The philosophy of football
There's a debate going on in France right now on the philosophical and aesthetic value of rugby – they're currently hosting the World Cup. Pres. Sarkozy has turned into an avid fan all of a sudden. (Which seems sensible enough if you're a politician.)
Anyway, reading about this debate made me think of Chomsky, who once claimed that the whole sports culture, or rather the media coverage it gets, is part of an indoctrination system to keep people from getting involved in stuff that really matters and where they might make a change if they weren't busy keeping track of the NFL or whatever.
Obviously, Noam Chomsky was never a sports lover in the first place (I'm guessing), as opposed to myself. But what bugs me is that he doesn't bother to see the point, the good side of the issue. It's quite possible to be actively involved in Changing the World or fighting windmills, real or imagined, AND following Arsenal and Malmö FF at the same time, no? Come on, we're none of us activists ALL the time, are we? It's like saying that going hiking in the mountains over the weekend might be OK if it happens once or twice, but if it turns into a habit you really should think about focusing on something more important.
Or am I missing something here? Am I just rationalising? I do confess to publicly quoting Bill Shankly on the importance of football occasionally… Not really serious, that one, but I still think Albert Camus had a something of a point when he supposedly said "Tout ce que je sais de la morale, je l'ai appris dans le foot." Football is more than an acceptable pastime, it tells us something about life, if we're attentive to it.
Now I'm just waiting for Noam's reply.
Anyway, reading about this debate made me think of Chomsky, who once claimed that the whole sports culture, or rather the media coverage it gets, is part of an indoctrination system to keep people from getting involved in stuff that really matters and where they might make a change if they weren't busy keeping track of the NFL or whatever.
Obviously, Noam Chomsky was never a sports lover in the first place (I'm guessing), as opposed to myself. But what bugs me is that he doesn't bother to see the point, the good side of the issue. It's quite possible to be actively involved in Changing the World or fighting windmills, real or imagined, AND following Arsenal and Malmö FF at the same time, no? Come on, we're none of us activists ALL the time, are we? It's like saying that going hiking in the mountains over the weekend might be OK if it happens once or twice, but if it turns into a habit you really should think about focusing on something more important.
Or am I missing something here? Am I just rationalising? I do confess to publicly quoting Bill Shankly on the importance of football occasionally… Not really serious, that one, but I still think Albert Camus had a something of a point when he supposedly said "Tout ce que je sais de la morale, je l'ai appris dans le foot." Football is more than an acceptable pastime, it tells us something about life, if we're attentive to it.
Now I'm just waiting for Noam's reply.
posted by Mats at 12:48 AM
2 Comments:
No I can´t see Chomskys point here!
Actually, watching Arsenal playing "the game" with such beauty and seemingly effortless mastery as in their recent performances is an experience of an almost kathartic character and therefore something that clears the horizon of your mind for the liberating work we are all called to.
Yes indeed: The beauty of The Gunners as "a cleansing of the soul", preparing you for the pain of encountering utmost beauty - The experience of "compunctio". An experience taht can only leave You wanting to give your life in the struggle for beauty, justice and hope to prevail.
on the other hand: A crappy game (read:Malmö - Trelleborg) can really leave you thinking: "Why did the media even bother...?"
Maybee Chomsky just happened to see the wrong game?
Mats, did you read the philosophy and football books? Kain became the goalie in one fo them (Am I my brother's keeper?)
Speaking of Camus, moral and football: I think we need a clear-cut distinction here. If you love Liverpool, it's justifiable both morally and esthetically. But the Gunners? C'mon, Chomsky would see this as another neo-con military attack on the rest of the world (I suspect Cheney is a stock holder). You are just manufacturing consent!
Post a Comment
<< Home