Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 day later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,316,205
Following Raygun’s controversial Olympic performance, many commentators have expressed their disdain that academic research in cultural studies on the topic of breaking even exists, much less that it receives taxpayer support. And some of her detractors have variously seen Raygun’s participation in the Olympics as cynically serving her academic work, as an act of sabotage in protest against Australian sporting institutions, or as a piece of juvenile, self-absorbed, performance art.
But the worst of the criticisms are fuelled by some basic misunderstandings. For example, it has been widely misreported that Raygun failed to score a point in Paris. However, Olympic breaking was not scored on a points-system but a vote-system. When she lost 18–0 it is not because she failed to earn any points for, say, musicality or creativity or technique. She failed to earn a vote from any of the judges over against her opponents. Losing 18–0 is common in a breaking battle, and it is certainly less shameful than scoring 0 in diving or skateboarding.
Likewise, conclusions were drawn about Rachael Gunn’s academic work in cultural studies based on preconceptions about the discipline and skim-reading of her academic papers’ titles and abstracts. Her academic writing is actually clear, measured, grounded, and insightful. It does not deserve to be dismissed as the radical activist word soup some have assumed it is.
Anonymous C double-posted this 1 year ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,316,206
Some supporters have read her choice of Australian uniform rather than street clothes and her dance moves — especially those full of “marsupial energy” in her final round — as a deliberate “meta”-critique of the formalisation of breaking as a sport, or of the power dynamics within breaking culture itself.
There is no doubt an element of truth to this more generous interpretation. However, just like the more negative assessment, it may lack appreciation for just how postmodern hip hop culture is. That is, by being zany and subversive in the guise of B-girl “Raygun”, Dr Rachael Gunn was not importing something alien into breaking. For if anything qualifies as a postmodern subculture, surely it is hip hop — as seen across its various elements of rapping, DJing, graffiti, and so on.
Hip hop culture has always featured self-conscious engagement with cultural studies and critical theory. When planning her strategy as a lower-ranked athlete in this competition, Raygun zagged — and in so doing she embodied the subversiveness inherent in the discipline. In both her choice of clothing and her choice of movement, she displayed a kind of goofy Australian distinctiveness. Was she less technically proficient than the majority of female competitors? Yes. Did she expose herself to being seen as cringeworthy or even disrespectful? Yes. Was she embodying an inherent characteristic of breaking culture? Yes.