Influenced by sociological theory addressing the role of culture in bringing members of society together, I defend the fans against charges that there is something obscene about the dependence they have developed on their sports and on their participation within hockey fandom communities.
You can find the web version of the piece here.
Cheering For the Fans
By Avi Goldberg
In the early days of the NHL lockout,
much attention has been directed towards hockey fans. Talking points have ranged from accusations that Gary
Bettman takes the fans for fools
to suggestions that the lockout is an opportunity for them to wean themselves
off their obsessive involvement with a sports business whose economics are too
unseemly to deserve their time and money.
A shared theme is that hockey fans are irrational, both for loving their
sport so much and for returning so quickly when it is temporarily taken away from
them. Accompanying these views is
the insinuation that fans should stay away when the lockout ends. There are compelling reasons why this outcome
will not, and arguably should not, happen.
Sport in general, and hockey in Canada
in particular, must be viewed as part of a society’s way of life, or culture. While culture exists to guide members
of a group, we give the elements of culture multiple meanings in addition to
their intended functions. Just as religious
practice can mean more than worshipping a higher power and mobile phones
provide experiences that surpass the convenience afforded by carrying a tool to
makes calls, fan involvement with hockey creates significant routines that
transcend tracking wins and losses of favourite teams.
Above all, hockey is a social
experience in which fans join with friends, family, and sometimes with strangers
in bars or via the internet, to participate in the action. There is no doubt that the plays,
points, and outcomes matter, but there is much more to it than that.
Given the comfort that comes from being
with others, joking and laughing with them during the games, and from sharing
food or drink at the same time, it can be credibly argued that fans willingly pay
the price of admission just to be able to experience group connection that all humans
need. Hockey, as experienced
through its multiple platforms of activity, is a significant source and locus
of everyday social belonging for its fans.
Second, many fans are routinely
involved in hockey because it enables them to exercise their minds in creative
ways. When fans debate the
greatness of the players, argue over issues like fighting or blindside hits, or
when they dissect the strategies of coaches or GMs, they engage in cognitive
stimulation that has positive social effects.
Fans may not always get to express
their passions at the workplace or even at home, but when they do it over
hockey, they contribute their unique perspectives to the discussions
that are ongoing within their communities. Telling and sharing of stories help communities to imagine
their togetherness. Fans connect
with hockey because it allows them to weave their own ideas into the narratives
that circulate and shape the identities of their social groups.
Finally, while some dismiss the leisure
experienced by hockey fans as something that distracts them from activities that
are of true importance in life, the legitimacy of fan emotion should not be
denied. Creating everyday fun
through hockey fandom is but one of many ways that networks of individuals
carve out spaces of autonomy for themselves within the confines of modern
society. Far from being a crass
distraction from the pursuit of an authentic quality of life, the pleasure of
everyday fan experience is both intrinsically valuable as well as a meaningful
by-product of choices that society members make to author the terms of their
own social realities.
Because it is an outdated notion to
only see the pleasures of the so-called higher forms of culture as being
uplifting to members of society, it is unfair to reject the emotional roller
coaster ride of fan life as a mere waste of time.
With hockey providing so much richness
to the everyday lives of its fans, is there any logical reason to think that
the current lockout could, or should, encourage fans to stay away once it is
finally resolved?
One recent interpretation suggests that the lockout represents a clash over ideologies
in which the owners are fighting to apply the economic philosophies they promote
in the wider society to the NHL.
From this reading, it could be argued that should fans be drawn into an
ideological battle, the potential exists for a mass exodus from the game in
response to the imposition of an economic system in hockey that violates their
own values.
Of course, for this to actually occur,
hockey fans would have to be as engaged in the affairs of economic philosophy
as the owners are. Given, however,
the sense that fans and pundits are united in their disdain and indifference towards
the intricacies of the positions advanced by both sides in the dispute, the implications of the fight over competing
ideologies appear not to be grabbing fan attention this time around.
Fan mobilization away from the NHL, to either
advocate for or against the implementation of particular economic principles in
hockey and/or society, is a highly remote possibility.
With ideological matters far from their
hearts and minds, hockey fans are anxious for the players, the teams, the
games, and the meaningful cultures of
their fandom to return once the lockout does come to an end. Given the legitimate ways that engaging
with hockey gives meaning to their lives, there is nothing irrational or
foolish about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment