Indestructible

Firstly some personal history. I started parkour two years ago, after being completely sedentary for the previous 16 years. Needless to say, I was...terrible, and after 6-9 months had 'progressed' to have roughly the same amount of skill as a non-parkour practitioner of my age. But, I did read a lot, did browse forums and articles and such, and knew the theory. Then I went to the gym for a year, and built some fundamental strength. I can honestly say that I progressed more technically in a year at the gym than I did in 6-9 months of practicing techniques, which would give you some idea of my level of coordination. Even so, my ability for spontaneous action remains poor, and I struggle with things I haven't drilled. That all said, I'm progressing faster than I feel I 'should' be, given the (little) amount of time I train each week. But, not complaining. Anyway, the point of this little biography is to explain that I don't think I have the experience to lend enough weight to what I'm going to say, so take it with a grain of salt - but take it, because I think it’s important. At least, it may give you something to think about.

"The final goal of physical education is to make strong beings." - Georges Hébert

"The goal of physical training can be summed up in one phrase, “to make yourself as indestructible as possible.” The harder a man is to kill, the longer he will remain effective, as a climber, a soldier, or whatever." - Mark Twight

If you disagree with either of those, then this article isn’t written for you. Plenty of people practice parkour just for fun, for fitness, or just to dabble – and I have no problem with that, but this article is an attempt to engage on a deeper level than just the motion.

Parkour is a mental and physical discipline for learning to overcome obstacles in your way, as if to move in a chase or emergency situation. It's about learning to move, to cross obstacles, to keep going. All well and good – it IS important - but there are many limitations on this kind of training. Even more if you consider the average traceurs training. Vaults, wallruns, probably conditioning, possibly stretching. Now, I'm all for training and I have much respect for the practitioners of this discipline, because it is physically and mentally challenging, and sticking with it requires tenacity, strength and dedication. So what's my issue here? I feel that while the training helps, it's incomplete. Being able to jump, vault and climb is all well and good, but if you have to leave your friends/family for the dogs to do so (and who would), then the skills remain unused - useless. The stock standard emergency is the fire, but while training helps you get out (or in, if your having the save-the-world, get-the-girl fantasy), it can't help you assist others to do so, and if your not strong enough to carry the girl out, completing whatever movements you need to, then again your skills are being inhibited. What about if your running, and you reach a river, but you can't swim. The obstacle beat you. What if your running, and you get caught? The obstacle (distance) beat you. Then the obstacle is the fire, the animal, the mugger; how will you overcome them? Bribery? Then the obstacle is money, which requires a source of income. Violence? Then the obstacle is firstly them, then the law, then possibly the prison, or possibly the psychological aftermath. Verbal de-escalation? How good at persuasion are you? And so on. This is not a criticism of parkour, parkour is not designed to teach conflict resolution or practical combatives. But to me, many traceurs who follow the discipline so they can be strong, be useful, handle themselves… are somehow limiting the overall scope of what they are doing, and the methods with which to accomplish it.

But I believe that Belle, Foucan, the Yamakasi - all the original French traceurs, would have no problem in the above situations. If you look at their videos, there are far fewer movements that fit the label of any one 'technique'. It's progressed beyond a concrete, articulate concept for them, the hours upon countless hours of movement has removed the constraints of technique. This feeling I think is in line with Blane's Dilution article, where people who end up very technically proficient end up shallower in other areas due to lack of experience. This feeling only applies to the way parkour is trained, not so much the discipline itself. But an art is only as good as its exponents, an art IS in fact its exponents, and if its exponents are lacking, the art suffers as a result.

I think Méthode Naturelle overcomes many of these flaws. Which is odd, you might think, because parkour evolved from MN, so surely it’s an improvement? Yes, and no. It’s more focused technically, but less generally applicable. I think that the original practitioners spent their early years training MN, and developed skills and qualities which the second generation (including myself) I feel lacks; before they began to gravitate towards movement, and less towards a martial development – due to their environment, resources, and the type of person that they became in the banlieue. MN builds strength, teaches force of will and character; and develops the qualities you need to overcome obstacles. Nothing specific, but just obstacles. And hence, this lack of specificity comes a full circle, back to parkour, martial arts, communication skills. The MN teaches, I think, intent. I don’t mean intent as “Be Strong,” (which it does), I mean intent as a more momentary idea, “Go forward,” “Dive right,” “Hit the bastard.” With intent, I believe then the subtleties of technique can be applied more naturally. Have you ever noticed when your perfectly in the zone, that things just ‘happen?’ If the “go forward” idea is always in your mind, and you have a good understanding of your body, then your body just…moves.

Of course, running towards something always means your running away from something else. The idea that training one area may weaken another area is perfectly valid – though there is a synergy between many skills, there is never a complete overlap. There is quite a famous quote, that you’ve probably heard tossed about quite regularly; “Jack of all trades, master of none.” It’s a fair point, but the full quotation actually reads; “Jack of all trades, master of none; but oftentimes better than a master of one.”

"Etre dans le vrai."