Sport As Art     If life is a canvas on which we create our own masterpiece, we can all consider ourselves to be artists. You may retort that this can only be true when I am involved in creative activities. Perhaps I may be considered an artist if I compose or perform music, but surely not when I am washing the dishes! The portrayal of Mrs. Doubtfire by Robin Williams suggested that even the most menial tasks can be imbued with artistry, but few would argue that vaccuum-cleaning can be considered an art-form. A debate has been raging in the past decades about whether sport can be art.
    That sport and art have enjoyed a close relationship through the ages is not a point of contention. The athlete in action has been a popular choice of sculptors and artists since the ancient Greek civilization produced a wealth of artistic artifacts that displayed the Olympic athletes in all their glory. From creations in classical art forms to depictions in popular culture, such as movies, sport has been represented as an object of beauty. However, sport as the subject matter of art is not the same as sport as art. The topic of debate is, can sport, in and of itself, be considered an art form to the extent that it meets the criteria applied to such art forms as sculpting, painting and dance?
    Rather than observing this debate from afar as armchair philosophers, it's time to roll up your sleeves and get involved (remember, the underlying theme of this book's approach is that you can only construct a philosophy of life by being actively engaged in the process!).
Exercise 2: Debate that sport is an art form.( Notice the congruence with the scientific method here in that the debate is stated as a hypothesis so that it may be disproved or verified through the evidence presented).
This exercise should help you to think through an issue as you consider the topic and construct arguments for and against the motion. As you do so, you will recognize that not only are there two sides to every argument, but that in many cases, there is not a clear cut verdict. If you have been weaned on the certainty of empiricism, it can be unsettling to enter an academic arena where asking the question can be more important than finding an answer, where finding an answer can depend upon the skill you develop in framing the solution and where answers that you reach are more likely to be relative shades of grey than absolute black and white. That is the nature of philosophic analysis, and, as I'm sure you will be quick to point out, that it is also the nature of life. How often are you confronted with major decisions that are simple and clear-cut in your daily existence? Hopefully, involving yourself in the philosophic process here and now will pay dividends when you are faced with momentous decisions in your future.
Step 1: Look back in the introductory chapter at the discussion of the philosophic decision making process, which entails reacting, self-distancing, identifying, analyzing and synthesizing. The first stages in this case may not be too problematic. This debate, while interesting, may not stir the fires of controversy in the same way as many of the ethical issues we will confront in the next chapter. So, although your reaction to this issue may not be strong, you should have little problem in detaching yourself emotionally from the question, which has already been identified for you.
Step 2: Analyze the motion carefully. A good place to start is with the words, "sport" and "art". The way you interpret these concepts will determine the outcome of the debate. It is tempting to assume that these commonly used words have readily agreed upon meanings. Yet, if you were to ask your friends to freely associate an activity with the concept sport, responses would probably range from football to frisbee. Some would think of sports that have obvious aesthetic appeal, such as gymnastics, diving and synchronized swimming, while others would name auto racing, boxing and chess, which at first glance seem less artistically appealing. Similarly, questions can be raised about the nature of art. Is art the process or the product, the act of creation or the canvas? Does an artifact have to be produced with a definite expressive intent in the mind of the creator? Does it necessarily have to express life issues beyond the artistic medium itself? This question of expressive intent is pivotal to your position. For sport to qualify as an art form it must meet the basic criteria of art. The purpose of the athlete as artist must be synonymous with that of the actor in any other artistic medium. Furthermore, the product of the athlete's endeavors must be a work of art. Given these parameters to your argument, how might you present pro and con?
Step 3: Try it out. Develop arguments for and against the motion. For example:
Pro: that sport is art. The purpose of the Olympic figure skater is to create a thing of beauty. The appearance and presentation of the performer are married with the grace and precision of movement to measure up to an aesthetic ideal. The finished product, the sights and sounds of the highly gifted athlete performing with consummate skill are indeed a work of art. While it is true that athletes may seek fame and fortune through their craft, isn't it also true that artists have to earn a living? Don't artists paint for profit, poets receive remuneration for their work, dancers compete to be accepted into juried shows? In both sport and art the process of expression through a chosen medium creates a product pleasing to the spectator. Each individual develops a unique style of execution and adapts imaginatively to the possibilities of their craft with new techniques and innovative uses of equipment. The athlete is an artist performing in the art form of sport.
Con: that sport is not an art form. The purpose of the athlete is not to create a work of art, but to win. The means to winning is not creativity and expressiveness, but efficiency and functionality. The aesthetic element is incidental in even the artistic tributary of sports and superfluous in the mainstream. In art, the means are the end, whereas in sport the end justifies the means. Sport is about the bottom line, crass commercialism and being number one, not the production of art. Sport is primarily physical, art mental; sport is frequently coach-dominated, art is individualistic; sport can't express concepts of life-issues, art can illuminate the human condition. Although there may be occasional moments of beauty in sport, these are incidental to the action and are only applauded when they lead to victory. Because the motives and methods of athletes and artists are fundamentally different, sport is not an art form.
Step 4: Synthesize your position. Now you get to weigh the balance of the arguments you have been able to martial on each side of the issue. In many ways this philosophic process of synthesis is like the legal process that takes place in the courtroom. You act as judge and jury as you decide which is the stronger argument. Like a hung jury, it may be that you cannot reach a verdict because you cannot differentiate clearly between the two positions, or because the two positions seem to be equally persuasive. Before you abstain, be certain that the reason is not intellectual laziness. Scrutinize the evidence presented more carefully, seek new information from other sources or synthesize your own alternative position, but don't sit on the fence. Life is full of tricky decisions, use this debating process as a form of preparation and practice for the art of decision making.