PAIGE, FORREST MASTERMAN, M.S. AUGUST 2017 ARCHITECTURE A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE ALTERNATIVE APPROPRIATION OF URBAN SPACE BY PARKOUR PRACTITIONERS Thesis Advisor: William T. Willoughby Parkour is both a movement art and an urban sport, a discipline of movement and self-improvement, where practitioners utilize natural body movements such as running, jumping, and climbing to overcome obstacles, both physical and mental, in the urban environment efficiently and creatively. This phenomenological study investigates parkour practitioners, referred to as traceurs, and their alternative appropriations of urban spaces, defining the essence of their lived experiences. Utilizing the interview as the primary data collection method, as well as first and third person video investigation, data was collected from parkour practitioners and parkour communities from the Midwest in the United States in order to define the essence of their collective lived experiences. The purpose of this study is to understand the contemporary perspective through which parkour practitioners view and experience the urban environment in order to contribute to the scholarly conversation between architecture, parkour, and urban space. The importance and significance of this study is to investigate a contemporary perspective on, and interaction with, urban space in order to understand this new usage of the city, identifying which urban conditions facilitate these movements so that designers can effectively incorporate this type of movement expression into urban spaces. Employing a qualitative phenomenological research methodology that is built upon the theories and writings of Henri Lefebvre, Iain Borden, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Juhani Pallasmaa, Michel Serres, Bruno Latour, Julie Angel, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, and Matthew Lamb, this investigation addresses the main research question: What defines the essence of the lived experience that parkour practitioners have when they alternatively appropriate urban space through the practice of parkour? This study discusses the significant aspects of the experience that traceurs have before, during, and after their alternative appropriations of urban space within the framework of the writings published by these theorists. Discussion is present explaining the preparation that traceurs engage in before executing alternative appropriations, their physical and mental warm-ups, their alternative perspective of the city, their spatial analysis methods, and their interactions with risk, danger, and fear. The resulting descriptive narrative of the experience that traceurs have when they alternatively appropriate urban space is as follows: they feel a calmness and a quietness, a sense of power and weightlessness, a floaty-ness in their body of smooth, serene movement; the world around them falls away and their focus comes to the present moment, focusing on the aspect of the space they are engaging in the present moment; they experience tunnel vision and have no thoughts; they feel their bodies and hear their breath; their sense of self steps back, removed, giving them a greater feeling of connectedness with everything around them, a oneness with the environment; their focus is solely on their movement and interacting with space, which is accompanied by a sense of euphoria and feelings of freedom; they are enveloped in a flow state. This experience of urban space through a flow state is examined within the framework of Csikszentmihalyi’s discussions on flow. Additional discussion is present explaining the experience that traceurs have when they complete their alternative appropriations, their documentation and sharing of their movements, their experiences of viewing the appropriations of other traceurs, their views and biases towards non-practitioners and authorities who view their movements, and their views on the relationship between their alternative appropriations and legality in the United States. Lastly, one of the most valuable outcomes of this study was the identification of certain urban conditions and elements which make urban spaces more ideal for parkour movements. These elements and conditions include thin low walls, suspended metal bars, multilevel sturdy platforming, railings, small square or circular objects, high walls made of durable materials, accessibility ramping structures, stairs and stairwells, tables, benches, trees, terrain variations, corners, ledges, lines or cracks on the ground, having many obstacles in close proximity, varying distances between obstacles anywhere from three to fifteen feet, good texture and grip on surfaces, sturdily built objects, older and dirtier appearance to the space, and a spot that is considered public space. Images of urban spaces that have examples of these conditions can be found throughout this document. Designers can utilize these visual examples and explanations of ideal urban conditions to more successfully incorporate the movements of traceurs into urban spaces, giving these spaces a multiplicity of different uses for urban communities which go beyond their normative functions, expanding their provided social services and usage possibilities. Through defining the essence of the lived experience that parkour practitioners have when they alternatively appropriate urban spaces through parkour movements, this study expands upon the current scholarly conversation between architecture, parkour, and urban space, informing designers of which qualities and conditions in the city make these appropriations possible. Understanding this alternative perspective that traceurs have on the function of urban space has the potential to redefine how these spaces are fundamentally considered, understood, and conceived by designers and how these spaces are perceived, utilized, and experienced by urban communities. Keywords: Appropriation, Alternative, Parkour, Phenomenology, Traceur, Urban Space A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE ALTERNATIVE APPROPRIATION OF URBAN SPACE BY PARKOUR PRACTITIONERS A thesis submitted To Kent State University in partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science by Forrest Masterman Paige August, 2017 © Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials All photographs property of author Thesis written by Forrest Masterman Paige B.S. Arch., Kent State University, 2015 M. Arch., Kent State University, 2016 M.S. in Architecture and Environmental Design, Kent State University, 2017 Approved by William T. Willoughby, AIA, N.C.A.R.B. , Advisor Jonathan Fleming , Coordinator, Master of Architecture, Member of Master’s Thesis Committee Gina Zavota, Ph.D. , Member of Master’s Thesis Committee Michele Donnelly, Ph.D. , Member of Master’s Thesis Committee Accepted by Adil Sharag-Eldin, Ph.D., LEED, A.P. , Coordinator, Master of Science in Architecture and Environmental Design Mark Mistur, AIA , Dean, College of Architecture and Environmental Design TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................................................................iii LIST OF FIGURES AND IMAGES......................................................................vi PREFACE...............................................................................................................ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS....................................................................................xiv CHAPTERS: I. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY..........................................1 Introduction......................................................................................2 Defining Terminology.....................................................................9 Methodology..................................................................................15 Data Collection Procedures and Target Population.......................17 Research Questions........................................................................28 Purpose and Significance of the Study..........................................31 Literature Review...........................................................................36 II. DATA ANALYSIS...................................................................................53 Introduction to Data Analysis........................................................54 PREPARING TO EXPERIENCE THE PHENOMENON........................56 Initial Preparation...........................................................................56 Identifying Urban Conditions........................................................57 Designing for Movement...............................................................64 When Alternative becomes Normative..........................................72 iii Criticality of Alternative Appropriation of Urban Space..............79 Physical and Mental Warm-Up......................................................86 Alternative Perception of Urban Space..........................................88 Mapping the City from an Alternative Perspective.......................96 Movement Preparation...................................................................99 The Moments before Execution...................................................107 Contemplation of Risk, Fear, and Danger...................................111 Criticality of Engagement with Risk, Fear, and Danger..............115 The Decision to Execute Alternative Appropriations..................119 EXPERIENCING THE PHENOMENON...............................................122 Experiencing the Phenomenon....................................................122