|

What are your responsibilities in
Torino?:
I am the Research Room Supervisor, meaning that I
oversee the 30 or so people who act as the central information network
for the broadcast of the Games on NBC networks.
How many hours a
day do you work
when the Games are on?:
I will likely be working 13 to 18 hours per day,
depending on the action.
Do you get to
enjoy the Games or are you too busy?:
It depends on the schedule. In Atlanta, I
barely saw anything outside of the International Broadcast Center
because we were live so much of the time – in Sydney, I got to see a
lot of stuff because of the time difference – the gold medal baseball
game between Cuba and the USA, women’s gymnastics, a lot of track and
field, and so on. In Salt Lake, I saw some speed skating, skiing,
and short track, and in Athens I went to some track and field, water
polo, basketball, and gymnastics. Athens was really easy because
the broadcast center was actually located within Olympic Park, where
the crux of the events took place, so I could sneak out and catch some
of the action. I also been to the closing ceremonies of Sydney,
Salt Lake, and Athens --- they are always spectacular.
Dr. Bass, tell us
about your FIRST book, Not the
Triumph but the Struggle: the 1968 Olympic Games and the Making of the
Black Athlete.
It is a look behind the very famous photo of the
black power protest of Tommie Smith and John Carlos, gold and bronze
medalists in 1968 in the men’s 200-meters. The book focuses on the
organization that Smith and Carlos were part of – the Olympic Project
for Human Rights – which proposed a boycott by African Americans of the
Olympics if its list of civil rights demands was not met. It eventually
called the boycott off, asking its members to protest at the Games
instead. Smith and Carlos did just that, and used this moment --
their moment -- in front of the world to speak out against racial
oppression. That moment became the central symbol of the Mexico City
Olympics, and one of the best representations of just how complex 1968
was, and let me explore multiple historical themes, including civil
rights movements, the rise of newly independent African nations, ideas
of minority identity, sweeping student unrest, and the relationship
between politics and mass media.
Why did you pick
that topic for your dissertation
and the subsequent book?
I didn’t start out focusing solely on the Olympic
Project for Human Rights, but after my stint in Atlanta in 1996, which
ended with me at the Closing Ceremony, roaming the infield of
Olympic Stadium wearing an all-access badge, searching for athletes
that the cameras needed to focus on, it quickly changed. Now that I had
shaken hands with Michael Johnson and Jackie Joyner Kersee, I only
wanted to write about the Olympics. Mexico City became the focal point
of my work, and Smith and Carlos my main characters.
ABC television bought the rights to the Olympics
and made Mexico City the first large-scale broadcast of a summer Games.
So all of these things – black power, apartheid, protesting students,
etc. – were televised. Indeed, a lot of the tumultuous politics of 1968
in general were televised: the Tet Offensive in Vietnam, the
assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy, the
Democratic Convention in Chicago. So the Black Power protest of Smith
and Carlos fits well within the trajectory of this pivotal year.
And what about
your new book?
This was a really exciting project, because I got
to work with such a wide range of really talented people in a variety
of academic disciplines. The central theme of the book was to ask
scholars who focus on issues of race and identity to think about
sports. For most of them, it was the first time they had done so.
The results, I think, are fascinating. Matthew Frye Jacobson, for
example, who is one of the leading scholars on immigration history,
wrote an intense piece on one of his childhood heroes, baseball player
Richie Allen. Joel Dinerstein, whose first book focused on the jazz
aesthetic in American culture, wrote about football in the 970S, and
the influence of African American culture within it. It is a really
diverse collection, offering insights into soccer, football, boxing,
basketball, and so on. A good read, I think, and for me, my first
experience as an editor, so I learned a lot.
How has your own
experiences working at the Olympic Games been important to your work?
My Olympic experience has been really unique. I
have worked in Atlanta,
Sydney, Salt Lake, and Athens for NBC, supervising the research
operation behind the scenes. In return, I got incredible access to both
the Games in general and, specifically, to the media operations that
portray them. The observations that I made during these times had a
tremendous impact on me: I think that it is hard for anyone who has
never been to an Olympics to understand their magnitude. They are,
bottom line, an awesome spectacle – the pageantry, the personal
stories, the wealth of competition, the many walks of life represented.
There are lots of reasons to be critical of the Olympics – doping,
corporatism, Western dominance, media saturation, elitism, and, of
course, the scandals of the International Olympic Committee. But
sitting in an Olympic Stadium watching a Closing Ceremony, in which
athletes dance together, trade parts of their uniforms, and exchange
Olympic pins, one is struck by just how remarkable it all is. Where
else do people from some 200 countries gather, and not just the rich or
the famous, but some very real, very “everyday” kinds of folk? Because
for every Prince Albert in a bobsled, there is an Eric Moussambani of
Equatorial Guinea in a swimming pool. Overall, it probably influenced
my first book more than my second, because it is there that I really
dive into the Olympic Games, but I am currently working on an oral
history with Jessie Owen’ granddaughter, so it all keeps re-emerging in
my work.
The clenched
black gloved fist that you write about in your first book was certainly
not a new sight in 1968 – why did Smith and Carlos’ action cause such
furor?
Members of the Olympic Project for Human Rights
were largely viewed as
ingrates by both the general public and by the sporting establishment.
They were considered to be the ones who had ‘made it’ – they were a
part of the Show. By threatening to boycott the Games unless full
citizenship was granted to black America, they were voluntarily
removing themselves from an arena that was considered, albeit
spuriously so, to be integrated, using their medal-winning potential,
which was terribly important to Cold War America, as a means of power
for others who didn’t have that kind of voice.
You go as far as
to say that Smith and Carlos were blamed for politicizing the Games.
How so?
The Olympics had, and still does to some degree, a
perception of itself
that was apolitical – that despite requiring an athlete to compete
under the auspices of a national flag, the competition was not between
nations but rather between individuals. Officially, for example, the
IOC does not keep a national medal tally – it’s a media constructed
count that began during the Cold War, when the U.S. and the USSR used
the number of gold medals won as evidence as to which employed a better
political system, democracy versus communism. And we still see
vestiges of that “East versus West” medal race today, especially in the
wake of the scandal that surrounded the pairs figure skating
competition in Salt Lake City.
Smith and Carlos’s action was seen as introducing
national politics into this so-called apolitical arena, with little
regard to the transnational struggle they were fighting (ie: human
rights). When the massacre of Israeli athletes at Munich occurred four
years later at the hands of the Black September Movement, Smith and
Carlos were directly invoked, indeed blamed, by quarters of the media
who concluded that if the black power protest hadn’t happened, no one
would have seen the Olympics as a viable showground for terrorism. Of
course, this kind of historical amnesia lets a figure like Hitler, who
certainly politicized the Berlin Games, off the hook, but even more
dangerously avoids examining just how impossible it is to separate the
pageantry of an event like the Olympics from politics.
Do you consider
the Olympic Project for Human Rights successful?
As the title of the book indicates, victory can be
defined in many
ways. I think that a common misconception that many people have
regarding civil rights movements in general is success. Did the OPHR
succeed in boycotting the Mexico City Games? No, obviously not. An
important part of understanding collective action is defining the
collective itself. Racial identity cannot create an unconditionally
unified whole – that is something that every politically defined
movement must deal with. Getting all self-identified black athletes to
boycott the Games was a near impossibility, as an Olympic gold medal
can have such a tremendous bearing on an amateur athlete’s future. The
OPHR found that out, and unless all those involved boycotted, it would
not be an effective action. So after a year of intense media spotlight,
the boycott was called off.
That said, did the OPHR have an impact?
Absolutely. It demonstrated an alternative arena for civil rights
actions, one that combined a more traditionally defined mode of action,
the boycott, with a more radically defined ideology, Black Power. The
threat of the boycott nurtured the spotlight that eventually gave the
gesture of Smith and Carlos so much meaning, and brought the varied
demands of the OPHR – the restoration of Muhammad Ali’s title, the
banning of South Africa from international competition, the addition of
black members to the International Olympic Committee – further
attention. Of course, in terms of where their images are today, that
becomes debatable. Without question, the image of successful athletes
like Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods makes a lot of Americans feel
better about our race record, but somehow within the corporatism that
Jordan and Woods encompass, new models of civil rights movements need
to emerge.
You seem always
to refer to civil rights movements, rather than the Civil Rights
movement. Is that an important distinction?
Making it plural acknowledges the nuance and
variety created by those who directly engaged in struggles for equity.
Common goals did not necessarily mean common approaches, with the most
familiar example being the split between King’s Southern Christian
Leadership Conference and the cry for Black Power that came from
organizations such as the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee
and the Black Panthers. Utilizing sports as a civil rights arena was
the idea of many, but it most forcefully came to fruition through the
OPHR, who capitalized on the economic, cultural, social, and political
importance that sports has at both the national and international level.
Do you think that
the Olympic Games are important and worthy of our attention?
I think the success of Salt Lake, for example,
speaks volumes about the ability of much of the world to conduct itself
peacefully for a length of time. While there is, certainly, much to
criticize in the stories Salt Lake told via its Opening and Closing
ceremonies, there is something to be said for what kind of a global
experience one gains from participating – whether as an athlete or a
spectator – in the Olympics. Sport serves as a stage with the potential
for tremendous symbolic power, one literally – physically – focused on
human possibility, and the Olympic Games achieve a global nature
unparalleled. They are flawed, certainly, plagued by accusations of
corporate scandals, doping, elitism, aristocracy, an overly-Western
influence, and a seemingly ever-lasting rivalry between Communist (and
even former Communist) athletes and the rest of the world.
But the International Olympic Committee also makes
some interesting decisions in terms of its role as a world power: it
censured Afghanistan when the Taliban took power; threw South Africa
out during its apartheid era; and has allowed delegations from Puerto
Rico, East Timor, and Palestine autonomy not found elsewhere. It also,
perhaps most importantly, lets much of the world see what it looks like
for some 200 nations, wearing something representative of their
identity, to get together in a manner that is not, well, boring.
Indeed, attending an Olympic Closing Ceremony is a profound experience,
one that can convince most anyone that the Olympic movement must
continue through its flaws, and one that you just can’t totally get
unless you go.
As a women’s
college, Title IX is very important to us. How did Title IX
demonstrate its importance at the Olympics?
At the Atlanta Olympics, an unprecedented 3,700
women competed. While women had always done well in individual sports
for the United States, as there were few other elite outlets for their
talent, Atlanta marked a successful collective effort for American
women, bringing home team gold in basketball, softball, soccer, and
gymnastics. Without question, American women were the face of the
Atlanta Olympics, and they were the women who were the first generation
to grow up under Title IX – the first who knew it was okay for girls to
play hard.
Dr. Bass, are you
a sports fan?
In terms of being a fan, yes and no. I love
tennis, and I’m both cursed and blessed to be a Red Sox devotee. In
fact, I had to rewrite the opening essay to In The Game because while I
was discussing the curse of the Red Sox, they went and won the World
Series – Talk about re-editing! But I’m not an
ESPN-watching/sports page-reading junkie. I’m more interested in how
sport is a central arena in which questions of racial identity are
hashed out. The black athlete is one of the most visible
representations of race in modern society: seen on television and in
print, cheered by millions in the stands and in their living rooms,
gracing cereal boxes and magazine covers, teamed with white
counterparts and – at least superficially – accepted. So an
examination of the black athlete, one which looks at the black athlete
as a character invented or created by our own societal and cultural
perceptions, serves as an amazing place to discuss ideas of national
identity, the operations of mass media, multiple methods of civil
rights struggles, and numerous manifestations of both race and racism
in American culture.
What will your
fall course in sports focus on, Dr. Bass?
It is an upper-division seminar entitled “Race,
Sport, And Society,” and it is the second time that I’m offering it, so
I’m really excited. It’s a lot of intense reading, research, and
writing. The course argues that athletes are an excellent window
through which to study ideas of racial and national identity, because
athletes are among the most integrated and diverse racial subjects in
the world – seen in all facets of media, cheered by millions of
fans. Students will be using Torino as a vehicle for discussion, as
well as do reading on subjects such as Althea Gibson, Ali, and Jackie
Robinson; the 1936, 1960 and 1968 Olympics (for obvious reasons); and
developing research projects of their own to share with the class. It
builds on other courses that I offer in cultural history, such as U.S
Youth Culture, which I taught last semester, which used the idea of
youth and popular culture to understand major themes in American
history. I also think I’m going to incorporate more this time
around about the culture of the sports fan, because it is obviously a
pretty hot area to get into, and one to which many of our students, who
unfortunately seem to be Mets fans, can relate.
O F F I C E O F C O M M U
N I
C A T I O N S
29 Castle Place, New Rochelle, NY 10805
info@cnr.edu
© 2006
The College of New Rochelle
|