UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Jaka Jeram

Skateboarding: an urban spatial activity

Ljubljana, 2022
 1. Introduction

Skateboarding – an activity practiced largely in public urban space. Its uniqueness is, that it
is one of the rare activities that interacts with urban space – the city, and its architectural
elements on different degrees. From only transporting through, achieve specific set goals
through space, implying new meaning to surrounding space, making space an area of self-
expression and so on. In this essay I wish to point out and discuss some space related
concepts connecting skateboarding and urban space. From summarizing the birth of it to
analyzing spatial movement of skateboarding in different dimensions, outlining basic places
of skateboarding, noticing sacred and profane aspects, the targeted focus area of
skateboarders, the transformation of intention behind skateboarding, skateboarding
architecture.

2. A brief summary of skateboarding

Skateboarding, is an activity that was born in the 60s, in California. In its essence it was a
transport vehicle serving only for transportation. Later on, surfers began using skateboards
as a vehicle to move from one place to the other and meanwhile, performing a number of
maneuvers. It was a tool of emulating surfing maneuvers on land, when the ocean denied
the possibility of surfing. In its evolution, knowledge about the possible variants of riding
styles, maneuvers and tricks accumulated. Skaters began using it when being, riding in the
streets, which gave birth to a branch of skateboarding known as street skateboarding. This
essay will be focusing primarily on this type of skateboarding, because its analysis of the
connection of space and skateboarding is the most fertile.

3. Skateboarding’s history of claiming different dimensions of urban space.

Skateboarding in its essence, as mentioned before is an urban activity. It was born out of the
principles of surfing and the mechanics of roller-skating. Skateboards and skateboarders, in
the 60s, claimed the sidewalk, the first dimension of the city. Moving on a sidewalk is
generally or intended to be done in two ways. Forward or backward or left or right. This are
the basic categories of the moving in the first dimension.

A skateboard was a perfect vehicle for quick and short trips. With its usage, skaters took
tricks and styles used in surfing, and applied them to skateboards. Skateboarding here
moves away from being an activity of transport, from a liminal activity, to an activity of
different engagement. (This will be discussed in a later chapter.)

Then when skateboarding had its first boom in the 70s. Skateboarders began utilizing
schoolyard concrete banks, to perform their tricks and to get a better sense of possible
riding surfaces and maneuvers. Remarkably in the same crucial moment, the urethane
skateboard wheel was invented and California went in a state of a long drought. These new
wheels provided a skateboarder with a new grip on the terrain, allowing him to make
sudden movements without losing traction. Consequently, skaters turned to empty
swimming pools, which were seen as a “constant wave”, maximizing the “surfable”
experience on land, in the city. This was a claim of the second spatial dimension – going up
and down on a steep inclined surface, without stepping off the board or stopping constant
movement. The invention of the urethane wheel, caused skateboarders to “chrash” into
walls and in that moment doing a special move, which allows him to “climb” a wall. To ride
it. Now skateboarders were equipped whit the two-dimensional riding. The flatness of
surfaces wasn’t so important anymore. Inconsistent terrain was not a problem for a flowy
ride, a ride without stopping and going around.

Skateboarding in the 70s evolved its competitive side, architectural (skatepark and obstacle
building) and the technology of skateboarding equipment. The at the end of the decade it
suffered a grate incline in interest and most of the skate parks were demolished and not
rebuild.

Then in the next boom, was in the 80s, where most of all skateparks were demolished,
skaters turned to the streets. Now skateboarding, equipped with a large collection of moves
and tricks to concur obstacles (in two dimensions), before met in skateparks, skaters used
this knowledge, acquired in the 20 years of its life and applied it to the streets. With the
invention of the “Ollie” a basic skateboarding move that allows a skateboarder to jump up
and over something, without losing contact with his board. This now means the mixture of
the first dimension and the second. Movement isn’t limited to only a first dimension or the
second, or both when the terrain allows it (banks, pools). Skateboarders now could move in
the both dimensions anywhere without being limited by space or different obstacle. This
fusion of the first two dimension gives birth to the third one. Now they could move over
things, move from one height to a higher position without the stopping of movement. In the
next decades skateboarding’s technicality evolved, even so the tricks and the number of
possible ones to the point that even uninviting places of the urban began to be usable. From
large stairs, handrails, banks, ledges, statues, plazas, sidewalk curbs and so on.

This notion of overcoming of the surrounding terrain, if we move away from cultural and
subcultural factors to spatial factors, is the appealing people find in skateboarding. Being a
master of your movement in the urban environment. “Rather than allowing architecture to
dictate who they are, the skateboarder responds with their own question of who am I, and
seeks an answer through their own actions.” (Borden, 2019, pp. 119) “Skating, then, might
be understood as an activity more adept that walking at discovering natural lines.” (Glenney
and Mull, 2018, pp. 444) Limitations dissolve, new ways new possibilities of motion patterns
occur, a person has now through a different perspective of space. The architectural
elements that seemed to be unnoticed and cherished by the general public now get new
meaning.

4. Places of skateboarding

A skateboarder doesn’t randomly choose a place where skateboarding would be practiced.

Skate spots1, or at least, good skate spots share some universal properties, that attract the
skateboarding community.

In principle the skate spot consists of three elements: the run-up, the “skate object” and
the landing. These three elements can be divided into sub elements, which serve to achieve
greater diversity and creativity of skateboarding in action. But this is not as essential as the
condition of the three general elements. These are texture – the smoothness of the ground,

1
A regualrely used urban place, where skateboarding is done.
speed attainability, fluidity and the versatility of surfaces accessible in a single line. 2 These
conditions later influence the trick probability and the interest of skaters in certain places.
Consequently, skaters are attracted to certain areas in which they regularly appear an those
not inclined by skateboarding in which they almost never appear – so called skateboarding
friendly zones and skateboarding unfriendly zones, in context of material elements. The
social factor of skater welcoming places is going to be discussed later.

The material aspect is only one component of factors by which skaters choose a place for
skateboarding. The second could be addressed as social, because it is linked with some
social concepts and interpretations of place and space. When choosing a space, the first
appropriated are places with the biggest factor of attracting attention of the passerby and
that meets the criteria of ground conditions mentioned before. These places demand
attention from people so skateboarders firstly appropriate them for skateboarding
purposes. This places mostly already have some cultural meaning – they represent
something, rather than being strictly functional (their importance isn’t just in the structure
of the urban space, it is in the cultural dimension of space structure). This category of places
includes churches, plazas, monuments … Skaters then willingly change the established
meaning and interpret them in their new way. Moving away from the intentional meaning,
for example – a statue – a praise to the person it depicts, to a meaning of self-expression.

On the other hand, many skaters choose “spaces yet not dominated by the high ideologies
and powers of the state” (Borden, 2001, p. 6) Appropriating spaces yet not defined in an
ideological way, skaters avoid confrontation with power holders and the police forces, since
skateboarding is seen as a criminal/delinquent activity. With no discreditation and
opposition of the intended meaning, skateboarders achieve more “skate-time”, the time
that they can use a public space, without being hassled by the public or police and can use it
longer, creating more chance of landing and inventing new possible tricks and combinations
of them. Skateboarder in their hunt for the perfect skate-spot, commodify “left over spaces”
(Borden, 2019, p. 7), that is spaces not commercially used, without implicit meaning or
function for the public. “Many buildings and urban spaces utilized by skateboarders are
thought to be “useless of abandoned, having no profits being derived from them, into which
skater breathe new life.” (Borden, 2019, p. 6) This re-usage, reinterpretation and the

2
A line – a collection of tricks performed in a continuous motion without stopping (falling of the board).
reapplication of meaning of urban spaces brings the back in the attention of the public.
Skaters are seen moving, spending time in places seen as “worn out” of profit. Their
presence at these kinds of space bring attention of other people and later city management
that leads to the “repopulation” and revitalization of left-over spaces. Skateboarding does
not only serve itself it serves to the city as well. Giving meaning to the meaningless.

5. Sacred and profane in skateboarding

By extensive use of skate-spots which allow creativity and trick-ability and by the collection
of wowing tricks done there and recorded, by the leading faces of the skateboard industry,
or places that “created” some skateboarding’s subgroups, or leading groups in the
progression of skateboarding, their cultural meaning gradually grows. Some have achieved
the status of sacred or quasi-sacred spaces. These places become the dream of where new
up-and-coming skateboarders wish to skate. Certain skate-spots get a “quasi-spiritual
meaning” (Glenney and Mull, 2018, p. 441), that can be glorified to an almost quasi-religious
meaning. Not only famous skate-spots are the recipients of this sacredness, even non-
meaningful objects such as curbs or handrails of ledges can be interpreted as sacred. All this
comes down to the skateboarder’s preference of skateboarding styles. Skaters who prefer
to skate parking block curbs imply sacred meaning into them. Curbs are, in their case, seen
as the most creativity inducing objects (and most fun). This results in the curb-culture – a
strand of skateboarding that focuses mainly on curb skateboarding. Their members
participate in group curb-sessions, in the context of sacredness, a sacred group ritual
practiced annually. Curbs appear on T-shirts, in magazines which is the symbolism of the
sacred. Curbs are only one example or reinterpreting and inducing sacred meaning in
objects. In general skateboarders imply sacred meaning in the surrounding space, making it
“meaning-fuller” to them as in contrast to the general public. Sacred spaces are not just
glorious architectural places attracting people, they are regularly unnoticed elements of the
urban.
 6. The “focus-view specter” of a skateboarder

Since skateboarding provides some new options of movement in the urban environment it is
still limited by the physical factor of space-dimensionality achievable. If we purpose that
skateboarder’s jump, its height is limited and also the capacity to turn in the certain “degree
factor” paths of skateboarding in the focus of skateboarder’s vision are limited to a specific
window in space. In my observation the view mainly is focused on the ground and on the
architecture accessible with the move Ollie. The more capable skateboarded can achieve an
approximate height of 50-80 cm, without the use of a jump ramp. Grater height can
definitely be achieved by better, more capable skateboarders, but these are limited in
numbers. So proposing, that the skaters target area consists of places from the ground up to
approximately a meter in height their vision is limited to this window of space. These areas
consist of benches, ledges, curbs, handrails, banks (tilted flat surfaces), poles and so on.
Skaters utilize relatively small architectural elements that seem to have no wider cultural
meaning. With the skateboarding activity they focus on this area and study it immensely to
the point they notice even the smallest details, which can be crucial in allowing good
rideability. They examine the floor when searching for the most optimal path and notice
everything from trash to cracks to the change of ground material, in which case they often
decide to change their course depending on their preference of ground material.

The second part of the visual focus is locating objects probable to disturb or stop the ride.
Potential interruptive elements can be people, cars, traffic signs, un-places, areas of non-
consistent paths, such as sudden quick turns. Skaters often choose spaces that are relatively
unpopulated to lessen their conflict with the surrounding public and once again prolong the
time of being unhassled.

7. A step away from liminality

Skateboarding in its initial design and purpose was a vehicle of transport. The focus was on
getting from point A to point B. Then skaters started to emulate surfing and invent new
tricks, skateboarding or skateboarders gave a new meaning to the activity. It wasn’t only a
mean of transport and a non-engaging and interactive activity, in the sense that no deeper
thought is given when riding about, choosing certain routes for the purpose of trick
attainability. It became an activity of focus, of elaborated taught, visualization, preplanning
and most importantly joy. Now the transporting aspect of skateboarding lost its importance.
The riding mixed with trick performance was the primary function. In this way skateboarding
stops being a liminal practice and becomes the targeted practice through trick being done. A
whole purpose of it can now be riding around for no inherent reason, rather that
skateboarding – skateboarding for the sake of skateboarding. “To go for a skate is to go for a
drift, to explore the streets looking for hidden places, opportunities for creative
misappropriation; it is to recombine the artifacts of production and reinterpret the city for
oneself” (Howell, 2001, p. 6) The main goal of the activity of skaters is performing tricks in
the ride. The goal is that the ride never stops. A skater on his “seamless” ride engages
actively with the surrounding architectural elements in a way that has not been done in any
urban activity, except maybe parkour.

Skateboarding is performed in liminal space (the sidewalk of the street), which for skaters
stops being liminal but targeted space, space of interest, a space of creativity.

8. Skateboarding architecture

Skateboarding was born in the urban. As mentioned, it utilized streets and then it was
removed from urban life and set in special environments – skateparks. I will not be focusing
on the initial skatepark designs, consisting of banks, ramps, slalom tracks…, until the change
of the planning of them in the sense that they mimic and copy elements of urban
environment. This change occurred in the late 80s and then gradually became the norm of
skatepark design.

In today’s skatepark or skate-plazas there are some elements in common with the urban
space. This includes stairs with handrails, sitting benches, curbs and other mutilated urban
objects.. It is a very interesting thing is this modeling of the urban, since the urban exists
outside of the skatepark and is used on an everyday basis by skateboarders, never mind the
fact that designated areas for skateboarding exist. The skateparks are a “sterile” copy of the
urban and present the optimal skateboarding conditions. This is a probable cause why a
mass of skaters rather choose the streets. Urban space is more organic than skateparks. It
allows more diversity, it is not static. The urban holds constant changes of movement, of
things and also the movement of the environment. The urban space changes regularly, in
constructing new buildings, repaving streets, building parks and so on.

9. Anti-skateboarding architecture

In the last years there has been an increase in architectural elements that function as
skateboarding preventers, known as skate-stoppers. These are little design elements that
make the act of skateboarding on a specific object impossible or very difficult. They are, for
example, bars on benches that enable sliding or grinding on edges, “perforated” pavement
installed specifically on the landing or the run-up, metal bolts sticking out of handrails and
bars… But as it turned out, they don’t serve its purpose. Skaters accepted skate-stopper and
found them as a thing that forces creativity. A recent trend in skateboarding is, seen in
contemporary videos, skating on objects that are skate-proof and in a unique way using
skate stoppers to invent new tricks or combinations of them. This again points out to the
skateboarder’s ability to harmonize with even hostile environment, an ability to subordinate
space to their need.

10. Skateboarding - time, flow and speed

“New spaces are designed to keep commerce (people) moving.” (Howell, 2001, p. 5) This is
not targeted at urban elements such as statues, monuments, that are designed to capture
people’s attention. If we assume that urban (street) skateboarding is done mainly in the
other non-attention seeking places, skaters protest the whole purpose of them. Skaters
linger where they should be moving and so disrupt the “flow of movement” in specific
areas. “The skater interweaves their own composition of time into that of regular temporal
patterns.” (Borden, 2001, p. 14) Where certain speeds are established (movement on stairs,
busy streets, steep hills, sidewalks) skaters imply their own interpretation of speeds
appropriate to those places and by doing so “paint over” the rules of movement, they
decide to brake the unwritten rules of spaces about speed and most of the time rush
through space manically and very fast, disrupting other movers making the stop or change
their path, that usually wouldn’t be such.

The movement of people in a specific area in the city is most of the time linear. People move
from point A to point B, most of the time without consuming, engaging actively with the
surrounding space. Sometimes the stop at a certain element of the urban environment,
study it and when they have learned a specific meaning of it they carry on to the next one.
But skaters present a drastically different pattern of movement. They do move linearly, in
the since that they are moving forward in time and space, but when engaging with space
they don’t only stop and study, they change their movement from linear to circular. This
appear in the events of trying to succeed different tricks. They start in the run-up of the
“skate spot3” of their choice, start moving to the targeted architectural element, engage
with the element through performing a trick and then continue to the landing. I purpose
that the trick is almost never successful in the first try, so skaters, when their ability to
consistently perform tricks fails, circle back to the starting point of of the “trick path” and
repeat their action. The circular pattern is not present only in the performance of tricks. It is
omnipresent in the whole route planning. When skateboarders go riding they plan their trip
accordingly of the starting point to the main point and later go back to the starting point.
The first skate-spots visited are closes to the starting point, then they are closer and closer
to the main skate-spot that they want to utilize and later they retract their journey
sometimes “hitting” the same spots backwards or planning them in the same way, but this
time the starting point is the main destination.

11. Conclusion

Skateboarding is not only a sport practiced in urban space. It is a method of communication

and appreciation of space. It is an activity that forces its practitioner to analyze space, find
meaning in it and later apply a different meaning on it. It is a method of self-expression
through space and a method of modeling one’s movement through it. Skateboarders imply
new rhythms and time patterns in the regular, they change the motion of places, they force

3
A place where skate trick are regularly preformed.
diversity and only in time and speed but in the directionality (meant linearity and
circularity).

Skateboarding has in its evolution claimed different spatial dimensions, with the
advancement of the gear and tricks for which skaters choose specific places that are most
suitable for skateboarding performance. These places aren’t chosen randomly and they
belong to a specific “window” of space which dominates the skateboarders focus vision,
because of being focused on this area daily. With a persistent search for the optimal skate
spot some get a quasi-spiritual or “sacred” implication which is reproduced in the skater
community and the specifics of this places are interpreted and reproduced in the building of
skateparks, since they are known to be most skate-appropriate.
Literature cited:

1. Brian G. and Mull S. (2018) Skateboarding and the Ecology of Urban Space. Journal
of Sport and Social Issues, vol. 42, no. 6, p. 437–453, Taken from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0193723518800525?
journalCode=jssa. (17. 1. 2022)
2. Borden, I. (2001) Another pavement, another beach: skateboarding and the
performative critique of architecture. MIT Press, 2001. p. 178-199, Taken from
https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/26049/1/Borden_Another_Pavement.pdf. (17.
1. 2022)
3. Howell, O. (2001) The poetics of security: Skateboarding, urban design, and the new
public space. Urban Action. p. 64-86. Taken from https://urbanpolicy.net/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/Howell_2001_Poetics-of-Security_NoPix.pdf. (10. 1. 2022)
4. Borden, I. (2019) Movement without words: An intersection of Lefebvre and the
urban practice of skateboarding. The Routledge Handbook of Henri Lefebvre, The
City and Urban Society. Routledge, p. 221-229. Taken from
https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/61741439/Borden-Lefebvre-
Skateboarding20200110-129620-1vpaw5c-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?
Expires=1642273260&Signature=fj8ms4b54xkUKR5BsLsmfC9qBuu6Iwk6oaMB1qG2P
GyG4w-
MrHyRjxw15br3Ezap2Bj98j9rg4QcdAR9hErMoDibPVJ2dWxtrp6ovGDPXR97yXTNIbAl
3LWLCNklTGe5LS4t5zKMV0cwnxL68~LlmHm~BUCjWrC6Rr~rss~4WiRjd0Yc4GCjuyYE
AjR9~HaHA3oBqpRb3VQRzvWyuD0IveDTs5xybLmUA1bE53VzkM5UOc0VqOBasbNCo
nZ-1yJWQ9S9EOY9onzVFAo04eAZPf34fnBxp~KptuEpRAMoiJcf6a6sHMbW3i0A-
G6WHTv2jsZiq3Yh5s~CY20O6gNnrA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA. (11.
1. 2022)