Group A Blog #4-Alison
It’s interesting how the philosophy of sports changes from the Greek writers we read to the Roman writers Seneca and Pliny. In Pindar and Homer, sports/athleticism were glorified because they represented one’s ability as a warrior. Even though the Phaekians in The Odyssey were mocked for being obsessed with sports, Homer did this to show that sports should be tied in with one’s ability to fight, not just achieving medals in games.
I think Pliny and Seneca’s criticisms of sports during their time might be tied into the criticisms of the Phaekians. The Roman chariot races were known for being extremely violent and often resulting in death. The participants were slaves, not great heroes like Telesicrates from Pythian Ode 9. Pliny described the people watching the slaves as cold hearted people because “in the very same race, even in the middle, one colour should transfer to another, their enthusiasm and support shifts, and they suddenly desert those famous drivers and horses” (Epistulae 9.9). Pliny is referring to fairweather fans. The suggestion is that competitors are risking their lives for nothing. The people do not care about athletic merit so much as the entertainment value. During the Greeks’ time, the champions were worshiped and considered moral emblems.
In Letter 7, Seneca ascribes the crowd’s carelessness to senseless fighting (gladiator fights) to the crowd mentality—“I go home more selfish, more self-seeking and more self-indulgent? Yes, and what is more, a person crueler and less humane through having been in contact with human beings” (Letter 7). The purpose of sports in Greek culture was the complete athlete (mind and body). Odysseus gives a speech on this to the Phaikians, and Pindar writes how strong arms, quick legs, and strong words and important.
I don’t think that Seneca and Pliny necessarily hate the idea of sports, rather they hate the sports of their time. To Pliny, chariot races are a waste of time and do nothing to better a person (compared to literature, his words). Seneca considers gladiator fights to bring out the worst in people. It’s likely they disliked these sports because they had the opposite ideals of Greek athletic competitions.
I think Pliny and Seneca’s criticisms of sports during their time might be tied into the criticisms of the Phaekians. The Roman chariot races were known for being extremely violent and often resulting in death. The participants were slaves, not great heroes like Telesicrates from Pythian Ode 9. Pliny described the people watching the slaves as cold hearted people because “in the very same race, even in the middle, one colour should transfer to another, their enthusiasm and support shifts, and they suddenly desert those famous drivers and horses” (Epistulae 9.9). Pliny is referring to fairweather fans. The suggestion is that competitors are risking their lives for nothing. The people do not care about athletic merit so much as the entertainment value. During the Greeks’ time, the champions were worshiped and considered moral emblems.
In Letter 7, Seneca ascribes the crowd’s carelessness to senseless fighting (gladiator fights) to the crowd mentality—“I go home more selfish, more self-seeking and more self-indulgent? Yes, and what is more, a person crueler and less humane through having been in contact with human beings” (Letter 7). The purpose of sports in Greek culture was the complete athlete (mind and body). Odysseus gives a speech on this to the Phaikians, and Pindar writes how strong arms, quick legs, and strong words and important.
I don’t think that Seneca and Pliny necessarily hate the idea of sports, rather they hate the sports of their time. To Pliny, chariot races are a waste of time and do nothing to better a person (compared to literature, his words). Seneca considers gladiator fights to bring out the worst in people. It’s likely they disliked these sports because they had the opposite ideals of Greek athletic competitions.
Sports have changed in every imaginable aspect since their dawn in the first century BC. Sports used to be a fight to the death; the crowd dynamic, refereeing dynamic, and reward dynamic has changed drastically since the days of the Gladiators. However, a common characteristic between sports of all times is that all sports have unified their competitors and audiences to one community of that sport. For example, today, I can get into a conversation with any baseball fan and most likely be friends with them. The sports dynamics will continue to change for centuries to come until the end of humanity, but these changes will never stop changing the dynamics of the people playing those sports.
ReplyDeleteI like what you say about how sports change over the eras. It is interesting how Pliny and Seneca grew up in such a violent time when slaves were used as warriors and death frequently occurred from the games, resulting in them hating sports. However, with Pindar and Homer, you are correct about how they love sports. When ever the athlete of a family would win an event, they would pay Pindar to compose an ode about the athlete. However, do you think that these athletes were glorified because they were also higher class? Many warriors at this time were in the higher classes because only these people could participate in the games. With the games that Seneca and Pliny recorded, while no notable athletes were described, do you think that it is just the slaves competing in the games? This would explain why the spectators were so cold-hearted. Your contrast between the point of view of the different authors definitely brings different perspectives about sports to the table.
ReplyDelete