Author Topic: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff  (Read 2744 times)

Offline Travis Graves

  • Administrator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • Primal Fitness
Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« on: February 07, 2009, 10:38:30 AM »
Just some thoughts I've had recently, thought I'd share. they don't do much good just marinating in my brain  ;D.

I'll start with some Bruce Lee insights because people listen to that guy. "I don't believe in styles. Styles tend to only separate men because they have their own doctrines and then their doctrines become the gospel truth that you cannot change. But if you don't have styles, if you just say: "here I am as a human being. How can I express myself totally and completely?"

This leads into Bruce's thoughts on "three stages of cultivation". The first stage is the original ignorance in which a person knows nothing of techniques and just fights or runs instinctively, the second is when  you are learning the techniques and everything is about being mechanical an learning "good form", then the third is when you shed those techniques and just adjusts to the opponent or the obstacles.

Most of us are at the point at which we're still learning and training and drilling and establishing our repertoire of techniques. This is the point when many people defend their art and the doctrines thereof very fervently and don't want to see it change and they really see that divide between the arts.

I don't want to be long-winded, so I'll end it here. Just some things to think about.
Don't step to me with your stats and your date smarts

You know your neighborhood by street signs or landmarks?

Offline truls

  • Oryctolagus Cuniculus
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2009, 12:30:46 PM »
The comparison between the Lee quotes and the parkour freerunning split is not really all that good. The quote is talking about different styles aiming for the same goal, while parkour and freerunning is devided in what goal they aim for.

Offline Nate J.

  • Oryctolagus Cuniculus
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • Karma: +1002/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2009, 01:03:31 PM »
I think that trying to categorize what you do ultimately limits your creativity and closes the door on new experiences. If you rigidly define parkour as one thing then you are less receptive to other ideas and don't explore anything outside of your definition. On the other hand saying something like "parkour can be anything" seems almost as wrong to me. To me that sounds like "painting can be anything" or "gardening can be anything" it simply isn't true. Spilling paint on the ground because you weren't paying attention and hit it with your elbow isn't painting. Likewise walking down the street to the store isn't parkour. The non-definition of "parkour can be anything" eliminates the need for creativity. Both extremes are detrimental to the mindset of a traceur much like being to nervous or to carefree can be harmful to a rock climber. I don't think that we need an overarching definition or reason behind why every traceur trains. Ultimately everybody has their own goals and their own motivation and trying to fit them into an overarching ideal would force them to compromise their own beliefs. However if what brings us together is closer to a code of conduct for life in general as opposed to a set of rules for how we should do parkour then everybody can do their own thing and share it with the world enriching the community.

Moa

  • Guest
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2009, 01:54:57 PM »
The way I see it is that there was a thesis (parkour) then an antithesis (free-running) now there is a synthesis (pk-fr).

Offline Terry McIntosh

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 220
  • Karma: +19/-7
  • Tear It Up Terry
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2009, 01:59:00 PM »
travis hit the nail on the head +1.  if you disagree with his thoughts, thats cool. just realize that he is saying "don't worry so much about definitions and rules, just be positive and train."  really, whats so wrong with that? If you want to practice flips thats fine. i know, i know, "flips are not parkour!"  then don't call it parkour, don't call it anything, just train. stop wasting time debating and train what you want to.
I like to touch different kinds of surface textures.
Parkour lets me do that without feeling weird.

Offline TR

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
  • Karma: +63/-90
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2009, 02:13:41 PM »
For me, I don't care what it's called.. It's all the same to me. I move because I enjoy movement, I don't care what the goal is, just as long as I'm improving myself, having fun, and getting stronger.

But if you want my opinion on the whole thing... I believe at the very base of everything (ADD, PK, FR) that it's just about being a strong person, Physically mentally and spiritually. With that base, you can explore your potential however you like. Without that base of physicality, mentality, and spirituality, you won't last in your discipline. This is the way I've seen it for some time now, and it's something I highly believe in.

Offline Alec Furtado

  • kicks butt.
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1992
  • Karma: +27/-6
  • Balance.
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2009, 02:41:10 PM »
travis hit the nail on the head +1.  if you disagree with his thoughts, thats cool. just realize that he is saying "don't worry so much about definitions and rules, just be positive and train."  really, whats so wrong with that?
Yea and that's perfectly fine for the individual. What's wrong with that is that it makes it nearly impossible to explain to others what parkour is. You might find yourself babbling or saying "well for me...". The person will think you don't even know what you're doing or that the community in general is very disorganized and doesn't know what's going on. Whether it's the "correct"/perfect definition or not, I think it's important for everyone to just say *asdfkjhadg* is what we are going to say is the official definition for parkour, freerunning, etc. Something to unite under. I would see that as the point when it's really matured and is ready to enter the mainstream. "A to B" pretty much seems to be the (un?)official parkour definition.

Nah meen? :)


So for individual training that concept is perfectly fine, but...
Water conforms to the shape of it's surroundings. Do not be water. Shape your own life.

Offline Dan Elric

  • Ambassador
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1586
  • Karma: +92/-53
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2009, 04:59:40 PM »
I thought it would be accepted now that whether you're practicing the art of freerunning or parkour is depending on what your goal is at the time.  They aren't different styles, they're just different mindsets.  They both use the same set of moves, which is any movement your body can do.

Offline Spencer B

  • the Romantic
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Karma: +47/-25
  • ...*BANG*...
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #8 on: February 07, 2009, 05:24:45 PM »
I don't like the 'Point A-Point B' or the 'Training for emergency' definitions of parkour because in my experience you can come off as either practising a sport or being paranoid, respectively, to anybody you try to explain these concepts to. You can get away with the 'Human Reclamation' argument, but I don't think our ancestors did flips when they were running from Smilodons. Overall I would define parkour as a discipline, a lost art, or my personal quote; "Reclaiming our ancestral strength"
www.cracked.com
www.tvtropes.org

There are times when you want to break down and rage at the heavens. Don't. Stay calm, and let the emotions flood in, accept them and then rise above them. Never dwell. Don't fear or worry. Anything worth thinking about is worth talking about. And... Good luck.

Offline Dan Elric

  • Ambassador
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1586
  • Karma: +92/-53
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2009, 06:20:11 PM »
I don't like the 'Point A-Point B' or the 'Training for emergency' definitions of parkour because in my experience you can come off as either practising a sport or being paranoid, respectively, to anybody you try to explain these concepts to. You can get away with the 'Human Reclamation' argument, but I don't think our ancestors did flips when they were running from Smilodons. Overall I would define parkour as a discipline, a lost art, or my personal quote; "Reclaiming our ancestral strength"

This is true.  But Seb often says that parkour can't be explained with words, the definition is to move.  I like the A to B definition though.  It describes the mindset fairly well.  The distance from A to B can be just a few meters or kilometers.  But you're focused on overcoming an obstacle.

Offline Spencer B

  • the Romantic
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Karma: +47/-25
  • ...*BANG*...
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #10 on: February 08, 2009, 06:31:34 AM »
I don't like the 'Point A-Point B' or the 'Training for emergency' definitions of parkour because in my experience you can come off as either practising a sport or being paranoid, respectively, to anybody you try to explain these concepts to. You can get away with the 'Human Reclamation' argument, but I don't think our ancestors did flips when they were running from Smilodons. Overall I would define parkour as a discipline, a lost art, or my personal quote; "Reclaiming our ancestral strength"

This is true.  But Seb often says that parkour can't be explained with words, the definition is to move.  I like the A to B definition though.  It describes the mindset fairly well.  The distance from A to B can be just a few meters or kilometers.  But you're focused on overcoming an obstacle.

It's like we've revived a dead language...

*Kong-Cat Leap" = "How are you today?"
"10ft. Cat Walk-Landing w/o roll" = "I'm fine."
www.cracked.com
www.tvtropes.org

There are times when you want to break down and rage at the heavens. Don't. Stay calm, and let the emotions flood in, accept them and then rise above them. Never dwell. Don't fear or worry. Anything worth thinking about is worth talking about. And... Good luck.

Offline Shae Perkins

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Karma: +78/-18
  • Texas tough
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #11 on: February 08, 2009, 08:40:12 AM »
I really do not care about definitions, styles, or anything that could give what I do nametag and restrict what I love: movement, with rules and set philosophies. I have boiled my training down to honing my skill as a human to move in any environment and being the best I can be mentally and physically. Simple as that.
This post was based off of my personal gatherings. Enjoy:)

Offline Rafe

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 790
  • Karma: +54/-5
    • View Profile
    • Natural Athletics
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #12 on: February 08, 2009, 11:49:34 AM »
I see a similar progression Travis when I first trained parkour, understanding what parkour was, was very important to me and then feeling like a I understood, enforcing orthodoxy was important, flips are not parkour, free running isn't parkour trying to convince people of my positions was important to me. At this point the practice is all that I really place importance on I don't feel like it needs to be defined by negation to me parkour is a method of training the body to overcome obstacles there is a clear heart to that practice running, jumping, climbing, moving on all fours, defining the boundaries of the discipline of were parkour is no longer parkour is not important to me as long as you practice that heart as long the concept of improving your ability to move past obstacles is there the rest of differences between us don't matter much. Free run, parkour, l'art du deplacement the names don't matter the practice does. The practice is the true defination, the words are only attempts to capture something that can only be understood through practice. I don't think we will ever settle on defination of parkour that will perfectly capture it and everyone agrees on the only defination we will find peace in is the one we share when we train. All the arguments on the net melt away to nothing when you train with another experienced practioner the common understanding there arises from the movement not from words.
I shall not fear, fear is the mind killer the little death that precedes total obliteration

I will face my fear, I will let it pass over and through me and were it is gone, I will turn the inner eye and see its path, and only I will remain.

Offline Sam Slater

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +18/-0
  • a.k.a. 'Disciple'
    • View Profile
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2009, 08:05:20 AM »
I am going to approach this from a slightly different angle.

People often misread or leave out parts of what I think (yes I said I, so this could just be me misreading as well) Bruce Lee was attempting to express.

I love the "three stages of cultivation" that Bruce Lee explained, and I believe in them.  I find however that people don't realize that all three stages are necessary.  People often attempt to skip from ignorance to personal expression.  Focusing on styles and superiority of styles and differences between them is not important, but without learning the details of the way someone else does something, without learning from their mistakes or taking in the knowledge that they have already gained, I see this as either foolishness or overconfidence.

I feel the same way that Travis does in regards to the stage that most of us are in at the moment.  Without 5, 7, 10 years of constant training, people are still going to be in the stage where they are learning and perfecting specifics.  Most of us start by trying to move like someone else, but in my opinion far too many go off and attempt to 'just move' far too soon.  Yes that should be occurring throughout your training, but it takes much longer that I think most people give it.

What does this have to do with naming styles and such?  Well, from my point of view, naming styles is just naming the philosophy behind the training of the person you wish to emulate or are learning from.  This only serves the purpose of differentiation in discussion, and only at the second level of development.  The problem is that people have attempted to define terms and separate styles, when this should be done by those who "created" them.  Currently, in the higher echelons of Parkour, people do not want to define anything because of the unfortunate way that we fixate on these definitions as opposed to training.  We let these definitions divide us as we attempt to define them without going to the sources that we are attempting to emulate.

That's all for me today. Just my 2 cents.  Thanks for sparking this Travis.

Offline Travis Graves

  • Administrator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • Primal Fitness
Re: Some thoughts on the PK-FR "divide" and other random stuff
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2009, 08:22:26 AM »
Thanks for the thoughts, everyone!

The comparison between the Lee quotes and the parkour freerunning split is not really all that good. The quote is talking about different styles aiming for the same goal, while parkour and freerunning is devided in what goal they aim for.

The problem with this argument (and quite a few other ideas in this thread) is that it is born of a "level two" mind, or way of thinking.
And I completely agree with what Sam mentioned about all levels of cultivation being completely necessary.
Don't step to me with your stats and your date smarts

You know your neighborhood by street signs or landmarks?