Hey Guys, It is Bygone Era. I Started writing this short(relatively) paper about urbexing. I just want to get some of your guys' opinions about it so here:


Forgotten and Found:
The Value of Decay
By Bygone Era

Since the beginning of civilization, humans have never been satisfied to simply live in the natural world. We are known to erect structures, fashion tools, and invent our comforts. Most of these creations outlive us and their own usefulness. They are often left behind, derelict and forgotten, a tactile memory of what we once needed and have now moved past.

There’s a wide gap between Indiana Jones swinging through ancient ruins in search of treasure and the slow, dry work of real archeologists digging through layers of shattered pottery. Somewhere in between is urban exploration, “a term coined in 1996 by Jeff ‘Ninjalicious’ Chapman in his zine Infiltration” as “the investigation of man-made places ignored and largely unseen by the public.” (Paiva, 2008) “Urbex”, as it’s known in forums that are popular with explorers, can encompass any human creation left abandoned and artistically rotting, from desert junkyards to deserted military installations. Just as in archaeology, all fragments of human civilization are important but the urbexer is chronicling emotional connection rather than historical ephemera and the draw of urbexing might be more closely associated with art than academics.

People who understand the beauty of a natural stone arch, the attraction of the Crown Jewels, or the lure of a mystical relic like the Blarney stone are less enthusiastic about the appeal of a decrepit gas station, but who can forget the first time as a child they discovered a strange, abandoned structure or a flotilla of interesting garbage, maybe in the woods, maybe in a field or stream behind their house? “Many of us first began exploring abandoned places as part of a childhood rite of passage anthropologists and folklorists have dubbed ‘Legend Tripping’--that ‘I double-dog-dare-you to go in that spooky old house!’ experience.” (Paiva, 2008) As we grow older, we lose that sense of wonder and start to see only the hazards of the old and unkempt. Urbexers are a bit like those whose inborn ability to learn new languages doesn’t fade with age. They are able to hold onto that childlike awe of broken things and the beauty of decay.

In a sense, history is a monetary system. It assigns high value to the rare, unusual, and the celebrity: paleolithic cave drawings, Anasazi cliff houses, George Washington’s letters. But just like money, value is arbitrary. The accessibility of modern urbexing sites--that crumbling old factory your mom might have complained they still haven’t torn down--often leads to low societal valuation, but their very ordinariness is what makes them truly valuable. As a people, we preserve our historical objects with a sense of immortality: if we can still see paleolithic man’s drawings, we can chart our own supremacy in the timeline of the world. But modern decay is a constant reminder of our fragility. In the end, Mother Nature always wins. Tearing down and rebuilding is the only way to stay ahead in the race. Abandoned structures are stooped with tragedy--the hare of civilization taking a rest while the tortoise of time ambles inevitably forward. “The songs of broken things are everywhere. The flaps on derelict airliners creak back and forth from under the eaves and broken shingles of decrepit buildings…The air is thick with an atmosphere of foreboding and infinite sadness.” (Paiva, 2003).

Urban exploration will not mitigate the inevitable decline of modern life or the mortality of human instruments, and likewise, isn’t going to force decomposing casualties of advancement--the old office buildings, the rusting cranes--into the broader historical narrative. But it can breathe on the spark of life. As human history continues its march onwards, the charge is left to urban explorers to document the emotions, the wonder, and the transience of our dominance. Like a bird nesting the cartilage of a roofless warehouse, all that is left to these explorers is to be: “[an] observer recording the final moments of a crumbling man-made world that few ever get to see,” (Paiva 2008)

Bibliography:
Paiva, Troy. Boneyard: SoCal's Aircraft Graveyards at Night. Mount Pleasant,
America Through Time, 2019.
Paiva, Troy. Lost America: The Abandoned Roadside West. St. Paul, MBI Pub., 2003.
Paliva, Troy. Night Vision: The Art of Urban Exploration. San Francisco, Chronicle Books,
2008.

TL;DR:
Urbex is underappreciated and connects people to the fact that what we make, just like us, doesn't last forever.

Any comment(hopefully constructive)is welcome!

Honestly? Way too much romanticization and overwrought attribution of meaning to a hobby that is simpler-explained by merely accessible adventure (i.e. one doesn't need much money nor physical prowess/training compared to other modern-day adventures) of relatively manageable risk for novelty-seeking (things/environments doesn't typically see in everyday life).

Why?

• Some of the highest echelons of UE involves active site exploration. No decay involved.
  
• Some of the best UE involves rare sites of high general valuation.
  
• There is often (but not always) appreciation of history involved, but not everyone documents, not everyone documents for emotion, and not everyone documents for the emotion but for the emotion they will make from the scene.
  

I mean, since the title suggests these are only your feelings (which in the essay you attribute to "urbexers"; perhaps you should rephrase the perspective there), they're valid as feelings... but they probably won't be valid for very long as you stick with the hobby and stop trying to fully-justify the ethics to a point of nobility.

Just my two cents.

Posted by dtewsacrificial Honestly? Way too much romanticization and overwrought attribution of meaning to a hobby that is simpler-explained by merely accessible adventure (i.e. one doesn't need much money nor physical prowess/training compared to other modern-day adventures) of relatively manageable risk for novelty-seeking (things/environments doesn't typically see in everyday life). Why? Some of the highest echelons of UE involves active site exploration. No decay involved. Some of the best UE involves rare sites of high general valuation. There is often (but not always) appreciation of history involved, but not everyone documents, not everyone documents for emotion, and not everyone documents for the emotion but for the emotion they will make from the scene. I mean, since the title suggests these are only your feelings (which in the essay you attribute to "urbexers"; perhaps you should rephrase the perspective there), they're valid as feelings... but they probably won't be valid for very long as you stick with the hobby and stop trying to fully-justify the ethics to a point of nobility. Just my two cents.

Hey thanks for commenting!
I guess I would have to point out that not everyone has the same feelings or emotions about it, and it means different things to different people. The books that I sited are from a photographer from desert southwestern USA, in which a lot of the exploring is that of abandoned and decayed buildings, many of which have been deserted simply because there isn't much else around them, so people just pick up and leave. I guess It would be important to distinguish between the options of each region. This is just a first draft so there is still plenty I can add.
Thanks!

Personally I’d want to use at least one other author in my bibliography, but it was interesting enough for me to read through to the end.

Great article with really interesting insight. I like your ideas on the juxtaposition between archeology and urban exploration ... much the same approach but from different perspectives. If I see anything to add it would be to expand on the urban explorers inherent fascination with the transitory and ephemeral nature of life and our final exit which terminates in death. Consciously or subconsciously I think all urban explorers are seeking that portal which separates these two realities.

Nice quote from your essay ...

"But modern decay is a constant reminder of our fragility. In the end, Mother Nature always wins."


.

Can I ask what it’s for? Are you writing to collect your own thoughts, is it like a school thing, or do you plan on publishing it in some sort of indie zine or online?

Posted by OpenHouse Can I ask what it’s for? Are you writing to collect your own thoughts, is it like a school thing, or do you plan on publishing it in some sort of indie zine or online?

It was just raining outside, and I had been thinking about this a lot. While I'm from the Northeast, I was born in the Southwest and have always loved Rural Exploration, and the unique setting and opportunity the southwest/desert gives decay photography, and am a big fan of Paiva's work. I had Troy Paiva's books all on hand so I just used them for citing. I probably would have cited others if I had them on hand, but I kind of just went all-in on this. Just for myself and this forum for now, I guess.

Thanks for all the comments!

The idea of comparing an urban explorer to an archeologist is interesting, and reminds me of a similar comparison between documentary filmmakers and journalists. Both have some kind of ethical commitment to what they’re doing, but the filmmaker’s is more personal while a journalist has to be strictly professional. A documentary isn’t less valid than a journalistic piece, but their relationships and goals are different.

The idea of history with value based on rarity or exclusiveness can be explored a lot more. I get the sense that even within urban exploration not all ’finds’ are ranked equal. And like archeology that value is based on many factors: difficulty, rarity, community value (so and so’s been there it must be cool) etc...
But yeah exploring your local community is more accessible than flying to the Amazon, and what ranks one experience over the other is probably a convoluted combo of what you value and what you believe others value.