Academia BASE . . .

[base736 0]

Quote

Unfortunately for these researchers, they failed to take into account that the mother of BASE is skydiving, and it is from those roots that video-making, video-sharing, and video-selling arise. Too, skydiving has plenty of media saturation.

They also failed to take into account the fact that high-quality video equipment is becoming increasingly available to the consumer. But, much like your point, that's largely irrelevant to a discussion on the nature of the mediation of BASE.

Quote

So what I would ask these fellows is this: if I substituted a skydiving event for a base event, what difference would it make to your paper and your research?

Also irrelevant. Nowhere do the researchers make the claim that mediation in BASE is fundamentally different from that in skydiving. A discussion of that question in this paper would constitute scope creep.

Quote

Ask yourself this: if there were no media at Bridge Day, would the jumpers still come? If there were no way to make base videos, would you still jump?

Demonstrating only that mediation is not central to the sport. But then, the authors never claimed that it was...

Quote

You can't tie the non-base jumping picture-takers, video-makers to base. They're just there to get a story, make a buck, and they will be at the next story-making, buck-making event, whatever that event happens to be.

That's rediculous. By the same argument, you can't tie parachutes to BASE, since they're also used in skydiving, to drop cargo, to slow aircraft, to entertain kids in elementary schools... Video, both by BASE jumpers and by others, is absolutely relevant to the nature of the sport. This article discusses the nature of that relevance.

I think this should probably be taken to private messages if you'd like to discuss it further. I'm pretty sure we're drifting well away from a discussion of any relevance at all to BASE, and am posting this reply only against my better judgement.

... If, as might be true in principle, I had any.

[JaapSuter 0]

Quote

I think this should probably be taken to private messages if you'd like to discuss it further. I'm pretty sure we're drifting well away from a discussion of any relevance at all to BASE, and am posting this reply only against my better judgement.

Please don't. The subject interests me and this forum is more effective than multi-person messaging. I'm sure Tom will allow us this minor digression. It's still about a BASE paper.

Jason, do you have an opinion on the following comment by Rhonda Lea?

Quote

Except that they wouldn't be able to make the link between skydiving and quasi-illegal activity, and publication in a criminology journal wouldn't be open to them.

Are the conclusions in the paper relevant to the fact that base-jumping is sometimes illegal? Or do they merely argue that there is a bidirectional influence between media and BASE and keep this orthogonal to its legal status?

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

Video, both by BASE jumpers and by others, is absolutely relevant to the nature of the sport.

It is?

Quote

I think this should probably be taken to private messages if you'd like to discuss it further. I'm pretty sure we're drifting well away from a discussion of any relevance at all to BASE, and am posting this reply only against my better judgement.

We can have the rest of the discussion in PMs or email if you like, but your statement above makes me feel like I'm really weird.

Or maybe your perception is different from mine because you're a videographer, and I have very little interest in video or pictures. I carry all my visual memory inside my head, not in a dvd. I don't go to movies either--I read books, and they all unfold for me visually, like my own private movie.

So that's my prejudice, but I really did believe that all anyone needs to base jump (equipment-wise) is a rig and a canopy.

rl

Edited to add:

Quote

Quote

So what I would ask these fellows is this: if I substituted a skydiving event for a base event, what difference would it make to your paper and your research?

Also irrelevant. Nowhere do the researchers make the claim that mediation in BASE is fundamentally different from that in skydiving. A discussion of that question in this paper would constitute scope creep.

The only thing distinguishing base from skydiving for the purpose of their thesis is the quasi-criminal aspect of base. Which brings me back to the point that Jaap has asked you to comment on.

Don't get me wrong, Jason, I think that a lot of what they describe, factually, is accurate and worth reading, but I also think they started out trying to describe what they believed to be an on-the-edge (legally speaking, not the way we think of it) community and were subverted in the process. So when they got to the end of the whole mess, they didn't really know what to do, and they ended up with a...swirl (to use their word) of shit.

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[base736 0]

Quote

It is?

Absolutely it is. You don't need to enjoy video yourself to understand that its use has made a significant impact on the sport. Perhaps equivalently, the fact that some jumpers have no interest in video does not change its importance to both BASE jumping and skydiving.

For instance... I remember a time (as I'm sure many do -- heck, I haven't been to a dropzone in a while; this might still be the case) when cameras were found predominantly on freeflyers. I find that tremendously interesting. Why is that the case? How does it change the way freeflyers and bellyflyers identify themselves as subgroups? Sure, at the end of the day, we're all jumpers, but there's a subtler dynamic here.

Or, consider the fact that if my video malfunctions on a jump, I'm a little bummed about that. Why? Because part of the jump, for me, is the bit where you sit down and relive the bits and pieces, or BS about it with friends. Video can be a part of that. Would I jump without? Absolutely, and I have even since I started flying video.

Consider the safety aspect, which is tied in intimately with what Lyng et al call "negotiat[ing] individual and collective status". Ever watch a piece of carnage tape repeatedly, before setting it aside, to see what you might learn? Ever see a cocky skydiver go ass-over-teakettle at NRGB and give the guy shit from your living room? How many people know that Jeb is the man despite never having met him personally, having seen him do thirty-seven back layouts from 300 feet, or something silly like that?

Video changes many things, among them the social dynamic in BASE. Video is absolutely relevant to the nature of the sport.

Quote

[...] Except that they wouldn't be able to make the link between skydiving and quasi-illegal activity, and publication in a criminology journal wouldn't be open to them.

Which is why publishing a similar article about skydiving in a criminology journal would have been foolish. "Theoretical Criminology" is an interdisciplinary journal. I suspect they publish many articles with only a little relevance to mainstream criminology.

Where you, unless I'm mistaken, believe that the authors manipulated the article to marginally suit the journal, I believe that they chose a journal which only marginally suited their article. You suggest what amounts to minor academic misconduct; I suggest a productive sharing of ideas. The difference is in intent, and neither you nor I know the authors' intent.

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

Quote

It is?

Quote

Absolutely it is. You don't need to enjoy video yourself to understand that its use has made a significant impact on the sport. Perhaps equivalently, the fact that some jumpers have no interest in video does not change its importance to both BASE jumping and skydiving.

I remember a time before the cameras got itty-bitty, so my perspective isn't quite the same as yours.

Quote

For instance... I remember a time (as I'm sure many do -- heck, I haven't been to a dropzone in a while; this might still be the case) when cameras were found predominantly on freeflyers. I find that tremendously interesting. Why is that the case? How does it change the way freeflyers and bellyflyers identify themselves as subgroups? Sure, at the end of the day, we're all jumpers, but there's a subtler dynamic here.

I remember a time before there was such a thing as freeflyers.

Quote

Or, consider the fact that if my video malfunctions on a jump, I'm a little bummed about that. Why? Because part of the jump, for me, is the bit where you sit down and relive the bits and pieces, or BS about it with friends. Video can be a part of that. Would I jump without? Absolutely, and I have even since I started flying video.

So what you're really saying is that this article fits in with your view of reality.

What I'm saying is that it doesn't fit in with my experience. But a lot has changed since I stopped jumping, so maybe I'm like one of those old fogeys talking about the "good old days."

On the other hand, while I remember some people jumping camera at Bridge Day '97 and '98, there were far fewer than the article implies.

Quote

How many people know that Jeb is the man despite never having met him personally, having seen him do thirty-seven back layouts from 300 feet, or something silly like that?

Because they've read about him?

I've never seen any of his videos.

Quote

Video changes many things, among them the social dynamic in BASE. Video is absolutely relevant to the nature of the sport.

So if a law is passed banning cameras tomorrow, what happens to jumping?

The sport--both sports--existed for a long lot of years without a whole lot of video. Some, I'll grant you, but the good video guys were few and far between, so there are a lot of jumps that happened without pictures.

Quote

Quote

[...] Except that they wouldn't be able to make the link between skydiving and quasi-illegal activity, and publication in a criminology journal wouldn't be open to them.

Quote

Which is why publishing a similar article about skydiving in a criminology journal would have been foolish. "Theoretical Criminology" is an interdisciplinary journal. I suspect they publish many articles with only a little relevance to mainstream criminology.

Where you, unless I'm mistaken, believe that the authors manipulated the article to marginally suit the journal, I believe that they chose a journal which only marginally suited their article. You suggest what amounts to minor academic misconduct; I suggest a productive sharing of ideas. The difference is in intent, and neither you nor I know the authors' intent.

I don't see anything productive about their article, Jason. And their focus is "edgework" (in this and other articles they've published) which is quasi-criminal in nature. Do you really feel that you are the canopy-equipped equivalent of a graffiti artist?

But now we're about to go sliding into my perception of "what is crime?" and that's not relevant to this except from the point of view that I cannot be convinced that base jumpers are criminals--well, okay, maybe one or two --even if certain members of the law enforcement community skew justice to suit their personal prejudices by prosecuting base as a criminal activity.

And I certainly don't believe any implication that base is a criminal activity should be allowed to pass unremarked.

Now I'm going to bed.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[Zenister 0]

its not that it is a criminal activity per se but that it has elements of a criminal nature, as does graffiti..and there certainly more similarities between the two activities than legality.... when it comes right down to it everyone is a criminal whenever they break any law at all.

Camera and video affects everything.. it brings experience and documents events in a manner like nothing else before it. This vastly contributes to the collection and dispersion of information and eventually knowledge. Mediation isnt really a bad thing even if it has detrimental effects to some aspects of what was primarily a mentor based activity...

Even this board is a form of mediation, and it would be equally valid to study the effects of the 'internet' on 'BASE' as it is video..

These are all elements of the activity. Even if you've never made a jump on video, it still affects the development of the sport..Participant or not, like it or not, the fact that anyone 'knows of' any activity except by direct experience, or first person narrative, is directly attributable to mediation..technology affects social order as much as social order affect technology.

but i agree 'edgework' is simply a silly term to describe any activity on the fringe of a social system.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[base736 0]

What Zenister said. But less succinctly.

Edit to add: What I think is productive about this paper is that much of what I've said above isn't something I'd really thought about before. As always, your mileage may vary.

[TVPB 0]

Jaap

You are making the assumption that the writer actually wants a wider audience.

This may be incorrect. Or not???????????

You are right if the writer was intending to inform and educate a wider audience. But I personally do not think that was the intent or the case.

You are entitled to have an opinion on any piece of writing. But more than that, the writer has a greater right to pen the words that (s)he feels/desires/believes/etc. A similar example I have come across recently are the works of WD Gann - on of the greatest investors during the years of the Great Depression, etc. His technique when it is dummed down is very simple to understand for most people. It is a bit of a hobby of mine that is making some good $$$$$$. But if you read his books, most mortals struggle to understand "what the hell he is on about". His intent was to force people to think and try to understand instead of giving them a simple 5 step recipe. He believed that people should put in effort to earn rewards. The reward in his case was a more complete understading of his techniques (and the flow on benefits of greater trading success).

Many people seem to have the belief that BASE jumping is an activity that deviates widely from other activities. I don't actually think that is the case at all.

There are many similarities between BASE and other activities. One of the other posts on this thread touched on this. The sport has people, groups, individuals, competitions, solo activities, equipment, training regime's, personalities, events, students, experienced, administrators, competitors, social participants, manufacturers, equipment retailers, supporters, detractors, champions, losers,

The major differences are:

- perceptions of people internal and external to the sport
- the actual detail and technical aspects of the sport
- the level of maturity of the sport - we are still relatively young (not necessarily time - level of development could also be considered)
- the fact that any activity that has a minor participation rate is considered strange by the remainder of society. I.e I always thought spoon collectors were weird. And what about the running of the bulls - doesn't that look dangerous and stupid (but if you talked to an experienced runner and learnt more about the activity . . .)
- the perceived and actual risk and margins for error.

Hence,

The best thing in my humble opinion is to keep an open mind about everything. What people say and do and what your perceptions are of what they said and did may be extremely divergent. Clarity through communication resolves most of these circumstances.


But thankfully, there will always be different opinions. Society needs this to progress.

Enough ranting and raving.

Stay Safe
Have Fun
Good Luck

Stay Safe - Have Fun - Good Luck

The above could be crap, thought provoking, useful, or . . But not personal. You decide.

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

What Zenister said.

I agree with everything Zenister said.

I don't agree it has anything to do with what these wingdings tried to tie together in their paper.

More later. Work calls.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[klapaucius 0]

The messages, quotes and replies became so convoluted, that I'll put my comments on a fresh page, because it's too difficult to trace it all.

Here it is.

The paper talks about BD ca 1998. That was different compared to now?

Scientific terms are scientific terms and usually mean the same to a community. Edgework is a term and people use it.

At least two authors had significant 'edgework' experiences, their scientific viewpoint is most likely "mediated" with previous experiences...Quoting from the essay:

"Building on our previous ethnographic work on voluntary risk taking, illicit adrenalin rush experiences, and related subjects (for example, Milovanovic, 1988; Lyng, 1990; Ferrell, 1996), and on our previous experiential involvement with skydiving and BASE-jumping activities, we attended the Bridge Day event in 1997 and 1998"

A long sentence follows

"Attempting to immerse ourselves in the event, and thus to develop a situated ethnography of the event and its participants, we collected documents; attended training sessions, orientation seminars, informal gatherings, awards ceremonies, parties, and other events; tape recorded, photographed, and participated in events and interactions at the bridge jump area, the landing area, and elsewhere on Bridge Day; and conducted numerous on-location interviews with BASE jumpers, event organizers, media personnel, and other participants".

The essays in these interdisciplinary fields almost never reach a firm conclusion.

What we are doing in this forum now is what they were doing to BD in their essay, to a certain extent.

One of the purposes of authors writing has been achieved: Further discussion on the subject (no firm conclusions though..). All of this started with an innocent post from NickDG.

Mediation affects the sport. Why is the number of jumpers growing exponentially? (we start using their term - "mediation" ).

I did not reach any conclusions either...

[avenfoto 0]

i have reached a conclusion and it is my head fucking hurts.... what a thread..who knew "we" were so smart...

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

The paper talks about BD ca 1998. That was different compared to now?

Specifically, it talks about '97 and '98.

This was '97:

A stroll down memory lane

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb