Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiEvery four years I marvel all over again at those bodies honed like precision instruments to defy the bounds of human ability, those people flying with graceful force over hurdles, off diving boards, into somersaults in midair, speeding down tracks, slicing through water. The athletes' bodies are relentlessly particular, concrete, personal, and tangible: the reality of flesh, of heart, of effort, of this tense face, that muscled arm, that DNA, and that training and determination. This is why it's so peculiar that the Olympics suspend these bodies in an abstracted superstructure of nationalism, as though this feat of balance really had something to do with Austria, that burst of power really represented Japan.
The elegant sinewiness of a sprinter, the coiled power of a diver, has little to do with the abstraction called nationhood, except that the sprinter or diver is being put forward as the public face of his or her nation-or the mask. There are other faces to nationhood. We live in an era where truth is most often found by looking away from the spectacle presented to us. Corporations consciously choose their masks: BP claims to care about climate change; Chevron had its "People Do" advertisements of the 1990s, in which the oil giant advertised its noble deeds (often obligatory environmental mitigations that cost a tiny fraction of the company's earnings). Chevron doesn't want you to see that the toxic emissions of its Richmond, California, refineries make the mostly poor, nonwhite people living nearby seriously ill. Or its complicity in human rights violations in Africa, Asia, and South America. Then there's Nike, one of many apparel manufacturers that would rather you think about the celebrity spokesperson or anonymous Adonis than the sweatshop workers who, in all their bodily misery and deprivation, have infinitely more to do with the product. In the same way, nations have infinitely more to do with prisons, laws, and foreign and domestic policies than athletes.
Sports bring us the human body as a manifestation of nature-not just the elegant forms of athletes, but their animal ability to move through air and water. At the Olympics, these bodies are co-opted by a political culture that wants to be seen as natural, legitimate, stirring, beautiful. Beautiful bodies are just one kind of nature that nations like to claim. After all, this country invented the idea of "national" parks and claims the sublimity of the Grand Canyon (which preceded it by hundreds of millions of years) and all those purple mountains' majesty as part of its identity. Corporations too like pristine landscapes, particularly for advertisements in which an SUV perches on some remote ledge, or a high-performance car zips along a winding road through landscape splendor. Few car commercials portray gridlock or even traffic-that your car is just a car among cars-let alone the vehicle's impact on those pristine environments. Of course most of us have become pretty well versed in critiquing advertisements as such-we assume they are coverups if not outright lies. But the Olympics have not been subjected to the same level of critique.
On August 8, the Beijing Olympic Games will begin, and television will bring us weeks of the human body at the height of health, beauty, discipline, power, and grace. It will be a thousand-hour advertisement, in some sense, for the participating nations as represented by athletes with amazing abilities. In reality, the athletes will be something of a mask for what each nation really stands for, and this year the Olympics as a whole will be as much a coverup as, say, the Mexico City Olympics of 1968, which came hot on the heels of the Tlaltelolco Plaza massacre of students, or the 1936 Berlin Olympics, which gave the Nazis legitimacy as they turned Germany into an efficient totalitarian death factory. Ironically, the 2008 summer Olympics begin on the twentieth anniversary of the 8888 (for 8/8/1988) Burma uprising against the brutal military dictatorship that has controlled that country, with crucial backing from China, for more than four decades now. The Chinese government is also busy terrorizing Tibetans protesting for religious freedom and liberation of their colonized country; it is also the main protector of the Sudanese government carrying out a holocaust in Darfur.
It serves the nations of the world to support the exquisitely trained Olympian bodies, and it often serves their more urgent political and economic agendas to subject other bodies to torture, mutilation, and violent death, as well as to look away from quieter deaths from deprivation and pollution. In the struggles for land and resources-for Chinese control of Tibet, and for the petroleum fields of Sudan and the timber and mineral wealth of Burma-bodies are mowed down like weeds. The celebrated athletic bodies exist in some sort of tension with the bodies that are being treated as worthless and disposable.
At the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City, two young African Americans from San Jose State University won first and third place in the two-hundred-meter dash, gold medalist Tommie Smith setting a world record in the process. On the podium, receiving their medals alongside Australian silver medalist Peter Norman, they gave the Black Power salute. Bronze medalist John Carlos wore beads that signified the lynchings of his fellow African Americans. They were shoeless to represent black poverty. Norman joined them in wearing Olympic Project for Human Rights badges. Their actions suggested that great bodily gifts could not be separated from bodily suffering, or conscience. It was a beautiful moment, one of the iconic moments of the 1960s. As athletes, they had represented their country magnificently; as human beings they had testified to the complexity of that nation and their place in it.
In response, International Olympics Committee President Avery Brundage banished the two men from the rest of the games and a spokesperson called their act "a deliberate and violent breach of the Olympic spirit." The Olympic spirit by this measure insists that athletes be bodies without minds and hearts. But the insistence that athletes not "politicize" the Olympics is really an assertion that the politics of the Olympics be determined by governments, not movements and individuals, most particularly not participating athletes. When authorities say we should not politicize something, they mean that the politics of the status quo should not be questioned. Fortunately, people nowadays have become more skeptical of masks and more sophisticated at connecting the dots.
The global route of the Olympic torch this spring was interrupted again and again by human rights protests, so that rather than a triumphal tour, the relays seemed to be a flight from principle and responsibility with activists in hot pursuit. The athletes, too, have refused to be silent. Some joined Team Darfur, "an inter-national coalition of athletes committed to raising awareness about and bringing an end to the crisis in Darfur" cofounded in 2006 by speed skater Joey Cheek and water poloist Brad Greiner. This will be the invisible competition at the games: between the official desire to strip athletes of any meaning their country does not superimpose on them and the desire of some athletes to give true meaning to their acts.
Bodies in peak condition performing with everything they've got are an image of freedom, as are pristine landscapes like Yosemite and the Tetons. But the reality of freedom only exists when these phenomena aren't deployed to cover up other bodies that are cringing, starving, bleeding, or dying, other places that are clearcut, strip-mined, and contaminated. Television coverage of the summer Olympics probably won't cut away from those sleek athletes to the charred bodies of massacred villagers and the anguished faces of young gang-rape victims in Darfur, or the bloodied heads of young monks and uncounted corpses and prisoners in Burma and Tibet. But the associations between the two are crucial to our sense of compassion, and of what it means to be a part of a global community.
In elementary school, Rebecca Solnit was always the last one to be picked for any team, except spelling bees. In 2007, she helped organize demonstrations in support of the uprising in Burma. She writes frequently for Orion.
© 2008 Orion Magazine
17 Comments so far
Show AllJust a belated, quick thanks to DCA for comments that are exactly to the point. I enjoy the essays on CD, which are typically well written and insightful. We do need to be continually updated on the form the issues take. However, the underlying power dynamics remain the same, and the real question is: What are we all doing about that? The answer seems to be: complaining. Too much of the comment section has become a sort of "amen chorus" of cynicism, outrage, and defeatism. Tedious and totally unhelpful. DCA is right: We need to hear more about what people are actually DOING about it all, and catch some of that energy and inspiration and hope.
hedology: "The olympics for most of us is what the media presents it as and says it is. There is a real test of what the human gene pool and nations health and sports promotion policies can provide. It does not go beyond that and proves nothing about war and politics."
I don't think anyone's saying that they personally see the Olympics as a competition between nations and that it bothers them when certain nations (perhaps the U.S.?) win. I'm certainly not saying that. For me, it's more a case of worrying how *others* are affected by the Olympics.
This competitions is a ritual which reinforces the notion that nations matter and that people are seriously divided by nationality. It reinforces the legitimacy of all governments of all the participating countries--participation is kind of a club for supposedly legitimate governments. To take an example, certainly you can see how someone such as an anarchist, who fundamentally questions the amount of authority given to governments in general, both to rule their populations and to wage war against one another, would have a problem with the Olympic ritual?
Surely you can see why someone who thinks the genders are basically the same would irked by constant framing of things as some sort of "battle of the sexes". The very fact that there is such a competition implies some sort of significant difference between the two groups. Same thing with a racial competition--wouldn't that bother you a little bit if the U.S. held annual Racial Olympics, pitting the country's best black athletes versus the best white ones?
To take the example further, what would you think if there were annual international Aryanness Olympics: the world's best Aryan athletes versus the world's best non-Aryan athletes? That would bother you I'm sure. But the question you have to ask yourself is WHY it would bother you. The reason, I believe, is that you reject the significance of the Aryan/Non-Aryan distinction as a way of dividing human beings, and you are aware of much inhumane and awful stuff that has been justified on the basis of this distinction.
That's precisely how many of us anti-nationalists feel about the Olympics. We reject the significance of the national distinction as a way of dividing up human beings, and we are aware of much inhuman and awful stuff that has been justified on the basis of the national distinction.
Nations are totally arbitrary. Just as arbitrary and stupid as dividing people into Aryan and Non-Aryan. Don't agree? Just look at the parts of the world most affected by imperialism, such as the Middle East, and you'll find that borders were drawn up just 50 years ago but now people are killing and dying on the basis of who is inside those borders and who is outside them! The very existence of nations is not ancient, only about 500 years old; the existence of most individual nations is vastly shorter. Yet it is on the basis of national distinctions that nearly all decisions are made about who gets certain wealth and who does not, who can be shot at/bombed and who cannot, who is worthy of treatment as a human being and who is not.
I hope you see why the Olympics bothers people who do not want to see nationalism become further entrenched as a way of dividing up humans.
Thanks rebecca for echoing my own disappointment in this once every four years
spectacle of shameless advertising promoting limitless consumerism. The ability
to spend, drive, pollute, immediately gratify, as much as one wants has become the
new meaning of the democracy that China and the US now promote.
DCA - your right. i have found that most people on this site like to complain alot and do very little else. More with the hands less with the mouth - as my father in law says. Keep in mind he's an 82 year old plumber that goes to work everyday and knows how to "get things done".
My way of puttin it' enought with the intellectual bull - get your hands dirty. Either way y'all can catch my drift.
The olympics for most of us is what the media presents it as and says it is. There is a real test of what the human gene pool and nations health and sports promotion policies can provide. It does not go beyond that and proves nothing about war and politics.
The fucking Olympics is nothing but a FRAUD of hidden racism and cheating anyway. Quit funding its sponsors and let the system collapse.
went through all that trouble just to say lovely thing empire pie. always liked the idea of that artist onsite, too... no longer with us? only good thing is war games (sporting exhibitionism) are better than war. xoxoxo
Well, I am guessing that most CommonDreamers already know this, already agree with msot of the points made in this article, no? I just get frustrated as I have watched twenty years of privileging such commentary over important organizing information. If folks spent as much time trying to get more progressives elected, in office, spent more time on taking concrete steps to actually change laws, and so on, and less time going over and over about the same issues in these types of commentaries, less time privileging these types of writers and writing over much more important organizing, then we'll still be sitting here in twenty years reading the same stuff, agreeing about how this or that stinks? I don't know, but really I think some of these writers and boards that feature them prominently are very well-intentioned, but not as effective as they might think. I would personally really like to see a lot more attention being paid to information coming out of different non-profit groups, and others, who are trying to get laws changed, who are changing laws, who are trying to get the death penalty banned, from groups who are actually working on this day to day, from those who are taking legal steps to try to stop the war machine, who are working to get progressives elected, and who are giving people important information about not only what the problems are but what they can do about it, right then and there. As long as we continue to focus on these individual writers who are often preaching to the converted perhaps, and not the groups of people who are really making the day to day changes, who have been rendered invisible in some ways, who are not the stars, who are doing the administrative and less glamorous work which is what has to get to done... ? Times have changed. This is not the sixties. Getting people out in the streets is not nearly as effective as getting the right people in office perhaps and changing laws? I personally do not find the privileging of these types of commentary articles to be very empowering, uplifting. It's like: I know this, now give me a petition to sign, give me a group that needs a donation, give me a date to show up to give a public comment, give me a number to call my representative about a particular issue which is coming up on the house floor next week, give me some real progress oriented information.
The Condor Soars on Mushroom Tops
The clouds were dancing mushroom tops
a mobile magic tapestry
binging to new condor heights
Time puffed up the cells of mist
while finite rode
an Olympic eagle to the fringe
End timers short sold visions of fantasy freedom
while the condor found new lift
a lazy soaring day
with no phony prayers for prey
Soar condor soar
beside mushroom tops
and phony prodded bears
just dancing in the mist
While the fetid crowds below
swelter in the glow
the lovelace
and the gold...
as time does a backflip
for..... the sold
Take nationalism out of the Olympics.Either eliminate the team sports or have a "draft" of players to form mixed nationality teams.That might increase the sense of international cooperation.
Also have one permanent site-probably Athens.This would stop the corrupt bidding process and wasteful spending of competing cities.Continuos upgrading of existing facilities would save many millions that could be spent on humanitarian projects-or in making the telecasts commercial free.
To pay for these changes-countries would be assessed dues on a GDP basis.
lobo72: "The Opening Ceremony at Beijing was so spectacular it was surreal. (I pity the fool who has to put on the next Super Bowl half-time show!) To me, it shows what an unlimited budget and a totalitarian government can do."
China is only called "totalitarian" because they are (seen as) a competitor of the U.S.
Is Mexico totalitarian?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tlatelolco_massacre
Don't get me wrong, the Chinese government does bad things, as most governments do. They are also very capitalist. There is really nothing about them for progressives to see as an example whatsoever. But the wider U.S. culture and MSM use *one* factor to decide who is totalitarian, and that is their status with regard to the U.S.--ally or competitor?. Progressives obviously cannot let this doublespeak seep into their own consciousness of world politics.
The Tlatelolco massacre was probably bigger, in terms of civilians killed, than Tiananmen Square. At the very least is was roughly equivalent.
The Opening Ceremony at Beijing was so spectacular it was surreal. (I pity the fool who has to put on the next Super Bowl half-time show!) To me, it shows what an unlimited budget and a totalitarian government can do.
I, like Ms. Solnit, have many misgivings about today's China. I hear they spent some $40 billion on this Olympics. That's the kind of money our country dumps into the Iraq Occupation or for new weapons systems. In that context, China's investment is well spent.
I'm reminded of the transformation of televised college football games which are now glitzy corporate spectacles. Good point, Safiyyah, in noticing the underlying essence of the Globalist corporate extravaganza's of the Olympic Circus, which can only proceed after all the unsightly aspects of humanity have been cleansed. I get the author's point, but I also get a vision of her glued to NBC for 2 weeks slavvering over these beautifully-honed "symbols of freedom", which is part of the program. After turning off the TV, and still in need of a little beauty, why not try something like going to a salsa club, where you have a choice of observing or actively participating.
When I see the Olympics I don't see beauty at all. I see stultifying boredom and authoritarianism.
LENI RIEFENSTAHL LIVES!!
London is going to have a harder time finding 2,012 sync drummers and 2,012 martial arts performers (or Beefeaters, or whatever.) The "show" was not very representative of most of China's reality.
Yet, actually having 204 nations show up together for anything is probably better than not.
Well stated Rebecca.
I'd like to see us go to a simpler approach to the Olympics.
1. No opening extravaganzas with high tech light shows, dancers, lip-synching kids etc. let's get back to making the athletes the ONLY show and the only place where the lights shine.
2. Get rid of the IOC bidding process and the corruption. Do this by holding the games in existing facilities which meet the basic requirements of the athletes, not the political desires of bidding countries. This is easily done through a transparent lottery system run by a neutral group run by former Olympians. It will also open the games up to viewing by local residents of various countries and not just the well connected wealthy elite.
3. Do have an Olympic TV Network, into which national TV networks can pay to tap into video feeds. These payments will go toward the costs of the games.
I'm sure I've missed other thoughts on improvements for the Games, however they all support your idea of "unmasking" the Olympics.
Once again, great post!