As second effect of industry was the division of labour. Instead of having workers produce a product from start to finish, they were now assigned a single task with the production line. This allowed for a much more efficient production on a much larger scale. It also provided workers with increased free time. Initially this resulted in masses of people stuck in urban environments with little to do outside of work, and consequently health declined, boredom and frustration levels rose. According to Wilcox and Andrews (2003) this situation was quickly recognized and exploited by the middle class/bourgeoisie.
“Challenged by the relative monotony and boredom associated with life in the industrial city, seeking a panacea for declining health among the workforce, and building upon the emerging traditions of mass production and improved communication, social reformers, capitalist entrepreneurs, and municipal and industrial leaders south to exploit the increasing levels of discretionary capital and more widely available free time to develop, refine, promote, and deliver services and products, which, in totality, came to represent the foundation of the sports industry as we know it today.” (Wilcox, Andrews, p 5)
Seen in this context, sport is in fact a product of capitalist exploitation rather than an organic, natural expression of community interaction. However, this does not suggest that sport in some form or another was not being produced, only that it was happening outside of the system and thus not quantifiable nor part of the capitalist machine. Clearly there must have been some demand for sport at the offset otherwise no-one would have tried to exploit it. How does one exploit something that does not exist?
If this is the case, then sport should be seen as a way for our bodies to compensate for the inactivity resulting from the urban lifestyle. This activity keeps us healthy and strong, enabling us to be better producers and members of society. By bringing sport into the system through capitalist exploitation it becomes more than just ‘sport’, more than just physical exercise, more than just a way to stay healthy. It is now a source of identity for individuals, and fits into the larger hegemonic ideology of capitalism.
How is this the case? Take a look at Hargreaves and his book on Sport, Power and Culture. When the British Government uses soccer to reach out to troubled youth, it does so with the help of Nike, Adidas, Manchester United, etc. What does this mean in the context of my previous argument? On one level the aim is to create a model citizen who no longer has a hard time understanding their place in society, no longer needs to react with violence, and can function in all the ways that society demands (Hargreaves, 1986). Because England is capitalist, this means becoming a good producer and no longer taking up more resources than you put in.
Theodore Adorno also makes a similar point in his essay “Free Time”. Free time itself has become an industry in the capitalist machine. When applying this argument to sport (which we can because most of us are not professional athletes, thus it is a free time pursuit) Adorno concludes that it operates on two levels. First you have the perceived meaning of sport: the physical challenge, the health aspect, etc. The second level is similar to what Hargreaves was arguing. It is just another way to instill social norms into individuals. The team sport suppresses individualism and creativity in favor of conformity (Adorno, 2001).
No comments:
Post a Comment