Sports as Art? I think not.

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

>As I understand it, that's exactly what he did.

Alan:

What, you think Earnhart created a new form of performance? I definitely do
not. I think he drove. He might have been a very good driver, guess he had
to be, but basically he's doing the same thing I do every day. He's just a
little better and took a few more risks...well, maybe not considering how
people drive around here.

>Warning...snob alert.

Guilty as charged. But with a basis, I think...Sports is by no measure an
Art, but music certainly is. The snob part comes by me having no interest
whatsoever in sports, other than to play them (you don't want me to go into
the "decadence of watching" rant). I do enjoy playing them from time to
time. But once you take the personal competition out, once you project your
own loyalties to some individual or team to give you a feeling of
justification, then you've opted out of any possible value (if only the
value of the exercise itself).

>There are plenty of people who see just as much
>poetry in a beautifully-driven race (I'm not among them) as in a Who show.

There are some people who think The Archies were a real band, too. But
they're also wrong. There's no poetry to a race, it's all random moves by
individuals. I understand that people enjoy it, but that doesn't give it any
more value in my (snobby) book.

>Why deny the validity of their feelings?

Because I believe people should strive to grow and become more than they
are, and racing is retrogressive while music can be very progressive in this
regard. I could make even a stronger argument for contact sports. But
whatever people like...I just don't, and that's just as OK.

>take it you've never read Hunter S Thompson's description of the beauty of
>a Hell's Angel, illiterate and unwashed though he might be, becoming one
>with his hog.  "There's a million ways to laugh, and every one's a path."

My reading of Thompson is not one celebrating the Hell's Angel, but instead
merely observing from afar.

>No one's asked you to, but why bag on the people who DO feel sympathy and
>are grieving?

This only applies when they go to far with it, like threatening that other
guy with death threats or crying like they knew him personally. I am sorry
he died, but I'm sadder when a child gets left in a trashcan. To me, that's
a real tragety.

> Is it because they say "furst" rather than "first"?

No, I'm surrounded by people like that and am not completely free of the
dreaded Southern accent myself. As hard as I try, and at least I'm trying! I
DO know how to pronounce words like "nuclear" at least. I don't "didn't
never" or "like to break my leg" and so on.

>don't think there are people out there who will feel that we are a load of
>dolts for giving two shits when Pete dies, you're wrong.

I'm sure some will. But when Pete dies, the world will be a poorer
place...whereas I can't say the same in this case. Someone else will win the
race, now...that's all.

>To your mind...but not objectively. The whole point of racing is to push
>"driving" to the limits of skill and, yes, luck.

But it's so limited. It's not REALLY pushing the limits; the limits are set
by Nascar and the rules must be adhered to.

> Saying "it's only
>driving" is like saying The Who "are only creating sound...any 2-year-old
>can do that."

Show me the two year old. On the other hand, I'd say Richard Petty was a
better driver than Earnhart...not only because he survived the experience.

>And did The Who?  Or rock music in its entirety?  Pete doesn't seem to
>think so.

Come on, Alan...you know it did, I know it did. Society was completely
changed by Rock music. Pete is just being Pete...ask him again today and see
what he says!

>The Who are (were) just as much about entertainment as is NASCAR

Only on the most surface level. Nascar goes no deeper, and The Who certainly
did. Do.

>you ought to know about being looked on as a weirdo by those who don't get
>it.  I'm surprised this hasn't done more for your sense of empathy.

Instead it strengthens my resolve. I am ragged by people who think, say Led
Zeppelin is better than The Who...but first I know they're incorrect and
second they must admit, grudgingly sometimes, that The Who have value beyond
what they need to rag me.

>I seem to recall that an almost sufficiently big deal was made of
>Lennon's death.

Jim:

Perhaps where you are it's not as it is here, but here it was treated like
it was the lead story for almost a week...also on Yahoo, also on a lot of
national news shows...whereas Lennon was a two day story, as I recall. True,
there was no Internet then...

>Maybe it's a regional thing. SC can be expected to make a big deal
>about a driver's death.

Gee, thanks. As if I don't hate this state enough already.

>In 10 years, we'll see how many people still talk about Lennon's
>death and how many people still talk about Earnhardt's death.

I hope you're right. But it's still going on.



        "The budget caps were busted, mightily so. And we are reviewing
           with people like Judd Gregg from New Hampshire and others some
            budgetary reform measures that will reinstate—you know, possibly
              reinstate budgetary discipline. But the caps no longer—the
caps,
                    I guess they're there. But they didn't mean much."
       George "why didn't you tell me they already balanced the budget?"
Bush

                  Cheers                           ML