sox4lifeinPA Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Sports I'm all in favor, as long as sports give up their grossly misproportioned funding to balance out the economic prestige. let's face it: sports = $$$ and arts = creativity/brains. get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 this is seriously the stupidest guy in the world... We always hear "art for art's sake." Nobody ever says "sport for sport's sake." yes they do. it's called the olympics. AMATUER atheletes (albeit world class atheletes) compete against each other for the sake of sports. Meaning, the end game isn't a paycheck, but glory for the sake of sports. I also believe that sport has suffered because until recently, athletic performance could not be preserved. What we accepted as great art — whether the book, the script, the painting, the symphony — is that which could be saved and savored. But the performances of the athletic artists who ran and jumped and wrestled were gone with the wind. yeah, because until the advent of sports center, no one EVER remembers the individuals who participated in sports.... I mean, the term "marathon" doesn't have anything to do with ancient Greek civilizations, it's just a name they game a really long foot race. Or, please: Is not what we saw Michael Jordan do every bit as artistic as what we saw Mikhail Baryshnikov do? yeah, you're totally right............... As Walters argues, "Athletic competition nourishes our collective souls and contributes to the holistic education of the total person in the same manner as the arts." nourishes the soul, yes. I will there's a spiritual connection for many who express themselves with their bodies; contributes fo holistic education? laughable at best. $$$ ruins most things...sports is suffering in some of the worst ways right now because of that very thing. Likewise, art suffers the same way: summer blockbusters, crappy boy band records, etc. Money ruins all things. Certainly, there remains a huge double standard in college. Why can a young musician major in music, a young actor major in drama, but a young football player can't major in football? he can. It's called sports management or six other names starting with "sports". Are you sure you work at Princeton? THE Princeton? That not only strikes me as unfair, but it encourages the hypocrisy that contributes to the situation where those hidebound defenders of the artistic faith can take delight in looking down their noses at sport. That's just getting personal now. Literature, Music, Art has been a friend of sport. It is the vehicle which has kept it alive. So, yes, Walters' argument makes for fair game: Is sport one of the arts? It relies on the arts, but isn't art. There is art in sports, but sport is not art. Otherwise, the white sox 2007 series would be the Weekend at Bernie’s II. Or, just because you can bet on something, does that disqualify it as a thing of beauty? Ben Affleck sucks and he's an actor...and I can bet that his next movie will suck. so the argument doesn't stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts