I've been watching a lot of Friday Night Lights recently, which is a pretty great show. It's largely great because it's a high school soap opera, which is pretty enjoyable in its own rite (who doesn't love living the drama of high school without the fear of having your acne seen?). The show is also great, however, because it is constantly dispenses well executed sports cliches. They are the same cliches that make you groan in so many awful movies, but when they are done correctly they leave you with a lump in your throat. That's probably because they get to the heart of sports. The rush of athleticism, sure, but also the respect a leader earns by steering his men through battle. The loyalty guys have to a cause (sorry to be so phalocentric), the unity and higher purpose of a team... you know, all that cliched shit.
There is, undoubtedly, a reason this show takes place in High School. People have a feeling that professional sports isn't like this anymore -- that with so many steroid scandals (what up beloved), decisions, salary deals, and felony charges it is hardly about the game, or at least not in the way that Friday Night Lights is. And while I think these conservative sports value types are somewhat historical revisionists, they may have some point. Malone certainly isn't and never has been a perfect man, to claim otherwise would be to willfully play up some values while ignoring some serious others (morals were great in the fifties, 'member?). But stories like this show you why he's great, what sports can offer, and a reason to care, even when you don't get LeBron.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After reading the curious phrase "pretty great", I was tempted to comment on how this statement operates as a vector into your subconscious feelings concerning this show. "Great" in that you like it a lot, "pretty" in that you are ashamed of this enjoyment. Unfortunately, the following sentences revealed that you were aware of the curiosity, thus removing any notion of subconsciousness and obviating (what up, Bernard?) the jeering paragraph I had planned to write. In it's stead, two things struck me about this post. First, it answers one of the plaguing existential issues of the sports fan: why care? what is the point? One point is to have the lump-throat condition in a proximal fashion. Second, it elucidates a trend in ESPN commentators previously unexplored. They are revisionist, comparing one thing that is currently happening to another that never did. The term is apt and adds increase leverage into prying open their crazed and poorly argued thoughts.
ReplyDeleteHuh. I kind of liked the show the first couple seasons but then it started disappearing off the map with all this short order/Direct TV/NBC rebroadcast stuff. I just wasn't dedicated enough to try and find it.
ReplyDelete