ABSTRACT
Power is undoubtedly a core, if not the central, concept for physical cultural studies (PCS). The ways in which we define conceptually, analyze theoretically, identify empirically, or otherwise work to understand power in its manifest and latent complexity has profound implications for not only what we study in PCS but also how we can, or indeed should, go about studying it as a matter of both epistemology and praxis. While power sits symbolically at the center of the field through a concern to understand various forms (i.e. material, ideological or identity-based) of oppression in/through/as physical culture – and then deployed towards mapping, programming, seriously advocating or realizing progressive social change (Atkinson, 2011) – there is little consensus as to what actually constitutes power and how best to demonstrate its multifold effects empirically. Stated differently, there is no recognized canon of ‘power thinking’ in PCS or directional mandate of the field as such; despite what critics argue regarding the hegemonically enforced theoretical inclusions and exclusions in the burgeoning field. The problem of understanding power is complicated further given there is no shared understanding of physical culture itself.
