Visual Epidemic

I think I picked a bad time to start the 60 work posts – after all, this is ‘vacation’. I have been doing some work, however. I started the Post Secret article, and am working on the book chapter that is due in a couple of weeks. Hursomhelst, I will continue with the 60 work posts. Getting out of sync now would not be a good sign ;-)

So today I spent some time in a cafe reworking the introduction of the chapter. My big writing hurdle is formulating clear thesis statements – you know, that really important sentence that sets up the entire article. Mine are always a bit unclear, too complex and usually a run-on sentence that stretches into a paragraph. With that in mind, I have given myself ‘permission’ to write bad introductions, work the chapter, then go back and rework the introduction. Perhaps this is common practice in academic writing, but I was having trouble being ok with writing freely in the draft version. So much so that I was having trouble producing anything written. And this is coming from a once prolific writer. All that said, I am not quite ready to show my new intro so please enjoy the intro to the Reading Parkour Spaces section :-).

from the section “Reading the spaces”

Time and space are the central concerns when reading parkour films posted to YouTube. Spaces, according to Lemke (2005) are defined by the actions performed within them. Parkour uses objects in public spaces from which to run, jump, bounce, and flip. These acrobatic performances may seem like deviant public displays which show off strength and agility, yet the art is taken very seriously by its practitioners and much emphasis is placed on proper training and thoughtfulness during runs. These films portray behaviours that seem culturally inappropriate in offline spaces, yet are a defining characteristic of the art of parkour. Offline public spaces work because they tend to have culturally agreed upon behaviours. People sit on benches, walk down pathways, bike on roads, and hold handrails. Occasionally these behaviours are extended to dramatic performances, such as street theatre, or even demonstrations of protest 2. Parkour, however, uses objects in public spaces to run, jump, bounce, and flip from. While these acrobatic performances may seem like deviant public displays with which show to off strength and agility, parkour is considered an art by its practitioners and is taken very seriously and much emphasis is placed on proper training and thoughtfulness during runs.
In the Swedish parkour videos examined in this case study, three main offline spaces were found: the urban space, the training space and the rural space.

No Comments | In: Uncategorized | tags: 60posts, parkour, performative arena, youth, YouTube. | #

Friday I submitted the AoIR paper, and honestly, I am not really happy with it. I am still missing the interviews, so the paper felt lopsided. I talked a lot about how Swedish youth perform parkour in the uploaded films, but need more data/interview information to really talk about how the performative arena is experienced. I touched on it, but the arguments could/should have been stronger. Before the actual conference, however, I will have the interviews. I plan to make defining the performative arena – or the interaction between the filmed runs, the runners, and the actual platform – the focus of the talk.

Here is an excerpt from the paper:

YouTube is a performative arena due to the interplay between the users who perform aspects of community membership and identity through a seamless blend of offline and offline practices, but also due to the social networking affordances allowed by the YouTube platform. Each channel on YouTube could be considered a site of engagement, as it is there that traces of social networking are collected and made visible. It is the collection and interplay of these sites, both through engaging in conversation on each individual video page, as well as subscribing and participating on a user’s channel which gives meaning to the performed practices within the videos. LaBelle (2006), defines the performative arena in sound art by exploring the relationship between the object and the viewer/listener.

“In understanding the art object and the art viewer as interwoven into a conversational exchange in which the object produces the looking/listening, and the looking/listening produced the object, comes to suggest the field of attention as a performative arena. Thus, art objects do not so much contain or embody meaning but rather are given meaning through a performative exchange” (LaBelle, 2006:101).

This field of attention that LaBelle speaks of can be seen in the interaction of communities of practice in Swedish youth parkour runners. This group has established practices for both their offline performances and their online interactions, and it is the reciprocity between these spaces and interactions that perform forth an arena which is simultaneously meaningful, shared and experienced.

No Comments | In: Uncategorized | tags: AoIR, parkour, performative arena, youth, YouTube. | #