|
|||||||||||||
This paper was presented at the Pre-Olympic Congress in Thessaloniki,
Greece, August 6-11, 2004.
Olympism – is it a theory, practice or both? There are quite
different opinions on this subject in literature. One group of authors
considers Olympism as the theory of the Olympic Movement and Olympic
Games. Another group supposes that it is theory and practice combining
the whole triad of Olympism, Olympic Movement and Olympic Games. While
a third group, especially the Olympic Movement Executives, think that
Olympism is the practice comprising everything that happens now in the
modern Olympic Movement. According to the theory of knowledge, theory
and practice are two mutually related issues, and if we consider that
Olympism is a theory we should treat it as a unity of scientific ideas,
principles and laws.
The Olympic Charter defines Olympism as: ‘…a philosophy
of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of
body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism
seeks to create a way of life based on the joy found in effort, the
educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental
ethical principles…’ (Olympic Charter. International Olympic
Committee, 2000). As we see, the main characteristic term in this definition
is philosophy. There are no other system-making words, terms or definitions
provided. The following principle of the Olympic Charter provides further
definition of the ‘Olympism’ concept: ‘…The
goal of Olympism is to place everywhere sport at the service of the
harmonious development of man, with a view to encouraging the establishment
of a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.
To this effect, the Olympic Movement engages, alone or in cooperation
with other organizations and within the limits of its means, in actions
to promote peace…’ (Olympic Charter. International Olympic
Committee, 2000) The concept of the Olympic Movement as a practice is
entered into by the definition of this basic principle of the Olympic
Charter and then followed by more detailed explanation of mutual relations
between the Olympic Games, Olympic Movement and Olympism. ‘…The
goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful
and better world by educating youth through sport practiced without
discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires
mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, … solidarity
and fair play’ (Olympic Charter. International Olympic Committee,
2000). The activity of the Olympic Movement, symbolized by five interlaced
rings, is universal and permanent. It covers the five continents. It
reaches its peak with the bringing together of athletes of the world
at the great sports festival, the Olympic Games…’ (Olympic
Charter. International Olympic Committee, 2000)
As we see here, the mutual relations between the three components of
Olympism, the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement are underlined.
Definitions are given and the Olympic Games, the main system-making
factor of this triad, are mentioned. However, it is strange that there
is no definition of the main component of this system. Though the rest
of the Olympic Charter is dedicated to the details of the Games’
preparation and staging rules, we find no explanation of what the ‘Olympic
Games’are.
In accordance with the definition of Olympism given in the Olympic Charter, it is first of all the philosophy of the Olympic Movement and Olympic Games. Besides this, it is somewhat of an ideal to be reached in activity and development, that is, a living ideal supported by the Olympic Education Systems in many countries, the principles of fair play and presence of the so-called Olympic spirit among the Olympic Family members, existence of the Olympic Symbols System, the Games’ Cultural Programme, Opening and Closing Ceremonies, etc. In fact, scientific and public literature has always shown a great
interest in Olympism and its problems, beginning from the works of Pierre
de Coubertin, its founder and the person who revived the modern Olympics
in the late 19th Century. As a rule, the Olympic Games are preceded
by peaks of interest. For instance, in 1966 Carl Diem Institute of the
Cologne Physical Education High School (Germany) issued a bibliography
of Coubertin’s basic works from 1886 to 1936. The bibliography
included 226 titles. In the following 5 to 6 years, the above institute,
now headed by Prof. Karl Lennartz (a well-known scientist among the
world’s sports historians, recently elected the new President
of the International Society of Olympic Historians), published a number
of de Coubertin’s works in English and German. In his works, the
founder of the modern Olympics examined different aspects and interpretations
of neo-Olympism and Olympism.
In 1968 the IOC published an exclusive de Coubertin collection in French,
a fundamental work compiled and edited by Prof. Norbert Mueller, an
outstanding German historian of the Olympic Games, Olympic Movement
and Olympism(see Pierre de Coubertin. Textes Choisis. International
Olympique, 1968, Weidman. Vol.I-III.,).
A considerable number of publications on Olympism also appeared in
the lead up to the Centennial Olympic Congress in Paris, 1994. (see
For Humanism of Sport. After a Century of Olympism. French National
Olympic Committee, Paris, 1994, 239pp, Lucsas, J.A. Future of the Olympic
Games, Chamaign, Illinois, 1992, David Miller. Olympic Revolution. The
Olympic Biography of Juan Antonio Samaranch. Pavilion Books Limited,
London, 1992, 266pp). In our opinion, the two volumes published as a
result of this Congress should be considered as a serious contribution
in the matter of solving the problems of Olympism (see Centennial Olympic
Congress Report. Congress of Unity. International Olympic Committee,
1994. Vol.I, 425pp, Centennial Olympic Congress. Texts, Summaries or
Plans of Papers. International Olympic Committee, 1994. Vol.II, 320pp).
However, it should be recognized that above all, these and many other
historical, historiographical, philosophical, sociological and pedagogical
works on Olympism, there is still a unique volume of Coubertin’s
selected works compiled by N. Mueller and published in English by the
IOC before the Olympic Games in Sydney, 2000 (see Pierre de Coubertin.
Olympism. Selected Writings. Ed Director: Norbert Müller. IOC,
Lausanne, 2000, 862pp).
Undoubtedly, from historical, social and philosophical aspects which
we deal with, the richest historiographic and literature legacy is nearly
fifty lectures and works of the International Olympic Academy Sessions,
including the ‘Citius, Altius, Fortius’ Bulletin, which
is now called the Journal of Olympic History – The Official Publication
of International Society of Olympic Historians (ISOH). During the twelve
years of ISOH activity, dozens of articles, reviews and references to
multiple books, essays, various topical compilations, etc. have been
published on the historical problems of the Olympic Games, Olympic Movement
and Olympism. This has been made possible thanks to the efforts of the
ISOH founders and first editors of ‘Citius, Altius, Fortius’
– Dr. Bill Mallon, ISOH President (2000 – 2004) and author
of many fundamental works on the Olympic Games history from 1896 to
1924, as well as his co-author and colleague Mr. Ture Widlund. Recognition
should also be made of Mr. Anthony Bijkerk, the, irreplaceable for many
years, ISOH Secretary General and journal editor, Mr. Wolf Lyberg, Mr.
David Wallechinsky, Prof. Robert K. Barney and others. The contribution
toward the development of Olympic history and social philosophy made
by Prof. Barney, who not only organized one of the world’s first
Scientific Research Centres of Olympism in Canada but also founded the
respective scientific school and educated many historians of sport and
the Olympic Movement, should also be recognised (see Barney, Robert
K./Wenn, Stephen R./Martyn, Scott G. Selling Five Rings: The International
Olympic Committee and the Rise of Olympic Commercialism. Salt Lake City,
2002).
It is our professional obligation to also note the contributions made
by Soviet and Russian sport historians. Most of their works have been
written in Russian, so these authors may not be so familiar to the international
scientific and sports community, though their value is not less than
that of their colleagues abroad. The first attempts of researching Olympism
in domestic Russian sport historiography occurred in the mid-1960s and
70s with works by N. N. Bugrov, A. V. Vershinin, G. S. Demeter, A. O.
Romanov, P. S. Stepovoy, V. V. Stolbov, Y. A. Talalaev and A. A. Frenkin.
M research was concerned with the historical, philosophical and organizational
issues of the Olympic Games and Olympic Movement.
After World War II, the first work in the USSR which was directly dedicated
to Olympism was V. V. Stolbov’s report ‘The Social Essence
of the Modern Olympism’ (The 1st USSR Conference on Sociological
Problems in Physical Education and Sports, 1966, Leningrad). In the
1980s and 1990s, especially with the beginning of social and economic
reforms, the split of the USSR and the further formation of the Confederation
of Independant States (CIS) and independent Russia, there was a growth
of interest in various aspects, problems and interpretations of Olympism
(see the works by B. A. Balayan, A. N. Bugreev, A. G. Egorov, R. N.
Kiselev, A. A. Kozlovsky, O. A. Milshteyn, A. B. Ratner, V. S. Rodichenko,
M. Y. Saraf, V. I. Stoliarov, A. B. Sunik, Y. M. Chernetsky, Y. N. Yuriev
and others). Especially remarkable is the great contribution into the
development of historical, social and philosophical aspects of the Olympic
Games, Olympic Movement and Olympism by scientists and executives Mr.
V. S. Rodichenko, Professor of the Russian State University of Physical
Education and Sports and Vice-President of the Russian Olympic Committee
for the past 12 years. On his initiative and with his immediate participation,
12 regional Olympic Academies have been founded in Russia since the
early 1990s. These Academies are now doing very important work in Olympic
education in various regions of Russia. The Russian Olympic Committee
(ROC), in co-operation with the Russian Ministry of Education, included
a specialized course of Olympic education for all 8th form students
of Russian secondary schools. Prof. Rodichenko is also the co-author
and chief editor of the text-book on this discipline called ‘Your
Olympic Text-book’ (14 editions with the total of almost 500000
copies) (Your Olympic text-book. Recommended by the Ministry of common
and professional education of Russian Federation as the manual for educational
institutes of Russia. Issuing 2, Moscow. "The Soviet sport",
1998, 136 pp (in Russian)). In 1990, he launched the All-Russian Conferences
‘The Olympic Movement and Social Processes’, which are now
held annually with the participation of historians, sociologists, philosophers,
teachers and psychologists. Along with these scientific conferences,
All-Russian Meetings ‘The Practice of Olympic Education’,
are held to enable scientists and organizing experts to exchange their
experiences in this field. Until now, about 20 publications of this
Conferences have been produced. The most recent conference and meeting
was held within the framework of the 7th International Congress ‘The
Olympic Sport and Sport for All’ (Oleg A. Milshteyn. Post-Olympism:
Contest, Problems, Perspectives.-In: VII International Scientific Congress
“Modern Olympic Sport and Sport for All”, The Materials,
Vol.I, Moscow 2003, p.30 (in Russian)). Every year, the increasing number
of publications on Olympic issues attracts a wide range of readers.
Inspite of the described works by domestic and foreign authors, as
well as many respective references and publications, there are none
that concern the matter of Post-Olympism, i.e. the complex of issues,
processes, concepts and views which reflect the essence of the changes
that have taken place in the Olympic Movement and Olympic Games between
the 1970s and 1990s. These changes started before (former IOC President)
Samaranch’s “Olympic Revolution” and were conditioned
not only by commercialization of international sports and its consequences,
but also by such realities as globalization, mediacracy and visible
transformation of the world’s political, economical, social, demographic,
national and religious structures.
In view of the above, we propose the idea of Post-Olympism, its content,
problems, interpretation and research methods, i.e. the phenomena which
in no way fits in the concept of modern Olympism (Oleg A. Milshteyn.
The Olympic Expedition to the 21st Century. International Research Project.
In: The Legacy of Olympic Games 1984-2000. International Symposium,
Ed. Miquel de Moragas and others, Lausanne, 2002, p.397-399). Moreover,
it begins by contradicting the ideas and principles of Olympism, to
underline that Olympism, which remains, for most people, a philosophy
or an ideal may be a myth or sometimes even an utopia. Also, in the
development of the Olympic Movement, we cannot draw a line to clearly
separate Olympism from Post-Olympism. They develop through and in parallel
to each other at the present historical stage of the social progress.
It’s worth saying that, fortunately, we are not alone in our
approach. In April 2004, Danish colleagues published ‘Questioning
Sport in the Twenty-First Century’. This work, by John Bale and
Mitte Krog, highlights that the Olympic Games and Olympic ideals have
become symbols of global co-operation, mutual understanding between
nations and have connected people by means of sport. It also discusses
Olympic rhetoric facing dark sides of the Olympic reality. The Olympic
Games are constantly threatened by crises that may seriously damage
the Olympic spirit or even the Games themselves. Observing the changes
that have taken place in the Olympic Games during the 20th Century,
some authors naturally ask themselves the following questions: do the
Olympic Games have their future? If they do, what is it like? This is
also a big question for the authors of the book ‘Post-Olympism?’.
The book provides a useful overview of the ongoing significance of the
Olympics and will be essential reading for anyone with a serious interest
in the Games (John Bale, Mette Krogh Christensen. Post-Olympism? Questioning
Sport in the Twenty-First Century, University of Aarhus 2004, 256pp).
It does not tend to strictly contradict all negative things in the Olympic
Movement and Olympism, but raises questions as to what Olympism is,
nowadays.
From 1991 to 1999, the international research project, ‘The Jubilee
Olympiad’, was undertaken. Its aim was to monitor public opinion
of the role, lessons and conclusions for the hundred years’ experience
of the Olympic Movement, Olympic Games and Olympism. The research was
historically and sociologically profiled. The historical aspect of its
subject was approached by sociological methods. The basis was a standard
interview including 16 main questions and the same number of optional
ones.
The author interviewed over 500 respondents, including: the Olympic
Movement experts and the Olympic Family members from more than 80 countries;
Olympic Games athletes from 1936 to 1996; coaches in more than forty
sports from Europe, Asia, America, Africa, Australia and Oceania; leaders
of International and National Sports Federations; IOC Members (76 of
those who had this status at the time of the research); heads of all
IOC departments, Library, Research Centre and Olympic Museum, members
of all IOC Commissions; heads of National Olympic Committees; heads
of sports ministries and other national sports bodies; several heads
of the Olympic Games’ Organizing Committees; managers of national
sports centres; sports journalists with leading networks from the USSR/Russia,
USA, Germany, Great Britain, Italy and other countries; sports doctors
and doping control experts; sports scientists, sports historians and
sociologists; sponsors, business, financial, commercial and industrial
corporations involved in the sphere of sport business; and religious
leaders participating as priests of the Olympic teams of Germany, Poland,
Italy, Belgium and other countries in 1972 – 1996. The interviews
were conducted by the author of the project, between mid-1992 and mid-1996.
The interviews were undertaken in 27 countries, by visiting respondents
at their residence or working places, as well as at Olympic centres,
during Olympic Games, Goodwill Games, European Youth Olympic Days, World
and European Championships and other regional competitions, during the
Centennial Olympic Congress in Paris (1994), various IOC Executive Board
Sessions and Meetings, International and National Olympic Academies’
Sessions, ANOC General Assembly Meetings and General Assemblies and
Congresses of the International Sports Federations (GAISF), during international
scientific congresses, conferences, seminars, and symposiums.
As a result of this long, intensive but incredibly interesting work, a unique set of material of enormous historical and scientific value was assembled. The volume of the five hundred interviews, in 12 languages, makes up 230 hours of tape recording. In addition to the purely scientific value, this work created the of an international archive of sound memoirs of sport and Olympic Movement veterans, as well as for the opening of a virtual Olympic library on Internet to be founded. All data was translated, processed, systematized, generalized and analysed. The translation of the material into Russian and entering into a computer database lasted from 1996 to 1999. The statistical and sociological data processing and analysis of the results was then carried out (Oleg A. Milshteyn. Olympic Saga. Olympionics, Priests and Pilgrims (Historical and Sociological Essays), Vol.I, Terra Sport-Olympia Press, Moscow 2001, 743pp (in Russian)). In 2000 at the Sydney Olympic Games, with kind assistance and support
of the IOC (personally J.A. Samaranch and the Athletes Commission headed
by P. Tallberg) and the World Olympians Association (Liston Bouchette,
Secretary General), a new pilot polling was carried out at the Olympians
Reunion Centre. Its topic was ‘Olympians Life Story and Sports
Career’ and 63 videotaped interviews with the Olympic veterans
representing 23 nations were collected. These athletes were the participants
in 17 Olympic Games and 8 Winter Olympics in 17 sports from 1924 to
2000. The project was based upon the same key issues of the Olympic
Movement, Olympic Games and Olympism. As well as in the previous mass
polling of the Olympic Family members and Olympic experts, almost 93%
of respondents defined Olympism in general as the Olympic Movement and/or
Olympic Games, but very rarely as a philosophy, ideology or theory.
So, we can clearly see the complete identification of the above concepts
and phenomena in public opinion and in the opinion of the Olympic Family
members and even the majority of IOC Members. These were the same results
found, having carried out content analysis of the most fundamental Olympic
literature (Carl Diem. The Olympic Idea. Discourses and Essays. Carl
Diem Institute, Verlag Karl Hofman, Stuttgart, 1970, 121pp; Factcheets.
Office of Communications. Public Information. IOC, Lausanne, 1998, 207pp;
Krüger, A. The Unfinished Symphony: A History of the Olympic Games
from Coubertin to Samaranch. In: Riordan, J./ Krüger, A. The International
Politics of Sport in the Twentieth Century, London, New-York, 1999;
Olympisch Bewegt Festschrift zum 60. Gedurstag von Prof.Dr. Manfred
Lämmer, Köln, 2003, 509pp; Sortiris Giatsis, Vassilis Ziakas,
Contantina Zygouri, Anastasia Giatsi. Sport and the Olympic Games in
the Global Post-Cold War Era (1989-Nowadays).-Journal of Olympic History,
Vol.12, May 2004, Number 2, p.35-47; Taylor, T. Politics and the Olympic
Spirit. In.: Alison, L. (ed) Politics and Sport, Manchester, 1986; The
International Olympic Committee. One Hundred Years. The idea –
The Presidents. The Achievements. Work in three volumes. Series under
the supervision of Raymond Gafner. Vol.I-III, IOC, Lausanne, 1994; The
Olympic Movement and the Mass Media. Olympic Message. January-February-March
1996, XXVI-1.IOC, Lausanne, 213pp; The Olympic Movement, IOC, Lausanne,
1997, 111pp; The Olympic Truce. Report of activities 1991-1998. International
Olympic Committee, Lausanne, 1998, 26pp; Wolf Lyberg. The Seventh President
of the IOC. Facts and figures International Olympic Committee, Lausanne,
1997, 248pp). This project of polling the Olympian veterans and participants
in the Olympic Games will be continued at the Olympians Reunion Centre
in Athens, but even the existing material can logically provide the
following sets of scientific information:
As for the last prognostic issues, one may note the following key tendencies
in the stated opinion of the Olympic experts:
Thus, we believe that along with Olympism, as an ideal and everyday
practice of the Olympic Movement and its nucleus, the Olympic Games,
there is a phenomena that can be called ‘Post-Olympism’,
meaning a fusion of innovations and realities concerning the contradictions
in modern Olympic Movement that are frequently not appropriate to the
ideals and principles professed by the Olympic Charter and other basic
documents of the Olympic Unity. Prof. Dr. Oleg Milshteyn
World Olympians Association Olympians Video and Audio Memoirs Fund Ph: +95 912 8236 Fax: +95 247 1883 Email: milshtein_oleg@yahoo.com ![]() http://www.icsspe.org/portal/bulletin-january2005.htm |