Sprezzatura

Because neurotic is the new black....

Ann Nichols

Ann Nichols
Location
East Lansing, Michigan,
Birthday
December 31
Bio
I write, I read, I clean up after people and I worry about things. I have a chronic insufficiency of ironic detachment. My birthday isn't really December 31; it's March 22 but it won't let me change it.

MY RECENT POSTS

Ann Nichols's Links

Salon.com
JULY 28, 2012 10:38AM

The Olympics: Not So Much

Rate: 12 Flag

I’m pretty ambivalent about the Olympics. I watched the opening ceremonies so that I could hear the announcer say “ceremony” the British way, and because I love a good national spectacle. I was thrilled to hear Branagh recite Shakespeare, I am always teary when I hear the opening strains of “Jerusalem,” and I admired the man-made Tor that acted as centerpiece to Danny Boyle’s history of Great Britain.

He lost me somewhere around the Industrial Revolution hand jive, and I was kind of skeeved out by the childrens’ nightmare sequence with “Tubular Bells” and a gigantic baby; taken as a whole, the idea seemed to be that children were tucked into bed at Great Ormond Street Hospital by smiling, dancing doctors and nurses and then abandoned to nightmarish characters from literature until they were all saved by a fleet of Mary Poppinses. Presumably the Marys speared Voldemort, The Queen of Hearts, Captain Hook, et al with their proper British bumbershoots and eased the minds of all of us who associate “Tubular Bells’ with Linda Blair’s green and rotating head.

But I digress. My problem with the Olympics has nothing to do with its location (a place, frankly, that I would rather be than where I actually am) and everything to do with sports-related media. If a person is interested in watching Olympic coverage during prime time, which is the only time we watch television in this house, one is necessarily watching network coverage. Network coverage is kind of like “American Idol” with contestants who swim, vault and run. Favorites are cultivated, highlighted and vignetted; we are basically fed everything we need to know about who will probably win, who we should like, and why.

This phenomenon is not unique to Olympic coverage. It’s a sports thing. Several years ago when I became a rabid fan of college basketball, I actually watched sports on TV for the first time. They had been on around me my whole life - I grew up in a Big Ten town – but for forty years I was just passing by the TV on my way to find my book. When I began to watch televised college basketball, I noticed that it was hard to pay attention to the game because of those people who talked CONSTANTLY from tipoff to final buzzer. In one memorable game against The University of Texas, the commentators were so smitten with a guy named Kevin Durant that our team could have shot forty consecutive three-pointers and they would have continued to talk about the life and times of “Kevin Durant, KEVIN DURANT, KEVIN DURANT!!!!!!”

Apparently this kind of thing is par for the course as color commentary, but I know that the thrill of going to a game and watching with my own eyes, making my own judgments, and having my own hopes about the outcome is infinitely preferable to having Dick Vitale tell me that my team is outmatched and totally doomed halfway through the first half.

It wasn’t always this way, either. At least the Olympics weren’t. I remember falling in love with Dwight Stones the summer I was ten. I picked him out by myself (because I was ten and he was cute) and watched coverage of Track and Field events during the 1972 Summer Olympics with religious fervor so that I could see if Dwight had an event that day, and find out how he did. I may be remembering it wrong, but it seems that there was never a touching vignette about Dwight’s personal life set to gooey pop music, and although he was a strong favorite based on his record, other competitors were not completely eclipsed in the commentary. We knew Dwight was good, we thought he’d probably win, but we could watch him run and jump without the benefit of someone telling us that he was running, jumping, favored, running well, jumping high, liked to kick back with a bag of Cheetos and drink root beer in his hometown of Los Angeles, jumping over the bar and landing, and…you get the idea.

Dwight Stones 

I guess that’s part of my issue with the current setup: every single athlete at the Olympics has a story, they all sacrificed, and they can all do things physically and emotionally that most of us can’t imagine.  What effect does it have, psychologically, not to be a “favorite?” How does it feel to be on a team with someone who is charismatic, or has a great story, when you are just someone who has worked your ass off to make the Olympic team? Why should the girls on the Gymnastics team be interviewed about how excited they were to meet Michael Phelps? He is, after all, no better an athlete than any one of them. They are all American kids on American Olympic teams. He’s just a much more famous athlete than any of them because he was successful, he’s handsome, and he has an interesting backstory.

If I were a hardcore sports fan I would find a channel that streamed Olympic events as they happened, with minimal commentary. I’m not, and I won’t, although I think the Canadians do a pretty great job at that kind of thing. If I could tune in to NBC at 7:00 or 8:00 and just watch footage of the day’s main events, just be swept up and hold my breath to see if that one, cute boy I picked out was the fastest, I’d be in. As it is, I’ll probably watch reruns of “Cold Case” or read my book.

Good luck to every single athlete competing – upset the odds, flabbergast the spinmeisters, and win because you worked hard and you deserve it.

 

Image of Dwight Stones: http://www.fanbase.com/photo/600264 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I expected not to love the Opening Ceremonies, based on comments I was getting live from Britain. But I did. Maybe there's just too much of an Anglophile in me, or I got the whole Danny Boyle thing. But I did. I got it. And I loved it. It was never going to be Beijing.
Thank goodness the ceremony was different that Beijing. It was interesting and very dark. British to the core. As for the coverage of the athletes I do agree with you. I think the whole celebrity thing has gotten out of hand just like everything in the world. But I am fascinated with the Michael Phelps story. sigh....
Wait til they do the story on the hurdler who is 'saving herself for marriage'.
@Nick: I love Lolo! ... And, I must admit, I love the Olympics. I ride a bike, swim and workout. My husband does, too. We just love physical activity, and can relate to the triumph of the human spirit over the limitations of the human body. All of those stories inspire us and make us want to jump on our bikes and ride 100 miles. And we're "old!" Maybe that's why we're so inspired. We relive our youth by admiring the physical prowess of the younger generations. We revel in the beauty of the human physique, and we marvel at poetry in motion. For us, that's what the Olympics is all about. r.
I loved the Mr Bean send-up of 'Charriots'.

And the 'Queen's skydive'.

I know I'm a sucker for cheap tricks.

r.
The Olympic broadcasts can be wearying - the network creates pre-determined story lines which often seem arbitrary and manipulative and may bear little relevance to what ends up happening.

A while ago, I started writing something (which I never finished) about watching a DVD of the 7th game of the 1960 World Series, perhaps the most dramatic baseball game ever played. It was amazing to watch an event where the screen wasn't constantly filled with eye-irritating graphics and the announcers weren't analyzing every play as if it were D-Day. It made me realize how much today's sportcasts - hell, newscasts too - are filled with visual and aural pollution.

As to your wish for minimal commentary, my piece was going to suggest the equivalent of the SAP (Spanish track) button on the remote, which would give the viewer the choice of turning off graphics and turning off the announcers and just having the ambient sound. (BTW, 30 years ago, the NFL, as an experiment, broadcast one game without announcers. I think most viewers found it (to quote Mitt Romney) disconcerting.
it does make it interesting to know a little about some of the athletes, but maybe because I am so uninterested by sports in general? good point about it being too slick and contrived however
Gotta love the Brits. ~r
I would probably enjoy the Olympics, especially swimming, but since I don't have a television, it's kind of a moot point. I'm so out of the mainstream–would you believe I did not know the Olympics had started until I read this post?
a) Check out Bud Greenspan on the Google. Like you, I don't watch sports - my brain just filters it out if it's on in my presence - but one night I was home alone and found myself watching this great, documentary - looked like mostly raw footage, no narration, no fluff - about the '72 Olympics. My husband tells me it was probably a Bud Greenspan piece.
b) Greenheron, you're back! How was your time off the grid?
I'm witcha here. I catch a little of the brouhaha each time I walk thru the room where the TV's been on all day with rarely anybody watching it. I caught a little of the opening show last nite and what I saw was pretty dazzling, but, as the British might say if it were being done somewhere else, it seemed a bit much. But I had just come from washing dishes all evening at a spaghetti dinner fundraiser for our volunteer literacy group and I did identify a tad with the laborers in the industrial segment. What impressed me most was the passion on the performers' faces. They were really digging what they were doing.

Cold Cases, huh? I haven't watched that show in ages. It was one of my favorites. I loved the flashback sequences.
I'm afraid I've pretty much ignored them, to the point of deleting Olympics-related news alerts without reading them.

It's a sour grapes thing with me. The Olympic Games are THE perfect venue for conducting a massive experiment in social psychology. People the world over would emerge from following the games with heightened self-awareness. But no one seems to support this mission.

Here's how it would go: The training, preparation, and sacrifice would remain the same. But when the athletes arrived on site, each would draw a piece of paper from a rotating bin. On those papers would be written the name of the country whose colors the athletes would wear, the country they'd represent.

Then post-Games polling would tell us to what extent it was athletic excellence and international cooperation we were in awe of, and to what extent our thrills came from spectacle and nationalism.