sarma

The Olympic Games are supposed/meant to promote a spirit of peace and conciliation through benevolent challenge which is an idealised form of competition.In my view, the Olympic Games are a case of the most naked ambition and competitive force.In reality therefore, if one cares to notice, it is evident that all preparation has one and only target, that is, to prevail over the rival(s).The games actually have a direct relation to the characteristics necessary in fighters in order to survive the battle. Speed, flexibility, and quick judgement are of paramount importance in an athlete who participates in such momentous international occasions. The events which in particular showcase but also demand such abilities include wrestling, running, swimming, the long and pole jump, fencing. Basically, such peaceful meetings act as messengers who bring to a wider audience on the one hand the determination and capabilities of the country represented by its athletes and on the other its riches, prosperity and competitiveness. We know that the number of athletes participating from each country, their level of preparation and so on is closely associated with the clusters of authority and power that function internationally. The exemptions of small countries of the developing world who only send one or two good athletes who may take the highest prize only serves to confirm the rule.It also serves to endlessly reproduce and preserve racial stereotypes, for example the traditional knack of black athletes in say long distance running or dancing.

These stereotypes are based on an exotic take on “the Black Continent” whereby its athletes are endowed with the characteristics of the speed and instincts of wild animals which run freely in the savannas. Athletic preparation though has a direct relationship with the level of physical well being, the physical condition of the human body. It is not a accidental that the Olympic Games returned at a time of upgrading and revitalising the athletic practice and health care. Even Isadora Duncan’s dance and the freedom she demanded for the female body was linked with implicit notions of a small group of individuals about the need for change from the pressure placed on the (female) body by tight clothing, undergarments and immobility. Athletes, one could say, form a highly selected group, taught and trained, note the words, according to the ideals of a highly skilled army, who however will go to war. This group will only demonstrate its virtues and efficiency only in front of an adoring crowd who, still at a pre-lingual level, will understand the message and will thus become full of optimism and faith in the safety that it is provided by the other trained professional and fighting “body”, the army. The almost military style of the preparation of today’s athletes is so linked with the idea of competition in its “purest and highest” no-hold-bars form that acts as a metaphor for the pundits too. The isolation and hard practice, is a model that most of us conform to in our daily lives, having obliterated voluntarily the aggression of the message that such a practice carries. The problem in all this is not the aggression that has turned into a bodily demonstration of iconic fights, despite its clear message and context.

In the final analysis we can still enjoy the spectacle for what it is….What I object to is the hypocrisy and the attempt at hagiography of the infamous contest, its stripping off of anything that is a true and valid element of that concept. Unfortunately, the practices of training the body easily become reduced to the concepts of sanitasation, purification and the arrogance of power in the most blatant way. This may happen because modern athletics or rather championships contain to a large extent the dimension of exhibition which rears its head when authority decides to make it a vessel for its aspirations. Of course this is par for the course of the Olympic Games since their inception at the end of the 19th century. They will continue without objection even at times of military preparedness and autocratic regimes.