you were wondering what I think everyone should do: a. Don't watch game shows that misrepresent parkour. b. Don't but from UFF, Pk Gen, and WFPF. c. Make sure that beginners know what parkour is. d. Go and teach a class and get some people off to a good start. e. if you see a misleading video about parkour, make a comment that corrects the mistake. There are many more things!

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 01:33 AM

If you are not fighting to keep parkour competition-free, then why was there a link in your sig that said "WE CONTROL OUR DISCIPLINE. FIGHT COMMERCIALIZATION HERE! "?

Because I think that traceurs should have the power to promote, advertise, portray, represent, grow, expand, practice, and teach parkour the way they want to, not the way a company wants them to. Just for a minute, forget about if the companies are doing anything good or bad. Even if they were doing great things, we should have the power to control parkour, not companies.

Can anyone here agree with me on that?

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 02:01 AM

I also thought this was a good summary of my views:

1. We don't believe in elites.
We don't believe in any form of selection among practitioners.
We don't believe in the necessity of any form of hierarchy of performance among practitioners.
We believe to be "the best" doesn't mean anything in parkour, because winning or losing don't mean anything in parkour philosophy.
We do not accept such a drive as part of the parkour philosophy.

Instead, we believe the drive to train should always and only come from within.
We strive to be stronger for ourselves and others, not against people, but with and for others.
Therefore, we reject and disregard any form of rivalry between practitioners.
Instead, we value mutual respect and solidarity in making progress as individuals and as a community.

2. We believe it stands against the philosophy of parkour to compete to win or earn anything that is not part of parkour values, such as medals, prizes, trophies, money, fame, recognition, or glory.
Same goes about showing off for a crowd.

Instead, we look for priceless and beneficial outcomes to our actions.
We also look for benefits we all can share.
We are givers, not takers.

3. Competition encourages the unready to sacrifice their health for early victories, or to reach a ranking that has no true meaning.
It forces elite competitors to constantly and repeatedly endanger their most precious good, health, because of obsession and obligation of victory, and whatever is at stake as a direct consequence of it, including money, rank or status, pride, and also professional or sponsoring contracts and profitable commercial deals.
It leads competitive practitioners to unbalance their training and focus only on the specific skills needed to win, leading to chronic injuries.
Despite official denials, doping is most of the time involved in every level of competition, that money is involved or not.
We believe the physical consequences of competing at high level goes against the philosophy of parkour which emphasizes on moderation and the necessity of enduring.

Instead, parkour is a humble, patient and lifelong discipline, and the human body requires incremental conditioning to ensure its resistance and longevity.
Moderation is a truly important value of parkour and an indispensable quality in order to preserve oneself and for the body to endure.
Therefore, we reject whatever goes against moderation and that impairs the body.

4. Parkour doesn't belong to corporations, sponsors, medias, and people sitting at home to watch.
We believe we must not accept activities and plans that are abusively called parkour, that misuse its name and hijack its image to draw public and medias attention to something that is NOT parkour, despite the resistance of the majority of the community against such intentions.

Instead, we affirm parkour is a non-competitive discipline that belong to all practitioners, to the local communities, to the teams and friends, and to the human race as a whole.
We believe we must stand together against ambitions that do not reflect the original philosophy of parkour and that are disrespectful to the parkour philosophy and the parkour community.

Competition is not inevitable - it is just another obstacle! Support original parkour, keep our discipline free!

Beretta

04-11-2009, 02:55 AM

instead of arguing useless semantics, lets do this: leave parkour as it, but with Rage Froobling, we can commercialize the crap outta it, plus rage froobling is naturally competative sport!

Lulz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You're a genius. Rage froobling forever!

lethalbeef

04-11-2009, 08:25 AM

The idea that it is even possible to break down parkour into certain things that fit into its repertoire or something like that is already flawed, in my opinion. Obviously it doesn't make any sense to be able to wiggle a finger and call it parkour, but it also doesn't make any sense to limit it by implying that there is an unchangeable definition, and regardless of whether that's what you really mean when you talk about that vague, enigmatic, set definition of parkour.

I don't think it's very effective to say much more than that parkour is an activity, community, and way of life built around an idea of natural movement and creating paths. Or something like that. Even if you say that people can have "different styles," unless the framework is open and free to addition, there's only so many combinations you can have.

Furthermore, this change happens because of the community. I find it a little contradictory that it matters so much what non-traceurs think about parkour when so much emphasis is put on the fact that change is completely under our control.

Corndogg

04-11-2009, 09:09 AM

2. Parkour is not "whatever you want it to be". It has a definition.

please reference the definition :fingersx:

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 09:30 AM

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 09:36 AM

I don't think it's very effective to say much more than that parkour is an activity, community, and way of life built around an idea of natural movement and creating paths.

David Belle said that parkour is a discipline. Parkour does not really refer to a group of people or a way of life. Of course you can say "the parkour community" or "the parkour lifestyle", but if you just say "parkour", you are talking about the physical discipline. This is my opinion, correct me if I'm wrong.

Corndogg

04-11-2009, 10:00 AM

We should all be able to agree that parkour is a physical discipline that focuses on getting from one place to another place as quickly, efficiently, ad safely as possible using only the abilities of the Human body. This is a pretty standard definition that everyone can agree on. (David Belle's quote as to what parkour is is posted on the main page. I think his opinion should be paid attention to, because he founded parkour.)

I would also argue that parkour is, by definition, non-competitive, but that's a different story...

Anything that is not a physical discipline is not parkour, if parkour is ONLY a physical discipline, which it is. Any sort of extreme sport is not parkour. Anything that cannot be used to get somewhere quickly, efficiently, and safely is not parkour. Anything that does not primarily use the Human body is not parkour. These are all facts.

To my point, there is no black and white definition other than maybe the one or two lines DB has said. Anything else is someones interpretation! Even the statement on the front page is a paraphrase of the many variations out there. In his definition, you may infer it doesn't include competition, but I may infer it doesn't include wearing black so thus now I'll say if you wear black you're not doing parkour? It doesn't strictly follow, and anything you try and argue is part of that definition is just that - an argument - it doesn't make it part of the definition. It's a guiding philosophy, a vision, so instead of a definition its more "are you upholding the spirit of parkour"? (Check out the latest review of his book) So in this sense, while in general I'm against competition, I do believe you can still uphold the spirit of parkour in a properly constructed competition.

I think parkour is both a physical and mental discipline. It is not ONLY physical, nor is it not ONLY mental.

I think people are looking for a strict definition, so things can be clearly defined as parkour vs. not parkour, and I don't think that's the right way to approach it. Parkour is not about creating boundaries or obstacles.

Ascent

04-11-2009, 10:31 AM

you guys are all so smart, this is some great reading

Meatlad

04-11-2009, 10:46 AM

Let's rewind a bit, and look at the pros and cons of commercialization. Each pro and con will have a different weight depending on your subjective viewpoint. Look at these and make up your own mind whether commercialization is good or bad. Notice that "isn't specified in the definition of parkour" is not on the "con" list.

Pros:

Wider recognition--> growth of parkour (not credibility, only our behavior can get us credibility, not wide recognition)

traceurs can make money off of parkour

Product development --> something useful is created for us (like better shoes or a park or moveable obstacles)

Someone builds a pay parkour park --> more pk accessibility and hot spots

More classes (indoor or outdoor) --> more accessibility for those who feel unsafe coming to an unstructured jam, or (for indoor) older people more used to exercising in a gym.

Growth of parkour --> more traceurs that could help strengthen our rep, support leave no trace campaign, help correct public perceptions etc

Cons:

Companies have power to change parkour--> misrepresentation of parkour--> wrong kind of ppl get interested in parkour--> bad reputation--> anti-parkour laws, other restrictions

Growth of parkour--> more tresspassing and other bad things--> bad reputation--> anti-parkour laws, other restrictions

"Professional traceurs"--> competitions--> more injuries--> worse reputation--> anti-parkour laws and other restrictions

Safety product development --> a large maker of helmets or pads lobbies heavily to create laws for use of helmets/pads just so people will have to buy their product --> less accessibility for common traceur due to associated costs.

Growth of parkour --> more tresspassing and other bad things--> bad reputation--> anti-parkour laws, other restrictions

Henceforth I shall call myself a rage froobler.

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 11:14 AM

Wow, thanks for typing that up, meatlad! Let's continue to add to the list if we can think of more things!

I understand that there is no "black and white" definition for parkour, but there are things that definitely are parkour, and things that are definitely not parkour. Parkour is obviously not an extreme sport, and all extreme sports are obviously not parkour. MTV is definitely portraying parkour as an extreme sport, so they are definitely misrepresenting parkour. Can we agree on that?

It is a very complicated problem. I agree with you on that. The solution will have to be complicated I think. But before we think about the solution, we need to identify the problems, if there are any.

Beretta

04-11-2009, 01:22 PM

MTV is definitely portraying parkour as an extreme sport, so they are definitely misrepresenting parkour. Can we agree on that?

There is no way we can make any factual or accurate conclusions about MTV's portrayal of parkour two weeks before the airing of the show.

Beretta

04-11-2009, 01:29 PM

I would also argue that parkour is, by definition, non-competitive, but that's a different story...

If you include "with the intent to escape or reach another person," as is often done, even by David Belle, then it is easily argued that parkour is inherently competitive by definition.

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 03:30 PM

There is no way we can make any factual or accurate conclusions about MTV's portrayal of parkour two weeks before the airing of the show.

Have you read the description of the show? It advertised parkour as an extreme sport. You can also tell just by the name...

Well, the show will air soon enough. We will see whether it misrepresents parkour or not, but the description and the name have already misrepresented us.

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 03:34 PM

If you include "with the intent to escape or reach another person," as is often done, even by David Belle, then it is easily argued that parkour is inherently competitive by definition.

I think that wouldn't be "escape and reach another person", but rather "escape and reach". That's what I've hear at least. You can use parkour to reach a person who needs help, or reaching a safe place in an emergency. You can use it to run away, but there is huge difference between competing with someone to save your life, and competing with someone for a prize or glory or pride or money.

I definitely don't think that parkour is competitive because it CAN be used to compete against an attacker in an emergency.

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 03:36 PM

I've never actually heard of David saying that. Do you have the video or text?

Beretta

04-11-2009, 04:13 PM

There are many definitions of competition. Parkour to escape or reach (which implies another organism, though, you're right not necessarily human) includes competition in the sense of this definition from dictionary.com:

Ecology The simultaneous demand by two or more organisms for limited environmental resources, such as nutrients, living space, or light.

In this sense a human using parkour to escape or reach in a life or death situation is in competition for resources.

I'm pretty sure I've heard David Belle say that, he's big on the militarized definitions of parkour which fits with the 'escape or reach' concept. Off the top of my head I can't recall a specific source, but I'll post it if I find one.

As far as the 'extreme sport' aspect, I think many other things the media categorizes as extreme sports would be described as a lifestyle by dedicated practitioners. Inevitably the media watches people surfing forty foot waves at Maverick's and says "that's extreme." However, me barely standing on a board on a three foot wave at Doran Beach, probably not so extreme to most people. In the end the spiritual experience of riding the ocean thanks to the energy of the moon and wind, and the connected feeling produced is probably more similar than dissimilar between myself and the Maverick's surfer. The Maverick's surfer probably doesn't see himself as extreme, but to most people he is. Also, if you graph the Earth's population by surfing habits, the very few points on the graph representing big wave (15 foot and larger) surfers, would represent one extreme on the graph.

Whether a sport is extreme or not is more a question of perspective than reality or the experience of the individual. Lots of people have described traceurs to me as crazy based on watching videos. On Facebook I often get responses like this one from an old high school classmate to PK links I post:

So do you really do that shit...... That is nuts brother!

To the rest of the world our behavior is extreme. It is only once we engage in dialogue that we have a chance to let people know what parkour is to us. And in the sense of a graph of human behavior, diligent training in difficult physical disciplines would be one extreme, outside the clusters of the most common human behavior.

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 04:21 PM

So, can you agree with me that the WFWF is misrepresenting parkour?

lethalbeef

04-11-2009, 06:53 PM

Kirill

04-11-2009, 08:07 PM

Have you read the description of the show? It advertised parkour as an extreme sport. You can also tell just by the name...

Well, the show will air soon enough. We will see whether it misrepresents parkour or not, but the description and the name have already misrepresented us.
agreed

The point of parkour, is to become strong to help others...thats what the founders said

I really really really dont think that commercials and competitions are a part of that ;)

hillexallen

04-11-2009, 10:41 PM

What? No, read deeper, hillex. He's saying that from different perspectives, people understand things differently. The idea of "extreme" is relative to one's own abilities and perspective. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I think the point was that calling something extreme doesn't make it so.

However, I do agree with you that those commercials seem to misrepresent parkour. But commercials are meant to advertise to give something an opportunity to succeed. Obviously since we get direct contact from the people in the community who are participating in the show, we'll know about it. But what about everyone else? They need to find some way to attract attention so that it's not just traceurs watching. It could very well be better than we expect, and I hope I will see whether the show itself misrepresents me, that's why I'm not boycotting it.

Finally, I do respect David Belle but I don't take every word of his as holy truth. Just because he says parkour is something, it doesn't mean it's necessarily the way I should do it. He is just one very influential voice. If we're to believe that parkour can be shaped and controlled in any way by us as a community, we have to believe that we all have a voice in defining what parkour is - if not for everyone else, at least for ourselves to some extent. When I practice flow, there's hardly any efficiency in the sense of speed or urgency, but according to that definition I wouldn't be doing parkour. Well, I'm sorry, but I'm really not going to let someone else tell me that. More generally, training isn't efficient at all, but we do it. and in all honesty, competitions are probably closer to really forcing efficiency into movement than the way we train.

Sure, I agree that MTV is using a misleading line to advertise, and I hope that that's now how it's really going to turn out. However, if we're even still talking about boycotting at all, I'm with Corndogg: it's not a solution. Ignoring anything just makes you ignorant.

Thanks for your thoughts.

I agree that everything is relative, and that people have different perspectives on what "extreme" is. However, I think it is blatantly obvious that MTV is portraying parkour as an extreme sport. After all, "ultimate" is a synonym for "extreme".

Thanks for agreeing that MTV is misrepresenting parkour SO FAR. :wink: lol

I agree with you about David. A famous Japanese proverb says that "even monkeys fall from trees", so David Belle is definitely not perfect. However, he is the founder, so I think that his comments should be deeply considered and respected.

I think that there is a difference between boycotting something and ignoring it. I acknowledge that the show exists, and I am boycotting it for two reasons: a. If more people join in, it might have an effect. b. I can't bring myself to support a company that misrepresents parkour.

If I wanted to ignore the program, I would not even be in this discussion, I would be off doing something else and pretending that MTV doesn't exist. But, I care about parkour and I don't want to see companies misrepresent it, so I am trying to do something about the problem.

I really like lethal's opinions, though. :biggthumpup:

hillexallen

04-12-2009, 09:28 AM

The point of parkour, is to become strong to help others...thats what the founders said

(and what people taught us from day one)

Meatlad

04-12-2009, 10:27 AM

I don't think there's much of a point to parkour, it's just a way of overcoming obstacles. It's just a tool. Everything else, whether it's to help people or compete, is subjective to the experience of the traceur.

I'm hesitant to agree to some of those things you're asking if we can agree on, hillexallen, because many require a judgment of another person or organization, and I'm really really hesitant to do that.

I'm a lot more comfortable sticking with finding pros and cons and figuring out how each impacts things, then finding a way to either increase or decrease the impact.

BENNY

04-12-2009, 02:33 PM

lol this is funny, like if parkour were a religion, david belle would be its messeiah and prophet, his words are the commandments and his book would be the parkour bible. now people are doing all kinds of different interpretations of his words. parkour started off as just one thing but is spliting into different sects. lol when ever there is something, theres always gonan be derivitives form it.

why do need these labels for parkour and freerunning and stuff? no matter wut you call it, the skills you use will still be parkour, even with variations.

i see parkour as an important skills set, not a life style or anything u need to obsess over.

true its a discipline like how martial arts are disciplines, i dont dont feel that too much focus should be put into "living parkour", unless ur gonna get paid for it lol.

hillexallen

04-15-2009, 11:33 AM

I don't think there's much of a point to parkour, it's just a way of overcoming obstacles.

Is this a joke? I can explain the point of parkour to you if you like, but I hope I don't have to.

I'm hesitant to agree to some of those things you're asking if we can agree on, hillexallen, because many require a judgment of another person or organization, and I'm really really hesitant to do that.

What do you mean by judgement? Every time you answer a question that has to do with your opinion, you are making a judgement. I think that if you don't want to answer questions about your opinion, you shouldn't take part in a debate. I think I know what you mean by "judgement", though. You probably mean "final decision".

In that case, none of these questions require you to make a final decision about any person, company, or other entity:

1. Do you think that traceurs should have the power to grow, teach, and promote parkour in the way they want to, or do you think that companies should have the power to grow, teach, and promote parkour in the way they want to. If you think it should be a mix of both companies and traceurs, how much power should each group have? 10%-90%? 50%-50%? 70%-30%?

2. Do you think that Urban Freeflow has misrepresented the majority of traceurs? Have they misrepresented you at all?

3. So far, have MTV and the WFPF misrepresented the majority of traceurs? Have they misrepresented you?

4. Do you think that there is more than one acceptable way to teach parkour? Do you think that Parkour Generations should have the exclusive power to decide what is acceptable in terms of teaching, and to give out certifications?

My answers:

1. I think that companies should have very limited influence in the world of parkour. Companies will change parkour in a way that allows them to make money, while traceurs will change parkour in a way that will allow them to practice freely, teach the way they want to, and preserve the "parkour philosophy".

2. I think that Urban Freeflow has misrepresented the majority of traceurs, including the founders. They have also misrepresented me. I don't believe in competitng for a prize, which they have promoted. I do not believe in making parkour look like an extreme sport, which they have promoted.

3. I think that so far MTV and the WFPF have misrepresented the majority of traceurs, including the founders. They have definitely misrepresented me. They, just like Urban Freeflow, have promoted competing for prizes and making parkour look like an extreme sport, which it is not.

4. I think that there are many different acceptable ways to teach parkour. I don't think that Parkour Generations should be able to decide what is acceptable in terms of teaching, that should be left to a larger and more diverse group of traceurs if it is necessary at all.

What do you think?

Meatlad

04-15-2009, 05:19 PM

To address a little bit:

Do I really think there's no point to parkour? Absolutely. Parkour is a method, a tool. A way to get over obstacles. That's about as much of a point as we can all agree on I think. A hammer is used to hit things, but whether that's to hit a nail with the purpose being to build a house, or to break something or threaten someone, the purpose isn't built into the object, it's is brought by the user. Same with parkour. Whether it's used to catch a bus, run from a cop or just to amuse oneself, it's still parkour. One might frown on a traceur's use of it (catch a bus - haha) of course, but that's a judgment subjective to the eye of the beholder. We tend to search for greater meaning in things, but when we find it it's usually relevant to our own wants or needs. Might be shared needs, might not. No less valid either way, but it's not about the tool, it's about the human.

And what I mean by judgment is basically saying something or someone is "good" or "bad" or some variation. I don't believe in good or bad. I believe in cause and effect, and everything is subjective. This is an argument I always have with my religious friends. Is there a higher morality independent of humanity? I say no. Most of us can agree on one or two things, but it's only "right" because we have a quorum.

I think you and I agree on some effects of commercialization, but I can't boil it down to good or bad. Some effects I will find bad, some will be "good" by someone else's standard. So who's standard is right? Well mine of course! No, not really. I just have a certain point of view and can really only speak to that. Do I dislike things? Hell yeah. I'm trying to not call things I dislike "bad". And when I like something, I try to keep in mind it's bound to piss someone else off. Rather I'm trying (work in progress) to make a habit of saying "When I encounter X, I feel Y." Is it X's fault I feel Y? Nope. Evidenced by the fact that other people just don't feel Y when they encounter X.

So then I say, well, how does X really affect me? Or can I solve Y by figuring out what's going on in my own life to make me react that way to X? If X is a rabid dog chasing me into a closed alley, I've got to engage with the dog, but even still, I'm not going to say the dog is "bad", only that it threatens to harm me and I may need to harm it. Which is not a judgment the way I use the word. Dog won't like it, but that's it's problem.

And to PK Gens and UFF - I really don't know much beyond the gossip about UFF and a couple of their media appearances. Haven't felt misrepresented so far, but I recognize that you do. I don't think they feel it's their job to represent you, but if you can convince them it's worth their while somehow (definitely possible) to do something where you'll feel represented when you see it, then you may effect some change. To just tap them on the shoulder and call them "bad" somehow ("misrepresenting me" is a light judgment, but one nonetheless), then they'll just feel attacked. You're unlikely to affect any behavioral change when someone feels that way, whether you're right or not.

So what this boils down to for me is "what can we do help Alex (and others) feel represented, and feel safe with the idea of commercialization?" To be honest I'm not sure it's in my/anyone's power. And if you can't be OK with commercialization, then what? That's not a rhetorical question by the way. I'm not willing to stop anyone from doing anything yet, and I actually like what PK Gens is doing (because I do feel secure in the idea that I can continue to train and teach affectively my way, and it might enable something useful in England). Why this post then? Dunno. Maybe to just trying to be understood I suppose.

Ascent

04-15-2009, 05:30 PM

X+Y= meatlad and ascent:naughty::tongue:

hillexallen

04-15-2009, 07:16 PM

And what I mean by judgment is basically saying something or someone is "good" or "bad" or some variation. I don't believe in good or bad.

did any of my questions ask you to say that something is good or bad

i will post more later, consider this reserved.

hillexallen

04-16-2009, 09:42 AM

First of all, parkour DOES have a pupose. As I said, parkour has a definition. No matter what, the point of parkour is to become strong, and to be able to overcome obstacles quickly, efficiently, and safely. Anything that does not accomplish that is not parkour. so, the point of parkour is to become strong, and to be able to overcome obstacles quickly, efficiently, and safely. That cannot be changed. (Remember, "purpose" is a synonym for "point".)

Secondly, none of my questions asked you to say that anything is good or bad. I do believe that there are good things and bad things. After all, we wouldn't have the words "good" and "bad" if they didn't describe anything.

So, if the majority of traceurs, including the founders, believe that competition is bad for parkour, and that parkour is not an extreme sport, we should not let the companies portray it as such. Do you follow?

Thridly, all of the parkour companies represent YOU. You may not have voted for your congressman, but he still represents YOU. When the companies portray traceurs as practitioners of an extreme sport, they portray YOU as the practitioner of an extreme sport, because you are a traceur. I don't WANT to be represented by them either, but I AM.

I don't think the way to solve this is to disown the comapnies, because they still represent you in the eyes of the public.

DaveS

04-17-2009, 03:43 PM

If you'll forgive me jumping into the middle of a conversation, I'd like to add that more specifically, the goal of parkour is to overcome all obstacles, to get past everything that is in your way.

If it helps to think of it another way, use this; 'The philosophy of parkour is that all obstacles can be overcome.'

Yes, parkour has a method, but it also has a goal, a philosophy.

hillexallen

04-17-2009, 07:55 PM

Yes, parkour has a method, but it also has a goal, a philosophy.

Thank you ;) This is what I am trying to say.

hillexallen

04-19-2009, 02:44 PM

best in the world

We don't believe in the necessity of any form of hierarchy of performance among practitioners.
We believe to be "the best" doesn't mean anything in parkour, because winning or losing don't mean anything in parkour philosophy.
We do not accept such a drive as part of the parkour philosophy.

:wink:

Meatlad

04-19-2009, 07:33 PM

It seems to me that parkour is a method for achieving some goal involving moving forward. Whether there's a method inside a method isn't something I feel like getting into. :smile:

hillexallen, I can't figure out what your goal is with those random quotes, other than to point out that I may disagree with the people in the second quote? When you quote me in the future, please provide context and say why you're quoting me. Especially as that's a few words out of a sentence it could mean absolutely anything.

I think I've said some of the people around here are among the best in the world, and I believe that. Traceurs like Victor and Brian come to mind immediately, as I was at a jam with both today and it occurred to me again this afternoon. Victor trains as hard as any person can. He is very into a natural way of doing parkour - silently, stealthily, often barefoot and in nature and with very specific goals of reaching, chasing or escaping something in particular. The guy is totally into it, as much as any person can be. He reaches his goals. I really really admire that. Brian has a drive to perfect what he does and also loves doing what he does. He too sets and achieves goals. One competes, one doesn't, but I feel the term "best" is appropriate for both, and many others around here.

At the same time, "best" is absolutely a judgment word, which I did say I'm working on not using as much, so I'll just say now (I don't know the context the "best" quote was in so I'm not revising it per se), to say I admire the traceurs I know and train with as much as anyone in the world. Being humble enough to recognize one's own opinion as such and not universally agreed upon is a constant struggle. A very parkourian one though and I'm up for the challenge!

I'm retiring my jersey from this thread now because I'm not getting anything from it anymore. I stopped after the useful list of subjective pros and cons of commercialization. I'm sore, sunburned and blissed out from training all weekend, and that feeling clarifies for me that I'm in this to do and to find new ways of doing parkour, not to dissect issues on the forum to this degree without positive result. It's a matter of proportionality, and this thread has outgrown its allotted room in my parkour time.

Peace out.

(edit: OK, found it, I said the people on the MTV show are among the best in the world. So it's not about the traceurs around here. Oh well, it's true by my criteria. I said "It's cool to see people do what they love and give 100%. And when they're the among best in the world, well, it often is pretty exciting." Considering it was about people giving 100% and I said "among" and "often", it seems like a very fair, innocuous statement to me.)

hillexallen

04-19-2009, 10:30 PM

ok ;)

just wanted to point out that a lot of people, because of these competitions, are getting the idea that the people who are competing in them are "the best in the world" even though "best" and "better" don't mean anything to practitioners whose goal is to better themselves, as TK17 and Herbertiste pointed out.

I think that this is another false idea that the game show is giving its viewers. I'm also not implying that the people who appear on the show are not very skilled and dedicated. they are. ;)

hillexallen

05-04-2009, 08:04 PM

THIS JUST IN!!!

Source: MTV press release ([URL="http://baparkour.ning.com/group/traceursfightingcommercialization)

MTV brings the world’s fastest growing extreme sport to American audiences for the first time with the Ultimate Parkour Challenge. The essence of Parkour is a sport with virtually no limits. Athletes run as efficiently as possible from point “A” to point “B” but unlike a track and field race, Parkour is performed on any and every environment. Walls, cars, stairs, railings, rooftops and ten-foot gaps between five-story buildings, force runners to leap, roll, climb, vault and fly, using the obstacles in their way to increase speed.

MTV’s Ultimate Parkour Challenge captures the essence of the Parkour movement with a new special event sports competition that will thrill audiences as eight of the World’s best Parkour athletes defy gravity, showcasing seemingly superhuman skills in an easy to understand competitive format. Three rounds of competition will ultimately crown one winner with $10,000 and title of the Ultimate Parkour Champion. The show is produced in association with the WFPF, World Freerunning & Parkour Federation.

Some things I want to point out:

MTV brings the world’s fastest growing extreme sport to American audiences for the first time with the Ultimate Parkour Challenge.

MTV is INTENTIONALLY portraying parkour as an EXTREME SPORT.

Parkour athletes defy gravity, showcasing seemingly superhuman skills in an easy to understand competitive format.

MTV is INTENTIONALLY portraying parkour as a COMPETITIVE EXTREME SPORT.

World’s best Parkour athletes

Three rounds of competition will ultimately crown one winner with $10,000 and title of the Ultimate Parkour Champion.

MTV and the WFPF are INTENTIONALLY creating a hierarchy in parkour.

By now it is blatantly obvious that both MTV and the WFPF are intentionally misrepresenting parkour through this game show. I wonder why they would want to do that...

Beretta

05-04-2009, 08:14 PM

[B][SIZE="4"][COLOR="Red"]I wonder why they would want to do that...

Because they hate bunnies?

hillexallen

05-04-2009, 10:05 PM

Because they hate bunnies?

Because they like monies. ;) haha

hillexallen

05-05-2009, 09:40 AM

What are we going to do about this!?

We can't just stand by and watch while parkour's philosophy goes down the drain!

We should at least contact them and tell them to correct it, right?

Corndogg

05-05-2009, 01:50 PM

Nobody on SFPK or PKNA will listen

People are listening. Some people just aren't responding, whether it's because they've already stated their case and have given up trying to convince you, or are too busy training, or aren't as concerned about an MTV press release on an entertainment show that hasn't even aired yet, or otherwise. But from the responses and views thus far, I don't think its fair to say nobody is listening, just because they don't agree with you and aren't jumping on your cause.

hillexallen

05-05-2009, 05:16 PM

True. I tend to exaggerate on BAPK...but it seems very much like nobody here is listening or participating any longer.

I hope people start participating after the show airs.

Lonnie

05-05-2009, 05:41 PM

hillexallen, I've heard everything you've said. I've followed this discussion across several boards. You have a friendly disposition, you make good points and the foundation of your argument is a good one. The trouble is, for many different reasons, few people feel so strongly about this single event that they are willing to jump on the bandwagon with you. Try as you might, it just hasn't happened. Perhaps once the show airs people will become outraged and all that will change. Perhaps this will blow over, in time attention will fade, making this production just another MTV reality game show that never caught on.

Ultimately, I think you've pushed some people away in your unwavering pursuit of this cause. You've developed an us vs. them mentality and you want the community to take sides. That isolates people and creates conflict.

Where do I stand? I've always been against the commercialization of Parkour and the attempts at competition to date have been a joke. I don't have high hopes for this one. It is MTV after all. But I could be wrong. I do not like to see the image of Parkour represented in the wrong light any more than you do. unfortunately for us, it happens all the time and it is going to continue to happen as that is the nature of the media. When the first Red Bull Free Running competition was announced I did not actively try and stop it from happening. I did my best to continue to promote the Parkour that I know and love. That is what I will continue to do today.

superjoe

06-27-2009, 11:25 PM

Like the joker said
"If you are good at something never do it for free."
-Joker

:bowdown:

stevem156

07-02-2009, 11:22 AM

Personally, I'd rather not see parkour cannibalized by huge corporations looking for profit. The fact remains, though, that if a trend is big enough or looks like it will be big enough, companies WILL catch on and WILL try to capitalize on it.

Every time you post the word "parkour" online, companies can track it through Twitter and specialized search applications. Every time a parkour documentary comes out, company executives learn about it directly or indirectly. Hell, some company executives probably train for parkour. Fact is, they know about it and wouldn't mind making money off of it.

And the best strategy to making money from parkour is for a company to establish its presence in the parkour community, generate brand awareness, and attempt to spread awareness about its brand and parkour to influence new people into becoming traceurs and buying into what the company offers. So they'll advertise and market their products and services to traceurs or using us to promote an image. Their advertising will make some people associate their brands with parkour, but others will ignore it

Does it suck? Kind of, but not really.

See, we're the first real generation of traceurs in the US; as far as history is concerned, it began with US (it's a different story in Europe; they're a little bit ahead of us). Parkour has always been about the individual training to make him/herself better and people banding together in communities to help each other train. We know that, and we can communicate the original philosophy to newcomers. It doesn't matter what corporations try to say; we can tell them otherwise. Will it work? I have no idea. It depends on if the corporations and companies listen to you.

Honestly, if there turns out to be a huge influx of people practicing "parkour" as the mainstream media attempts to portray and profit from it, there's not a whole lot we can do about it. We can talk with newcomers, we can make websites and post blogs and host events and jams, but the newcomers can always choose to ignore us. If they do that, there's nothing we can do for them. Sure, they may get hurt and that is truly an unfortunate thought, but if they are too stubborn to listen to advice and the facts, then they simply won't listen.

Otherwise, I'm a big advocate of "Live and let live." Let the newcomers practice "parkour" as they want to if they choose not to listen to us. It doesn't mean that we have to like it or accept it. We can only do what we can do to influence public opinion. If corporations and newcomers influenced by the mainstream media choose to ignore what we tell them, then it's their loss.

Parkour will grow and evolve. There will be some people who feel that they'd like to use it to be competitive, and then there'll be people who stick to the original philosophies. It's not a matter of which philosophy wins out in the end, it's a matter of what philosophy you embrace. Think of skateboarding, paintball, and MMA; there's an overall image that each of these activities is associated with, but the bottom line is your experience with it.

Now, I work with a company that's marketing to traceurs. Personally, I think we've got a pretty competent line of products for parkour. Would it be cool if sales of our parkour shoes boomed? Absolutely. Would it be awesome to have Inov-8 achieve great brand awareness with traceurs? Hell yeah. As far as I'm concerned, though, parkour is fundamentally about the individual.

The fact is, marketing has entered into a new age of transparency. If you offer a product or a service and you can't deliver, or if you're offering lies and false information, you can't sustain it for long before there's a public relations firestorm. If parkour does go "mainstream" and there turns out to be a decent market for parkour equipment, apparel and services, people will weed out the liars and those who can't deliver, thanks to Twitter, blogs, consumer reports and the internet in general.

Heck, it may even be good to have some mainstream attention; we may get excellent parkour training facilities built, truly knowledgeable and helpful instructors (that doesn't mean you have to go to these instructors--I'll probably continue to meet up with local traceurs and train that way), and excellent equipment designed for parkour (not that you need it...but if you want it, it'll be there). If any of these products or services is sub-par, they'll die out.

The bottom line is this: if companies see profit in parkour, they'll seek it out. They'll try to make it go mainstream because that's where the big profit is. It may work, it may not work. You don't have to embrace how the mainstream media and corporations portray parkour; there will always be people who do it for the reasons it was originally birthed. In fact, mainstream parkour may even help; greater public awareness, more public acceptance, better parkour products and services. You won't have to accept these, but they'll be there for your consideration (or your scorn).

AeroSFCity

07-02-2009, 11:28 PM

Dude you are setting yourself up for it here...
There are a heck of alot of good locations and truly knowledgable and helpful instructors all over the bay.
Giving up on the newbies and have them just learn on their own and go for it? I have seen that, the cops and the river of blood that usually follows...don't wanna get any blood on your kicks do ya newbs?

But yeah man we can just let them all take it and just train, like we all do. Wait what are these new shoes gonna make them do?Or wait huh?

But I do agree.... Walmart will own Parkour in two years.

Beretta

07-03-2009, 01:41 AM

Haha!

Last edited by AeroSFCity; Yesterday at 11:36 PM.. Reason: Seven deep

Lulz!

2nd Chance

07-04-2009, 03:30 PM

In terms of products, that I really don't see having a problem. Some will try and latch onto parkour, but if the product sucks, then they won't gain any footing. If their product is awesome, who cares if it latches on, we get something useful and beneficial.

TV, movies, other media, etc etc however, I think it's a different story.

drow

08-14-2009, 03:17 PM

alright i read the 1st page or 2 and i am skipping the rest because i dont want to read 10 pages of hate.

the real question is, have the companies affected YOU in any significant way? probable answer, no. the thing is NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO companies will try to get on the bandwagon.

classes, are fine it teaches people, how is this bad?

certification, did they ever say you have to get it to teach?

products, agreed with 2nd chance

competitions: can you blame them? the competitions practically plan themselves. (and as long as its done right, it doenst even degrade the sport)

riddle me this, if the companies are so BAD for the art, why are they taking hold? because they offer benefits. and there is ALWAYS a gray area, its never black and white, like your attitudes seem to suggest. there will be organizations like american parkour (in you mind angels) and there will be companies (to you, the fucking devil). but there is a in between, people who band together, and make money from parkour, but use it to invest in the community

then can we have no parkour shoes? no videos? nothing? companies will always be there, its a matter of which you support. some will sell parkour as extreme to get profits, but others might bend the truth a little to attract customers, which is FINE. comon, how many of you saw parkour and thought that it was a very complex art, something with a deep philosophy and meaning? not too many of you im guessing. traceurs will always control parkour because we are the ones doing the actual art. companies may have some influence in the way of videos, but practitioners will always have the advantage. why? because its the real world where parkour is performed. some will buy the whole extreme gag, but those who do will be disappointed because they will see YOU! they will see you keeping the art alive, and nothing will change that

phew, alright im prepared for the hailstorm of angry comments about to be fired at me. GIVE ME YOUR BEST SHOT!!! (oh and any holes in my arguments are probably because im really tired right now, just throw me a message showing it and il explain)

Pirate

08-14-2009, 03:59 PM

aslo, i think they made the certification to help grant credibility to those who want to teach. say, you went and tried to teach at a gym and they asked for some sort of certification, they would say i have the adapt cert and the company would research that for his credentials.

i think that parkour generations just want's to prevent people from watching youtube videos, practice for 6 months or whatever, and then trying to teach other people, which is a good thing, but not if their teaching is off in some way, and then person that they are teaching gets hurt because the said teacher did know or teach proper landing, progression, etc...

like my water polo coaches.
:D

drow

08-14-2009, 04:21 PM

i think you are a bit at fault for not telling them about your pre-existing condition

ANYWAYS, i agree. the certificate means nothing, its just something to show "yeah im not just some random guy off the street"

Pirate

08-14-2009, 04:28 PM

DUDE.
i most definitely not the one one in water who got a shoulder injury from ignorant coaches. It's not a condition, it's like being able to crack your knuckles, only a lit bit more annoying. And yes, i did tell them. The only thing the "condition" did was that it made the injury occur sooner than most. If i am at fault, it was because i did not question my coaches enough. I told them about the pain(which was minor), and they said stuff like it was body adjusting, and that i would be fine. Wow i am really not happy right now.

hm.

drow

08-14-2009, 04:32 PM

put that in a private message next time, im trying really hard to keep my posts on topic >_< its so tempting

-edit-

oh damnit that was off topic

Pirate

08-14-2009, 04:37 PM

okay now i'm happy cause i found a new asian video hosting site.

and i apologize for my outburst drow, that just angered me a lot for reasons that i will not explain here because i don't want to go into another rant.

and seriously, haven't we hijacked ENOUGH threads lately?

Pirate

08-14-2009, 04:38 PM

too late.
:D

drow

08-14-2009, 04:44 PM

thats the whole point...damnit...

OK BACK ON TOPIC SNAP SNAP!!!!!

rparkour

08-14-2009, 07:14 PM

ummm....maybe i should bring us back on topic...

I believe that commercialization could be a good thing, but it could also be a bad thing. It would be good in the way that it would bring new tracuers to the community and give us more options in the way of equipment instead of making our own (backpacks and stuff). It could also be detrimental. It could distort our image into a punk-skater like image and then places will put up signs saying NO PARKOUR like they did with skaters (they already did this in a town near Liverpool, England). They would do this by marketing us as an extreme sport and compare us to them. I'm not saying that skaters are bad by the way (a lot of my friends are skaters, I'm just saying that they have been made out to be bad, and that's what COULD happen to us. They most likely will also promote competitiveness in parkour, which we all know is NOT what we are about.

Ok now I'm ready for you guys to poke HUGE holes in my argument. BRING IT!

Pirate

08-14-2009, 07:36 PM

i think that both scenarios you just named will eventually happen.

the skater image would be bad, but wouldn't it be cool to have "parkour parks"?

drow

08-14-2009, 07:47 PM

well, the only way we can get a skater image is 1) the companies advertise it so or 2) we bring it upon ourselves. the problem is if skater types start getting into parkour, then that WILL be what parkour is.

rparkour

08-14-2009, 07:54 PM

i 100% agree with u drow

COMPLEXproductions

09-14-2009, 03:51 PM

We all need to stop the branding and the selling of parkour. Im against commercialization of parkour because it will kill the entire point and meaning of it. and it will lead to something we will all despise!!!! If we dont stop the commercialization of parkour, its meaning will be reduced to nothing more than a fad. IT WILL BECOME THE NEXT TWILIGHT!!! Its already started... go to your local high school and ask around. all you will hear is that every other kid "had always loved it" and dont even know what they're talking about. I dont want to keep parkour all to ourselves. i would love meeting people that GENUINELY love parkour. meet people who honestly get what it means to them. i want this way of movement to be known, but not advertized and sold. worse yet, yesterday, my cousin (who is a freshman in high school) told me that he was walking and a group of kids asked him if he wanted to do parkour. he asked what it was and they laughed at him saying somethin like "You dont know what it is? Freerunning?... never mind". Please help stop this from becoming a fad. im not saying to stop newcomers. i want more people. but not if theyre doing it because its "cool". Video people, keep making those awesome videos(just keep em underground and free like it always has been). thats not what im saying. Just please stop this from becoming the next "thing".

Fads are fueled by the government, and the government does this so they can make money. Keep parkour FREE and you kill their supply. help save parkour!!

Austin

09-14-2009, 04:15 PM

Fads are totally fueled by the government. In fact I just got five million dollars from the state of California last week so that I could film a new twilight movie that is also a documentary about parkour.

Oh no! Kids that were too cool to stop and explain what parkour is? And WORSE YET they compared it to that devils sport FREE - RUNNING?!

Yea, keep in underground guys. Because no one ever has fun playing baseball, or skateboarding, or taking pictures. Stupid stuff like that was only fun when it was still underground

Meatlad

09-14-2009, 04:28 PM

I heard that if you get bit by a freerunner and survive then you become a freerunner yourself.

lethalbeef

09-14-2009, 05:11 PM

I heard if you die in parkour, you die in real life.

BENNY

09-14-2009, 05:13 PM

luckily, those kids that try parkour as a fad will suck ass and probly die from tripping on their own leg. so no worries :P

209Traceur

09-14-2009, 06:41 PM

Death from parkour... not a good image for the sport. Anways, the comment is a little legit, altho obviosly joking. When you do see someone trying to do parkour as a fad, refer them to sfparkour, tell them to check the philosophy, help them with the discipline. Honestly though, the reason i love parkour so much is that the community isn't full of asshats. If it does become the next fad, like jerking is now, or what c-walking was a year or two ago, the community will be plagued. Just keep it legit, and be helpful

drow

09-14-2009, 07:16 PM

be real, when you heard you got into parkour, did you think it would be like it is?

there are actually more people then you think that actually know about parkour (my friend saw me and asked if i was learning, he seemed to actually know a bit about it)

oh and to that twilight statement

TWILIGHT WAS CRAP TO BEGIN WITH
all disputers can be nailed to a statue in the likeness of edward

T.K.

09-14-2009, 07:38 PM

oh and to that twilight statement

TWILIGHT WAS CRAP TO BEGIN WITH
all disputers can be nailed to a statue in the likeness of edward

AGREED : O

COMPLEXproductions

09-14-2009, 07:51 PM

you first comment guys dont have to be dicks about it. i just dont want to get annoyed like i was with twilight alright. i didnt mean it like a conspiracy thing. im just letting u know fads are annoying if the people doing it dont get y people do it.

COMPLEXproductions

09-14-2009, 07:55 PM

AGREED : O

and twilight was NOT crap to begin with, i read it years ago and liked it a lot. But even though i liked it a lot, i hated it when every chick was like "Oh Edward!!!" "Oh Jacob!!!". Imagine millions of teen guys going "Oh David!!!" though. that would get annoying. but i still do want more people doing parkour. just not as a fad

COMPLEXproductions

09-14-2009, 07:57 PM

and thanks to those who tried understanding where i was comming from instead of being dicks

Corndogg

09-14-2009, 08:05 PM

Just remember that you can't force others and you can't control others. You can only control yourself, and as for others you can only help guide them, and inspire them. If they don't listen to you, instead of cutting them off and excluding them, or putting them down, try and stay open and continue to inspire.

COMPLEXproductions

09-14-2009, 08:07 PM

Profiting from parkour is okay! Companies like 5.10 and K-Swiss are not trying to change our community or discipline in any way! However, companies like Urban Freflow, Parkour Generations and the WFPF are changing parkour and its practitioners so that they can make money. No matter if you like or dislike what the companies are doing, you should be able to agree that traceurs should control parkour, not companies.

Please tell me if you agree, and if not, why!!!

I completely agree with this. so long as the game doesnt change im happy. fads change the game.

drow

09-14-2009, 08:08 PM

lol, ive read parts of it. i guess it just wasnt my cup of tea. my sister read it (she know a bit about literature) and said it wasnt written terribly well. but neither was harry potter, so its all good (dont take offense HP fans)

ANYWAYS, my oppinion is if parkour becomes a fad, it will be sad, but will die out fast. not saying i think its ok, just not a humongous deal (it could have lasting impacts on the image though, unfortunately)

not trying to be a dick btw. sorry if i came off that way

drow

09-14-2009, 08:09 PM

oh, and did corn merge threads?

Corndogg

09-14-2009, 08:10 PM

oh, and did corn merge threads?

Yes.

COMPLEXproductions

09-14-2009, 08:12 PM

yeah he merged them. i didnt know about the "no seperate thread" rule. and no you were cool about it. just the sarcastic remarks were off.
(to drow)

BENNY

09-14-2009, 10:07 PM

this problem is a contributing factor for the creation of project barf.

amidst the dilution of parkour to the mindless masses, we frooblers shall remain vigilant and defiant to the tyranny of the majority.

the fieriest will survive, and the rest shall be left behind...

Pirate

09-14-2009, 10:39 PM

oh and to that twilight statement

TWILIGHT WAS CRAP TO BEGIN WITH
all disputers can be nailed to a statue in the likeness of edward
:biggthumpup:

T.K.

09-14-2009, 11:02 PM

Alter

09-14-2009, 11:47 PM

ok heres why i think that parkour will not become a fad.... the thing is parkour is not easy and never will be easy. People will try yes but the thing is, they will realize how hard it is and make 1 of 2 choices. 1: quite because its to hard and they want to do something easy in life. or 2: take interest in ways they can improve their body to be able to do parkour and in the middle somewhere discover SF Parkour and how cool and awsome we are, and learn that true philosphy and saftey behind parkour and work hard to follow their own parkour path. : P

I agree to this... Parkour is too hard for people to just pick up as a fad.... fads don't require years of training.

furthermore, if Parkour becomes a fad.... I imagine alot of people are going to get hurt... resulting in Parkour being completely off limits most places as it's reputation will have grown far worse, and no body will want anyone doing any Parkour on their premises for fear of liability issues.

That would be sad :(

COMPLEXproductions

09-15-2009, 09:39 AM

ok heres why i think that parkour will not become a fad.... the thing is parkour is not easy and never will be easy. People will try yes but the thing is, they will realize how hard it is and make 1 of 2 choices. 1: quite because its to hard and they want to do something easy in life. or 2: take interest in ways they can improve their body to be able to do parkour and in the middle somewhere discover SF Parkour and how cool and awsome we are, and learn that true philosphy and saftey behind parkour and work hard to follow their own parkour path. : P

I like that optimistic view and i hope thats what happens:fingersx:...

...but at the same time, skateboarding was hard(at least i think it is) and people still did that... but parkour is way scarier and discouraging if your not willing to commit. I guess we all just have to wait and see. What we can all do is simply make suggestions to everyone and tell the people that are starting to do it about the philosophy. that one is not too terribly a big deal

as far as the organizations trying to change parkour, that IS a big deal and im sure we all agree with that. and i dont like the idea of competitions. thats not what its about(at least not to me). some might feel different.

regardless of the side your on, this is a big deal as a whole, and i think we should get everyones opinion in on this.

hillexallen

09-15-2009, 09:40 AM

ok heres why i think that parkour will not become a fad.... the thing is parkour is not easy and never will be easy. People will try yes but the thing is, they will realize how hard it is and make 1 of 2 choices. 1: quite because its to hard and they want to do something easy in life. or 2: take interest in ways they can improve their body to be able to do parkour and in the middle somewhere discover SF Parkour and how cool and awsome we are, and learn that true philosphy and saftey behind parkour and work hard to follow their own parkour path. : P

I think that's bull because:

1. Parkour IS already a fad.
2. They already made parkour easy, so it could become a fad.
3. SFPK does not teach the true philosophy of parkour, they simply provide a place for people to teach whatever they want, whether it's actually parkour or not. Not everyone who finds SFPK learns the true philosophy of parkour.
4. There's a third choice, that a lot of new people are making these days: do whatever you want and call it parkour.

I'm glad that some people are starting to realize that I'm not crazy, and that commercialization actaully is a bad thing for parkour.

T.K.

09-15-2009, 09:46 AM

3. SFPK does not teach the true philosophy of parkour, they simply provide a place for people to teach whatever they want, whether it's actually parkour or not. Not everyone who finds SFPK learns the true philosophy of parkour.

\

better check again my friend.... first thing you see on the sfpk website is ....

http://www.sfparkour.com/learn.shtml

: O o noes!

Austin

09-15-2009, 11:44 AM

2. They already made parkour easy, so it could become a fad.
3. SFPK does not teach the true philosophy of parkour, they simply provide a place for people to teach whatever they want, whether it's actually parkour or not. Not everyone who finds SFPK learns the true philosophy of parkour.
4. There's a third choice, that a lot of new people are making these days: do whatever you want and call it parkour.

2. Firstly, who is they? Parkour is not easy. Learning all the different types of vaults is easy. If it's your thing, learning a flip or two is easy. But so far none of this is parkour. Parkour happens when you think creatively. When you put these vaults and other techniques together to create something new; to move your body through space in a unique way.

3. You can't teach someone a philosophy. That's just shoving something down someone's throat. It's up to each person as a unique individual to come to have their own understanding of what parkour is for them. Once you pin down ONE PHILOSOPHY and try to spread it, that's what true commercialism is. You can't expect everyone to have the same opinion as you on anything. Every person is different, and we all need to live with it and accept that.

4. You can't get all pissed off because there's a small overlap between the completely separate activity / sport of tricking and parkour. We all at one time when training parkour have climbed a building right? But are buildering athletes getting all mad at us because we're calling buildering (bouldering on a building) parkour? No. No one cares. There's overlap in almost every sport.

Hidden in what you said is a good point though. I do get annoyed when I see videos of people doing sketchy flips and single random vaults and then trying to label it as parkour. I don't think it's a huge problem, but I do get annoyed by it.

COMPLEXproductions

09-15-2009, 11:51 AM

I never thought u were crazy, and if you think sfpk doesnt teach the true meaning of pk thats cool. what we can do is if u see a group of kids trying to do it, approach and inform. The philosophy doesnt have to be posted up on line. we can spread it ourselves and hopefully that will catch on along with the fad.

austin:
That's what i said.
"The philosophy doesn't have to be posted up on line."

Ronin524

09-15-2009, 03:13 PM

Parkour isn't something new to begin with. It is just rebadging and putting a name to something that's been around for ages. For you guys on here, now tell me this... say we lived in a parallel universe, and all these parkour videos were not posted on YouTube (or they were, but just not under the name of parkour), would you still think it was so cool? Don't shun the very thing that got you into it in the first place.

hillexallen

09-15-2009, 05:16 PM

3. SFPK does not teach the true philosophy of parkour, they simply provide a place for people to teach whatever they want, whether it's actually parkour or not. Not everyone who finds SFPK learns the true philosophy of parkour.

My mistake.

Let me say this a different way: SFPK itself, the website, has information about parkour on its front page that is accurate, but it does not prevent anyone from teaching something that is not inline with the philosophy of parkour. Therefre, not everyone who finds SFPK will find the true philosophy of parkour.

msgr33

09-16-2009, 01:14 PM

Before this thread starts drifting even more off-topic (it seems to be going toward objective v. subjective definitions of parkour), I want to point out that neither SFPK or BApk membership should be dismissed in groups as being of one mind. There are a number of people who participate in both groups- or perhaps train parkour despite the existence of two groups- even if they are not vocal online; creating an environment in which individuals feel forced to choose is just as destructive as being explicitly "shoving it down their throat". While BApk pursues a narrower definition of parkour, it is not a narrow-minded approach; anyone who has been to the Berkeley gym in the last couple weeks or seen the recent winner of the Hansen's soda photo contest (http://www.hansensloves.com/sanfrancisco/winners-circle.php?week=1) (commercialization content of this post satisfied) knows that many of the non-crossover members practice more than just efficient movement and mental sharpening (play is an essential part of parkour, after all).

I don't think it's helpful to parkour to tell anyone to leave the group and go train with others who are more in agreement with their beliefs; I also think avoiding difficult discussion with the "I'm logging off and training" often reads as a passive aggressive way to tell someone to shut up (this happens on more threads and forums than this one so I'm not trying to single anyone out here).

To the point about the difficulty of parkour being a deterrent to the commercialization of parkour, I think that line of reasoning is lacking in understanding of how branding works. Few people who wear The North Face are mountain climbers or even dedicated athletes- I spoke to a designer there who, after I complained about how one of their nice jacket designs was discontinued, told me explicitly that their main market is average-build, middle-aged White men, not the younger, multi-ethnic athletes depicted in their catalogs and advertising who account for a single-digit percentage of actual sales. Consider how many skateboarders can barely ollie a curb, much less boardslide a handrail, yet they hang out at parks and never take a run (think about this also the next time you're at a jam- hanging out with friends is great, but I encourage a little more thought about the performer/audience dynamics of jams and how/when that contributes to larger developments of spectacle leading to commercialization). What companies sell is lifestyle image, not an actual activity- the offensive turn is when buying the gear is the entry fee to the club, bypassing the hours of sweat and soreness of hard training.

T.K.

09-16-2009, 01:23 PM

My favorite part about this is that most of us are starting to train barefoot :O so whats to buy lol ... only equipment we use in parkour is shoes... and many companies have made shoes to sell to traceurs, but even that is dissapearing because of barefoot training. Im just saying not much equipment is used in parkour so its hard to commercialize shoes, specially when most of us dont care about the shoe as long as its comfortable to run in and has a decent grip, which most shoes do. :O lol i dont know it just seems funny to me.

Meatlad

09-16-2009, 03:11 PM

I wonder if the barefoot training phenomenon is at all linked to this commercialization issue, which really started to blow up at the same time. I know people like doing it to force them to practice good technique, but I also suspect for some it was a response to the increased attention to commercialization, and to see how much you really need.

I think Msgr33's comment about companies selling a lifestyle image rather than an activity is a good point. I don't think that any gear will be any sort of entry fee for parkour though. At a parkour park/gym, yes, quite likely in fact, but otherwise I'm not worried about it. If, like the Northface example Seng said, someday I see someone with all the parkour brand names but who doesn't do parkour... well, I'll just smile and think to myself they want to be like me (and you). No harm done. If I can't get into a park without the helmet and gloves or whatever, I'll be annoyed. But first we should tackle getting parkour parks.

As for the "just log off and jam" post - I don't see that as passive aggressive at all. Especially when it's self-referencing like that. Once in awhile on threads like this it's good to be reminded that parkour isn't an Internet activity, and getting outside is far more important. Especially when the conversation descends into squabbling, that's the best time to just turn the computer off.

And if someday we can't turn on the TV or computer without being inundated with parkour lifestyle products, rather than getting too worked up, just remember you can always just turn it off and jam.

COMPLEXproductions

09-16-2009, 04:13 PM

Well said meatlad. That was very weel-put.

Ronin524

09-16-2009, 05:10 PM

I guess it is the same with all athletic apparel. How many people who buy Air Jordans actually play ball in them? I'm thinking <1%. :laugh:

Meatlad

09-16-2009, 05:35 PM

I guess it is the same with all athletic apparel. How many people who buy Air Jordans actually play ball in them? I'm thinking <1%. :laugh:

Exactly. But it doesn't diminish basketball as a sport any, right? Looking at examples of commercialization in other sports is really the closest thing to a crystal ball we have for parkour. Applies to competition too (though that's a different thread).

Are there people who feel they can't play basketball till they own Air Jordans? Yes. But that's more an avoidance technique, and will never apply to us (right?). Do commercials create a cultural identity? They can contribute, but generally don't have that power. Plus it's not in the interest of the company that creates the commercial to portray the practitioner in any way that will hamper their practice of the sport, as the more it's practiced the more they sell.

Meatlad

09-16-2009, 05:44 PM

Re: the "it'll bring in douchebags and I'll be branded a douchebag and all my training spots will be closed off to keep out douchebags" argument. Yes, that is a risk. But remember, douchebags also play football and jog, and sports are often used to put structure and discipline in the lives of douchebags, which is often what douchebags really need.

Parkour shouldn't only be for nice people (in fact I've already met some douchebags, though luckily none use this forum). It's as innate as running, so eventually the entire range of humanity will join us just like the entire range plays soccer. Soccer actually unites people. Well, matches often are the catalyst for violent riots resulting in deaths, but considering how many billions are obsessed with the sport and how relatively infrequently those riots happen, I think it bodes well.

OK, I think I've said the word "douchebag" enough for one post. Thanks for listening, even if you're a douchebag (I couldn't resist one last time).

Meatlad

09-16-2009, 09:52 PM

OK, I moved a whole bunch of posts that really had nothing to do with commercialization to a thread in the Off-Topic forum called "Forum Culture":

http://www.sfparkour.com/forum/showthread.php?p=43402#post43402

If you have anything more to say on that topic, please continue it there.

What's appropriate behavior and responses, as well as people's place in local pk communities and what cross-over to expect, is a very interesting topic and I can see why it overtook this thread. But this thread is about commercialization, so stay on topic starting riiiiiight...

Now.

COMPLEXproductions

09-17-2009, 10:31 AM

Okay meatlad:biggthumpup:....

What concerns me a lot, is the potencial for shows adding competition factors to parkour(thus changing what parkour IS to some of us). But at the same time, the attention could bring about parkour parks(awesome).

hillexallen

09-17-2009, 11:03 AM

Okay meatlad:biggthumpup:....

What concerns me a lot, is the potencial for shows adding competition factors to parkour(thus changing what parkour IS to some of us).

Yes, this has already happened. See UFF, WFPF, and American Parkour + Motion Inc.

They are changing our discipline without our permission! That's not ok!

Ronin524

10-23-2009, 11:09 AM

This was moved from the MTV Parkour Challenge thread to a more appropriate thread.

Missed the premiere because I was out training and having dinner with my pk buddies! I'll try to catch it later on, but it's too bad that it (sounds like it) didn't turn out that well. I'm sure I'll be majorly impressed by what I see regardless.

We had a little discussion about this tonight though, addressing the question of how to combat the threat of parkour becoming restrictive. We spoke of mostly the monetary restrictions part of the problem, and the main worry is, if parkour as a physical discipline has the capacity to become really marketable and classes and such are marketed, we may face people who think that the only way to do parkour is with a class - a paid class. Perhaps the best way to avoid that problem is, while local communities like SFPK, BAPK, and PKCali exist, with groups like COPK, MadPK, VAPK, PKTO, etc all over the country, we need to make sure that people recognize that parkour does not need to be taught in a class environment, that it does not need any kind of professional background, and there are people around who are ready and willing to teach and train together with absolutely free of charge. We need to be proactive and vocal to the extent that we can.

I don't have an answer for the banning of parkour thing... but I think we can find a solution. It's just another obstacle (to vault over)

This makes sense, but in the whole scheme of things, money talks. If someone were to offer you an X amount of $$$ to teach a class, perform, etc., would you turn it down, and say you would rather teach for free? We all need to make a living, and at some point, that trumps our desire to do something "for the love of it", and not "sell out." Isn't it everyone's dream to get paid doing something they love?

Ronin524

10-23-2009, 11:18 AM

Come to think of it, I actually had this problem before. Not necessarily with parkour, but fitness training. I used to be a personal trainer when I was in college. I loved the job, but somewhere along the way, I actually felt bad for taking peoples' money to teach them something that should be readily available for free, so I stopped doing it.

However, fast forward to the present time, many years later. I now realize that if someone is indeed willing to pay me for the time, why not? Sure, I still believe that it should be free, but we all need to eat. We don't live in the barter system anymore.

Meatlad

10-23-2009, 02:12 PM

We had a little discussion about this tonight though, addressing the question of how to combat the threat of parkour becoming restrictive. We spoke of mostly the monetary restrictions part of the problem, and the main worry is, if parkour as a physical discipline has the capacity to become really marketable and classes and such are marketed, we may face people who think that the only way to do parkour is with a class - a paid class. Perhaps the best way to avoid that problem is, while local communities like SFPK, BAPK, and PKCali exist, with groups like COPK, MadPK, VAPK, PKTO, etc all over the country, we need to make sure that people recognize that parkour does not need to be taught in a class environment, that it does not need any kind of professional background, and there are people around who are ready and willing to teach and train together with absolutely free of charge. We need to be proactive and vocal to the extent that we can.

I wanted to talk about this more during conditioning on Wednesday, but it interfered with the counting to 60.

There seems to be this bipolar either/or assumption built into the line of thinking that if people charge for classes, or there's a certification system, then people must pay or get certified. This isn't the case.

How do I know? Because I, or someone else here, will continue to teach for free or while uncertified.

Will people continue to attend uncertified classes?

Sure. The certification means you can be certain of their skill as a teacher. Uncertainty leads to a price reduction is all. Free classes will always be attended. Getting people to shell out cash for a service is actually harder than getting them to take it for free (shocker!).

What is the explicit need for an ADAPT (PK Gens certification), or another certification?

ADAPT, as Dan Edwardes tells it (and as my faltering memory remembers it), was started because PK Gens wanted to teach a course through the city of Westminster. Being a city agency, they needed some sort of assurance that tax money was being spent on professionals. There was a need for assurance of a standard of teaching. Hence, Westminster and other cities could review the certification program for quality and know that if anyone was certified then they were qualified.
The correlary to the argument that anyone can pay $100 and get certified, thereby edging out qualified, uncertified teachers, is that unqualified, uncertified teachers could just open a gym and market parkour classes. Or get a job for a school district teaching parkour to kids without being qualified, while a good teacher remains unemployed. Remember the tizzy we all had about whether Guardian Arts was qualified or not? Imagine if there was some certification we were all aware of and agreed with. They could just get that and the argument would be moot.

People will have to pay for classes and it will become inaccessible for those without money.

I'm not paid now. I'm teaching. I certainly don't owe that to anybody though and may stop someday if I don't have the time or inclination.

we may face people who think that the only way to do parkour is with a class - a paid class.
Fuck 'em. They haven't done their research or they've got too much money. Not your problem. It's never long before a fool and his money are parted, and you can't do anything about it.

BobTheKing

10-23-2009, 03:29 PM

Sound arguments.

If I might interject my personal opinion about certifications as it correlates with the IT industry. There is a suite of certifications from a manufacturer by the name of Cisco of varying levels (CCNA, CCNP, CCIE). Although, possessing one of these certifications does demonstrate some level of proficiency, I have met people with no certifications who are far more proficient than those with a certification.

Essentially, my opinion on the matter is, just because someone can take a test and pass it, does not neccessarily make them a more qualified instructor than a non-certified person.

I wanted to talk about this more during conditioning on Wednesday, but it interfered with the counting to 60.

There seems to be this bipolar either/or assumption built into the line of thinking that if people charge for classes, or there's a certification system, then people must pay or get certified. This isn't the case.

How do I know? Because I, or someone else here, will continue to teach for free or while uncertified.

Will people continue to attend uncertified classes?

Sure. The certification means you can be certain of their skill as a teacher. Uncertainty leads to a price reduction is all. Free classes will always be attended. Getting people to shell out cash for a service is actually harder than getting them to take it for free (shocker!).

What is the explicit need for an ADAPT (PK Gens certification), or another certification?

ADAPT, as Dan Edwardes tells it (and as my faltering memory remembers it), was started because PK Gens wanted to teach a course through the city of Westminster. Being a city agency, they needed some sort of assurance that tax money was being spent on professionals. There was a need for assurance of a standard of teaching. Hence, Westminster and other cities could review the certification program for quality and know that if anyone was certified then they were qualified.
The correlary to the argument that anyone can pay $100 and get certified, thereby edging out qualified, uncertified teachers, is that unqualified, uncertified teachers could just open a gym and market parkour classes. Or get a job for a school district teaching parkour to kids without being qualified, while a good teacher remains unemployed. Remember the tizzy we all had about whether Guardian Arts was qualified or not? Imagine if there was some certification we were all aware of and agreed with. They could just get that and the argument would be moot.

People will have to pay for classes and it will become inaccessible for those without money.

I'm not paid now. I'm teaching. I certainly don't owe that to anybody though and may stop someday if I don't have the time or inclination.

Fuck 'em. They haven't done their research or they've got too much money. Not your problem. It's never long before a fool and his money are parted, and you can't do anything about it.

AeroSFCity

10-23-2009, 04:44 PM

i am not certified. the people who taught me were not certified. i have never met anybody certified. Crossfit certs take ONE day. UNO. certifications dont mean shit. the "class" experience/way you teach does. thats the end of that.

I make an insane amount of money teaching parkour in marin county. INSANE. Why? Rich people out here need to feel that their children are safe. It legitimizes our sport. Do i feel guilty? Hell yeah sometimes. Are the students gonna go elsewhere if i quit? In a second. I would rather be able to guide my students first impressions and learning curve than have them go to somebody ive never heard of or a gymnast. Same reason i go to teach at every free beginner session.

Alex you came to my classes a couple times. I watched you progress. Just cause youve hit that spot where YOU dont need anybody around for help and a sense of security doesnt mean the brand new never seen outdoor parkour cept the boobtube doesnt.

I have a feeling if you could get ahold of some new students and represent parkour any way YOU wanted you might think differently.

Dont talk shit, just go poop.
you dont need to kill you enemy just the indifference. dont tell people what you think they should do, just go fix it.

Meatlad

10-23-2009, 06:31 PM

Bob, I think a certification for being a Driver's Training instructor or a therapist is more akin to a parkour teacher cert than a Cisco certification. There are some certs that don't mean anything, and once word gets out then they don't tend to help you get a job if you have them. To be taken seriously, any certification for parkour teaching would probably need to require a certain number of hours or years of teaching experience, a test of skill, and an observed class or classes.

I'm mainly arguing that a certification system wouldn't do any harm, not that people should get certified.

BobTheKing

10-23-2009, 07:19 PM

I believe I am agreeing with you, unless I am misunderstanding. In other words a certification is okay, but not a necessity.

My only point is the quality of instruction is not necessarily dictated by certification. For example, I can be certified and Victor Lo Forte may not be. Obviously, at this point, Victor would provide much better training (even though he is not certified).

Just something to consider...not that it is a big deal or worth an argument. As you stated earlier, I would just hate to see people paying for something unnecessarily (i.e. "a fool and his money are soon parted.").

I do respect and concur with your insight.

Bob, I think a certification for being a Driver's Training instructor or a therapist is more akin to a parkour teacher cert than a Cisco certification. There are some certs that don't mean anything, and once word gets out then they don't tend to help you get a job if you have them. To be taken seriously, any certification for parkour teaching would probably need to require a certain number of hours or years of teaching experience, a test of skill, and an observed class or classes.

I'm mainly arguing that a certification system wouldn't do any harm, not that people should get certified.

Meatlad

10-23-2009, 08:33 PM

Yeah yeah, I totally agree. Sorry, my post sounded a little terse but it wasn't meant to. I'm basically agreeing with you. :)

hillexallen

10-23-2009, 09:38 PM

You sir, would then be breaking the law. Not respecting the law (agree or disagree) or people's/business' personal property is a much worse form of disrespect than anything else mentioned in this entire thread. It is people like you WHO DO, IN FACT give this sport, its practitioners, and all associated a bad name. Checkmate.

I don't quite understand the logic here. I personally would not give up my ability to train on private property to train in a park. I am right now able to train on private property without giving parkour a bad name, I have been doing it for more than two years. Even if my training on private property offends a few people who see me, not that it does, it is NOTHING compared to the broadcast of competition and showing off to millions of people at a time. To say that my training on private property contributes more to parkour's bad reputation than a misrepresentative TV show is simply incorrect and illogical. I WISH I could have more of an impact on parkour than the media can.

I seems like you are intent on proving that I am a disrespectful idiot, rather than focusing on how we can stop the mass misrepresentation of parkour in the media. :nono:

By the way, I have almost no respect whatsoever for the law... but that doesn't mean as much as it could because I really don't have much respect for government at all, or capitalism. It's just legalized corruption. I do, however, make it look like I respect the law, thus keeping a good reputation for myself.

Hey, just wondering, how long have you been training?

2nd Chance

10-23-2009, 10:21 PM

I'm not certified, people teaching me weren't/aren't, and I'm turning out just fine, as are my students. :) However, certification, as Meaty said, couldn't really hurt.

2nd Chance

10-23-2009, 10:25 PM

Hey, just wondering, how long have you been training?

Irrelevant. As long as someone understands what they're saying and the philosophies related, it doesn't matter how long they've been training.

Austin

10-23-2009, 10:29 PM

hillexallen

10-23-2009, 10:33 PM

Irrelevant. As long as someone understands what they're saying and the philosophies related, it doesn't matter how long they've been training.

I know, I was just wondering.

hillexallen

10-23-2009, 10:42 PM

Dude, even if you don't agree with the law, you kinda have to respect it in most cases. There's never been a perfect government and there never will be, so just deal with it and be happy with what you've got.
As a 14 year old kid that's never paid taxes and uses parks, streets, schools, etc for free... saying you have no respect for the law or any government is quite a claim. Better to be thought an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Eh, rather not get into discussion about civilization here... just a few points.

1. I have perspective. I don't have to do shit, and I am in the top 1% in the world in terms of income. I think that's outrageous and unfair.
2. I know what I'm talking about, I don't pull stuff out of my ass.
3. I am against civilization for the very reason you mentioned, the majority of people suffer to provide a cool lifestyle for the minority.
4. I am happy with what I have, but other people suffer and are not happy with what they have. These are the people I want to help. I have a lot of power, being a white American male. I intend to use that power to help those who are powerless.
5. Remember, without civilization and government, the whole world would be a park and we would not have to pay taxes to use it.

For more: http://www.youtube.com/user/zzz33333

lethalbeef

10-24-2009, 09:23 AM

Ronin: took me a little while to get back to you, sorry, but basically I would have said what Jeff said. I have taught classes, and I try to remind people there (though it doesn't always get that many results) to come out to free classes and regular training sessions all the time. I feel that what they're paying for when they have a class is the environment and accountability for me not goofing off. Pads and safety, plus the knowledge that someone's probably watching me and is going to be pissed off if I don't actually teach anything. The environment isn't necessary, and in SFPK classes and stuff like that, we have some sort of oversight from SFPK. If we work as a non-profit or something, as Tyson has done with PNWPA, which would also give us some legitimacy to teach through schools and other things, I think we can give people a peace of mind they want. We just have to make sure we do it early.

BobTheKing

10-24-2009, 10:27 AM

First off, addressing your first point:
You aren't reading the accumulations of threads as a whole. You don't understand the logic because you only read things sentence by sentence. If you read the whole post, it stated, and I quote "I don't think you have a legitimate reason to fear the relinquishment of our freedoms as traceurs. People can say the same thing about riding motorcycles, skateboards, etc. Sure there are places where skateboards are banned, but what happened? They PUT SKATEPARKS into cities! Awesome! I would love the banning of parkour on private premises in exchange for a parkour park, wouldn't you?" Explaining further, that means that if the owner of a particular piece of property (hence private property) does not want people practicing parkour on said property, it then becomes illegal...trespassing at best. If I understand you correctly, you would choose to infringe on the rights of that person as a property owner? Sorry dude, that is just outright disrespectful. This in turn would contribute to parkour being viewed in a negative light by the public. As I read more of your posts it is getting to be more and more evident the lack of respect you have for your fellow citizen.

Addressing your second paragraph, you state that I am intent on proving that you are a "disrespectful idiot". See paragraph one.

In your third paragraph, you mention your disrespect for the law, government, and capitalism.
-Working with law enforcement on a daily basis has allowed me to see both sides of the coin. A lot of them are just doing a job, not trying to make things personal, so keep that in mind in your encounters with them.
-Concerning government...WE are the government. As someone stated before (my interpretation) our system is what it is, and although it isn't perfect, it is the best out there. I can't think of a place I would more want to live than the U.S.A.
-Concerning capitalism Well, I'll leave out my opinion on this as per sfparkour.com guidelines.

Finally, you asked how long I have been training? In parkour, I assume, right?
The answer to that is it was my New Year's resolution (2009)...you can look at my log to find out more. The log starts in March as I didn't know about personal logs until then! :wink:

I don't quite understand the logic here. I personally would not give up my ability to train on private property to train in a park. I am right now able to train on private property without giving parkour a bad name, I have been doing it for more than two years. Even if my training on private property offends a few people who see me, not that it does, it is NOTHING compared to the broadcast of competition and showing off to millions of people at a time. To say that my training on private property contributes more to parkour's bad reputation than a misrepresentative TV show is simply incorrect and illogical. I WISH I could have more of an impact on parkour than the media can.

I seems like you are intent on proving that I am a disrespectful idiot, rather than focusing on how we can stop the mass misrepresentation of parkour in the media. :nono:

By the way, I have almost no respect whatsoever for the law... but that doesn't mean as much as it could because I really don't have much respect for government at all, or capitalism. It's just legalized corruption. I do, however, make it look like I respect the law, thus keeping a good reputation for myself.

Hey, just wondering, how long have you been training?