By
Boston College-Ireland Academic Director Michael Cronin is the author of the recently published Sport: A Very Short Introduction, part of the Oxford University Press Very Short Introductions series. The book offers an overview of the origins and development of sports from 3000 BC to the 21st century, examining international and business trends, amateur and professional sports, and sports-related controversies. Cronin spoke with Chronicle’s Sean Smith the same week the City of Boston celebrated the New England Patriots’ Super Bowl victory.
Q: Given that you’ve been overseeing a major historical project involving sports – Ireland’s Gaelic Athletic Association – writing this book seems like a natural progression for you. Has sports played a big role in your life?
Cronin: Not really. I was a high jumper in high school, and that was about the extent of my athletic career. I suppose my true interest in sports came about during my doctoral studies, when I started to look at the question of Irish identity. Obviously, Ireland has a strong arts and literary tradition that provides a connection for many Irish. But not everyone has the means or the access to that, so what else speaks to being Irish? During the course of my research interviews, a lot of people talked about the importance of sporting organizations in their lives, and that really struck me.
Later on, I worked in the Centre for Sports History and Culture in the UK, and teaching there broadened the scope of my interest, because my students were from different parts of the world other than Britain and Ireland. It was fascinating to hear their perspectives, and gave me a global appreciation of sports.
Q: You’ve certainly sought to make the book as “global” as possible, what with talking about the development of sports in Japan, China, South and Central America, among other places.
Cronin: That was quite challenging, actually. I really wanted to encompass all countries, but when you’re talking about “modern” sports – from the 19th century on – and in particular the role of business, the big counterweights are North America and Europe. So ultimately, most of the focus is on those parts of the world.
But there are plenty of interesting insights to be gained just by looking at Britain. We might think of sports there as having a highly organized “gentlemanly” tradition – cricket, horse racing, soccer (or football, if you prefer). Yet for hundreds of years there was a game known as “folk football” played on holy days between neighboring villages – with teams numbering in the hundreds sometimes – where the object was to move a “ball,” which might be an inflated bladder or even a cask of ale, to a geographical point in the fields separating the villages. It was boisterous, chaotic, violent – injuries were common, and there were deaths – and considered not at all “gentlemanly.”
Q: The book gets at a lot of those contrasts and contradictions of sports down through the ages: sports as an individual pursuit but also a “team” game; an informal activity as well as a highly organized and structured one; something that celebrates strength and dominance, but can also be about aesthetics and beauty.
Cronin: One of the most fascinating things to me is how sport tends to be written and talked about in terms of elite, highly skilled and high-profile individuals. You look at the kids who play football in high school and maybe – maybe – there’ll be one Tom Brady among them. Yet a victory, like the Patriots in the Super Bowl, can bring together a city, state, a region, and people feel they have a “share” in the achievement.
It’s a shared commonality. In theory, we know the skill set that gets all the attention is the one at a very high level. Most of those high school kids will never know what it’s like to play in an NFL game, let alone a Super Bowl. But there’s always the appeal of having an accomplishment, like scoring a touchdown or making a big play. Or simply being part of a team, working towards a goal.
Q: What do you think defines our view of sports in the “modern era”?
Cronin: There are many ideas we have about sports that have been hard-wired from the 19th century, and perhaps seem at odds with each other, especially in this era. For example, with something like the Super Bowl or rugby, these are aggressive, male-oriented team sports, and often full of war metaphors: “blitz,” “conquer,” “sack.” Yet when the Olympic Games come around every four years, what’s the sport that tends to draw the most interest? Gymnastics, especially women’s gymnastics. Then it’s the human dimension that is in the spotlight, the aesthetics, the body being beautiful in movement.
Similarly, there is the cultural representation of sports, the way sports is fictionalized and romanticized: someone writing about the art of fielding, for instance, or of throwing a baseball. We feel strongly that playing sports involves something more than brute strength or physical attributes, that there is a certain discipline of the mind which is just as, if not more, important.
Q: Does that speak to the ideal of the “Renaissance man,” someone who combines all the virtues we value: strength, intellect, artistic ability, ethics, etc.?
Cronin: Yes. We certainly know how athletes have been idolized and held up as role models, especially if he, or she, demonstrates an aptitude in things other than athletic skill and ability: Maybe the football star is also a superb musician, or the basketball player writes poetry, and they work with needy kids.
And traditionally we also want the player (or the team) to win the “right” way – not to cheat or skirt the rules, obviously, but also to show a certain amount of humility for his or her achievements, and generally behave with equanimity. So, naturally, we’re disappointed when that Renaissance athlete is found to have fallen short of the ideal.
Q: But it’s become increasingly difficult for athletes, and sports organizations of most any kind, to live up to that ideal, isn’t it?
Cronin: Yes, but we should keep in mind that there’s nothing really new about this. Look at the Black Sox Scandal, which was almost 100 years ago. Athletes have been arrested for, or associated with, bad behavior for decades and decades. It’s just those kinds of stories tended to be smaller, because – unless it was on the scale of the Black Sox Scandal – they weren’t considered news, or not news worth devoting a lot of space or time to.
As we know very well, in the age of 24/7 media coverage, it’s very different. Scandals like those of Tiger Woods, Michael Vick or Lance Armstrong get completely blown up. What’s more, sports bodies have become a lot more aware of their corporate and social responsibility, in ways that go beyond what happens on the field or in the stadium. Now they’re having to address the off-field behavior of athletes, or how athletes express themselves via social media, or – as witnessed by the controversy over concussions among NFL players – assume some responsibility for athletes’ post-sport lives.
So there are, of course, enormous pressures on athletes now, especially if they’re in the upper levels of achievement. They’re seldom anonymous, and their every indiscretion is going to be jumped on. But there is this locked-in idea of athletes as role models, many of whom came from modest or low-income backgrounds, and not always the best family situations: Yes, you’re making millions of dollars, but can you also behave like Francis of Assisi?
Q: As you compiled your research for the book, were there some aspects that surprised you?
Cronin: When I looked at the “dark side” of sports – the scandals and so on – I was pretty shocked by the sheer, never-ending litany of athletes who’d gone bad, especially in the modern era. My intuition had been that a lot of it was noise from the interface of sports and media, but the track record was discouraging.
The other thing that struck me was the business dimension of sports. For example, it’s amazing how many people the golf industry in a particular geographical area employs. The top-to-bottom depth in sports-related employment, from the team executives to groundskeepers to ballboys, is eye-opening.
Q: So, perhaps the big question is: Knowing what we know about the “dark side” of sports, and all the contradictions it embodies, is it healthy for us to enjoy sports?
Cronin: Oh, I definitely think so. I mean, if we’re getting our young people out there running around and being active, they’ll be healthier. Physical activity is good for all of us. And, as we saw with Patriots fans, there is a joy in having this collective identity – you can call it entertainment or a distraction, whatever you want.
It does get murky, though, because at a certain point you compartmentalize. For example, in the 2016 Olympics, when the runners line up for the 100 meters, part of me will be wondering how many of them are doping. Yet that won’t stop me from watching, or from enjoying and marveling at their athletic ability. We can still applaud the virtues of ability, drive, hard work, even if it means perhaps swallowing some of our cynicism.
As much as it’s changed, some things are never-changing about sports: I watched a film from the 1890s of a soccer game in the UK, and you know, all these years later it’s still 22 guys kicking around a ball.
With sports, there’s always a chance for redemption. You think, “OK, last season we were bad, but maybe if so-and-so is better this year and that guy is healed from his injury, maybe this will be the season we win it all.” If the Red Sox have a horrible year but they beat the Yankees in Fenway, it makes us feel a little better. It’s the same number of guys playing the same game, but we’ll buy into it.