One example is skateboarding. During the war Britain suffered a huge amount of bomb-damage. Post-war reconstruction had to carried out quickly and cheaply. It was completed in the Brutalist style, a form of Modernism. Estates like Thames Mead in London or Killingworth near Newcastle were cheaply built in pre-cast concrete. This created desolate concrete environments consisting of concrete ramps, barriers and walkways. These make the ideal environment for skateboarders. These spaces were universally rejected by the inhabitants, becoming massively unpopular with the public, but skateboarders can be seen as co-opting them and changing their meaning. It's been argued that they bridge the gap between the public and the austere, even inhuman spaces of Modernism. Likewise, corporate spaces in America often consist of hard surfaces and polished marble planes. Mies van der Rohe in particular sited works like the Seagram Building in open plazas. The vast business districts in downtown areas of US cities are virtually unused at night. Skateboarders often represent the only nocturnal users. By introducing anarchic, colourful and playful behaviour they essentially redefine business and governmental spaces.
It is an underground culture based primarily in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. It has its own language and codes of dress and behaviour. They are often hostile to organized competitions and specially-created skateparks (these were built to try to get them out of the street). The phenomenon has more of a guerrilla attitude. They colonise public spaces. Consequently it can be interpreted as a symptom of urban malaise that was said to be generated in these environments. The city of San Francisco tried to ban them from Justin Herman Plaza and Union Square. But they see themselves as a form of public entertainment. It's mythologised in magazines. This is a quotation from Thrasher Magazine, June 1986:
Unavoidably, the third death of skateboarding approaches with imminent swiftness. The death throes begin with the introduction of the "Back to the Future" mass-production Sears catalog goon set-ups, mass-merchandised by trash merchants.
Some of it might seem fairly air-headed, but there is a surprising degree of awareness about their significance:
The corporate types see their structures as powerful and strong. I see them as something I can enjoy, something I can manipulate to my advantage.
Jesse Neuhaus, a former professional skateboarder from Chicago, quoted from Marc Spiegel's essay on skateboarding in Metropolis.
There is a certain amount of ego-gratification and self-mythologising, and their exploits are often documented in photography and video. These media employ techniques of distortion, spatial warping and colour saturation - they often look like a still from the Matrix. So it produced a post-digital form of art.
On the other hand, there is a whole industry behind this phenomenon. It's a lucrative business controlled by companies that thrive on the image of subversive young skaters. It's worth $150 million a year and hires kids as young as 13 to promote its products - apparently with very little regulation.
Likewise, graffiti artists impose their identity on the anonymous and alienating public spaces of the city. It is a way of personalising space, locating yourself within it. At the same time it is seen as a symptom of urban decay. It is not a new phenomenon - there's a bit of carved graffiti in Durham Cathedral from 1770, and it has archaeological value. Much of it is banal, but some of it is creative. It is a nihilistic form of expression.
An extreme example of people using space in unorthodox ways is Fathers 4 Justice, who have a humorously anarchistic approach to using public spaces. They use public monuments and governmental spaces as a stage from their protests. In Newcastle they seized on the Tyne Bridge, which is probably the most iconic structure in the city. In London they've subverted the House of Parliament and Buckingham palace. They seize on these monumental buildings and essentially redefine, dispelling their solemnity or pomposity. They rely on a Post Modern sense of play and absurdity, and use pop cultural iconography in the form of superhero costumes. But it could be argued that they focus on monuments of authority in order to reinstate paternal order, denigrating authorities such as the government and the monarchy in favour of what they see as a higher authority, that of patriarchy.
They see themselves as anarchistic, but their protests are a response to the rise of Feminism and the shift in gender roles. Women are more empowered than they used to be. Some men interpret this move towards equality as an injustice. Paternal authority used to be unquestioned, but in the Post Modern era with the rise of Feminism and post-colonialism dissenting/silenced voices were suddenly being heard.
But what Fathers 4 Justice are protesting against is the fact that in custody cases women are more likely to win custody of their children than men. This arises from the traditional belief that women should have the responsibility of looking after children. This is a form of discrimination, even if it is a positive one. So in a sense Fathers 4 Justice are actually challenging traditional gender roles, though probably without any sense of being allied with Feminism.
