There’s a particular element of Parkour that creates noise in the process of understanding. In the various long-topic discussions I’ve read on the APA forums all seek to establish some coherent ideas about the basics of the disciplines. I’ve been taken in by questions about the culture of parkour, its philosoph(ies) and the misconceptions that surround it. The community is self-aware, and keen to establish perimeters, social values and shared ideas. There is, unquestionably, a community of parkourists in Melbourne, and they unquestionably share a culture. There are marked similarities in terms of outlooks, goals and attitudes. Yet, a common philosophy remains difficult to pin down.

I believe that the lack of total agreement in this community is the result of parkour’s artistic sensibility. The words ‘freedom’, ‘individuality’ and ‘art’ are often used in discussions of parkour. All of these suggest a level of personal involvement, not just through the physical practice of a common activity, or even a mutual participation in a shared discipline, but a personal creative effort. Parkour remains a personal physical expression. This does not contradict the ideas of community. Art can, after all, be communal. Unlike sports, parkour does not have a clearly delineated goal, or a set of rules. The team does not train with a specific task in mind that is the same for every team member (get ball past defence, into goal). The challenges are personal.

I’ve been doing research. The academic articles I read tend to see the practitioners of parkour always practicing in opposition of something: repressive environments, the capitalist hegemony, fear, the status quo. Few practitioners have told me exactly why they do what they do. Most simply say that it appeals to them. Hard to argue with something when you know exactly what they mean. For me the reasons I encounter, the explanations of others, don’t challenge some personal philosophy of parkour. Instead, they help me create one. Sure, its better than being herded through traffic. Sure, I want to resist being constantly forced to play the role of consumer. These ideas come together as more reasons for me to do what I love.

Having said all that, I think parkour needs to have the structures and community it currently has (and culture). There is growing evidence for something many people at the APA would take for granted: the mind and the body are not separate things. Engagement with parkour is total. We don’t just train our bodies while thinking up a new recipe for strawberry shortcakes, all elements of self are equally engaged. We are forming ideas, analysing our actions, justifying our experience, creating personal philosophies. At the end of the day, we are compelled to try to communicate these thoughts. We may find people who agree and disagree, that doesn’t matter. What matters is that we find people who care enough to listen, contribute, and sometimes argue. We find people who help us justify our own passion, and just like in the art community, we learn new techniques and define ourselves among others. The APA doesn’t go around knocking on doors to get members. People come to them. Other people form their own groups. The most important evidence for the need for structures and communities is their very existence.

Shared personal passion and creativity as a basis for community. Sounds good to me. Politics aside, I think we are onto a good thing here. Communities built on diversity, personal freedoms and freedom of expression are called democracies.