Posted by Jay Livingston
I remember my social studies teachers in high school having a difficult time when communist countries like the Soviet Union or China would do well in the Olympics. For some reason, they thought – and wanted us to think – that bad systems had to be bad in every respect. And if an evil country did produce medal winners, it must have used evil methods to do so.
So my teachers told us horror stories about the government selecting kids who showed some talent in a sport, shipping them off to special training centers – high-pressure environments for turning kids into professional athletes. (The US media are still pushing this image, at least as regards China. ) Yes, the system may produce Olympic medals, but the cost is heavy – the loss of childhood and untold psychological damage.
Thank goodness we didn’t live in such a system.
This morning, the New York Times has an article about sports psychologists treating young athletes. How young? Some of them still count their age in single digits.
The idea that mental coaching can help the youngest athletes has pervaded the upper reaches of the country’s zealous youth sports culture. . . . The families of young athletes routinely pay for personal strength coaches, conditioning coaches, specialized skill coaches, . . . nutritionists and recruiting consultants. Now, the personal sports psychologist has joined the entourage.I was especially startled by this quote from one of these psychologists: “The parents have the right intentions. They want their kid to be the next Tiger Woods.” Deciding that your child, as young as eight or nine, will have a career as a professional athlete, choosing the particular sport, and bringing in psychologists when the kid can’t take the pressure – that’s the right intentions?
As I was reading this, I remembered the cautionary tales my teachers told me decades ago about the Soviets and the Chinese. The difference between them and us apparently is that in the US, the role of the state is being played by the parents. If the state brings all its force and resources into turning a child into a top-notch athlete, that’s bad. If parents do so, that’s good.
I remember an interview with André Agassi where he mentioned that until his teenage days he knew hardly anything one could do except play tennis and when he figured he would be a tennis player he realized he did not want to be one; seems like he got over it but the parents' ambitions make up for a large part of the decision making process.
ReplyDeleteAgassi's father decided on a pro tennis career for Andre when the kid was still in his crib. The trouble is, people can point to Agassi and say that it worked out for the best. But for every Agassi, there are dozens, maybe hundreds or thousands, of kids who never make it to the top and spend their twenties rinsing the red clay out of their socks in the sinks of cheap hotels.
ReplyDeleteMy impression is that when a father like this has a girl, things can get especially ugly. Witness Agassi's father-in-law. Or Mary Pierce's nutty dad. Richard Williams is no bargain either. And these are the successes.
Yes, Boris Becker and Andrés wife Steffi Graf are also "Wunderkind" examples that foster ambitious parents' dreams about future fame and wealth for their children, and sports psych junior edition is a good example what sacrifices it takes enter into professional sports careers. We will certainly be remembered when the Peking Olympics begin. On the other hand, Bourdieu and others help understand that our own current econmic, social situation is not as much result of one's own decisions or achievements as we usually believe, origin and heretage take massive influence.
ReplyDelete