Leeuwarden in hip-hip-hurray mood for the Dutch national team. If they would know how it would end...After being away for a long time, I'm so happy to return. I have been (and still am) imprisoned in the claws of photoblogging and negelected the verbal communication. I hope I will return more often and discuss with people who have comments.
My contributions for the coming four posts will be in te realms of sports, management and religion. This is the first one:
Covey and soccer
I saw on TV how the Dutch national soccer team, so surprisingly achieving during the first round, got beaten up by the Russian team, also very surprisingly: 3-1. What remained was a bit of national pride because the coach of the Russian team was also Dutch. He had said: if they call me a traitor, that’s fine with me, and I hope I’ll be an excellent traitor. Was I disappointed? No. I’m not a soccer fan and the national soccer fever urged me to watch some matches (which I never do on other occasions). And believe me or not, I got fascinated by the game. At the same time I read an article by the German philosopher with (again) the Dutch name Peter Sloterdijk who analysed the meaning of sport in European history since ancient Greek and Roman times. There are some striking differences in the way the ancients viewed their sports: between the Romans and the Greek there were big differences. The Greek considered their sports as something semi-religious, their arenas were next to their temples. They only recognized winners, first places, the second and third place were of no value. They were exclusively practiced by naked men, presence or watching by women was strictly forbidden. The nakedness was a consequence of their adoration of the beauty of the male nude. I was remembered of it when I saw on TV the naked upper halves of the players’ bodies, so different from my own. I would like to have such a body! Yes, says Sloterdijk, and that was also the intention of the Greek: making the watcher feel guilty and encourage him to get such a body, too. For me I think it’s too late, and when I was between my twenties and thirties, I wasn’t interested and found female bodies more important than the shapes of my own as compared to other young mens’ bodies. Repent comes after sin. Sloterdijk notices also another difference: Greek sports were more sophisticated, Roman sports were cruel and relentless. They served an un-democratic goal: bread and games. In our modern sports, we have incorporated the values of enlightenment: fair play, teamwork, scientific research and last but not least money and marketing. The aim of winning has remained. Fair play also includes some recognition that the numbers two and three made also a good achievement. We abandoned the punishment for the looser namely death (Roman view on sports), and we don’t see sports anymore as a religious cult (Greek view). What also remains is the emotion. The tension during the penalties at the end of the match Russia-Netherlands reached heights that one normally feels only a few times in a lifetime. The euphoria after a goal is immense. After the match we could see how the Russian star-player burst out in tears, not tears of grief but of joy and relief. Not tears that quietly crawled down his cheeks, but his whole face looked like a baby crying.
I realized all of a sudden that emotions like these are sought for and exploited also in business, religion and politics more and more. It’s not sports that serves as an example, but sports is only one of the realms of society in which it manifests itself. Think of the way election campaigns are held, of populist leaders, think of how evangelical movements experience their religious services, etc. In previous decennia we saw this with pop artists (Elvis Presley, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones) and now it seems to have expanded to all other human activities in which motivation and achieving something are important. Everything within the rules, nowhere in lawless let-it-go. Rules of the game, rules of the company, rules of the music culture, rules of the religious movement (churches with their inner-directed inspirational traditions are becoming out-dated), but vehement and all-encompassing.
Mr. Stephen Covey fits exactly in this social movement with his “seven steps of very effective people”. I refer to Stephen Covey to websites with information about him. He is one of the most succesfull management “gurus” in the USA and he, and later his son who is also in his training business, visited our school during last year. His training programs have been incorporated in our curricula and a number of colleagues have become “certified” Covey-trainers. What bothers me a bit, but this off the record, is that his theories and viewpoints have been introduced in the school not by the teaching staff but by members of the board who are supposed not to interfere with curricula. Our professional discipline “Business Ethics” has been replaced by what I call “Coveyology”. His teaching materials are also “for sale”, everything that comes from or is derived from one of his books or courses, must be paid for. Even his seven “Steps of Very Effective People” have a trade-mark sign behind each of them. But apart from this, for many students and teachers it seems to work, to be effective. This cannot be said about the discipline of “Ethics” which consists of book theory and group discussion materials. All he says and recommends is picked up and brought together from all kinds of religious and spiritual movements of mankind during history. Tao, Christianity, Buddhism, Greek philosophy, Hinduism, are his main sources. There is no theory, only short explanations and practical exercises. His books flow over by one-liners and examples (also taken from existing cultural realms). Effectiveness that’s what it’s all about.
After the soccer match I saw suddenly the applicability of his seven steps on soccer. Next time more about it.
I saw on TV how the Dutch national soccer team, so surprisingly achieving during the first round, got beaten up by the Russian team, also very surprisingly: 3-1. What remained was a bit of national pride because the coach of the Russian team was also Dutch. He had said: if they call me a traitor, that’s fine with me, and I hope I’ll be an excellent traitor. Was I disappointed? No. I’m not a soccer fan and the national soccer fever urged me to watch some matches (which I never do on other occasions). And believe me or not, I got fascinated by the game. At the same time I read an article by the German philosopher with (again) the Dutch name Peter Sloterdijk who analysed the meaning of sport in European history since ancient Greek and Roman times. There are some striking differences in the way the ancients viewed their sports: between the Romans and the Greek there were big differences. The Greek considered their sports as something semi-religious, their arenas were next to their temples. They only recognized winners, first places, the second and third place were of no value. They were exclusively practiced by naked men, presence or watching by women was strictly forbidden. The nakedness was a consequence of their adoration of the beauty of the male nude. I was remembered of it when I saw on TV the naked upper halves of the players’ bodies, so different from my own. I would like to have such a body! Yes, says Sloterdijk, and that was also the intention of the Greek: making the watcher feel guilty and encourage him to get such a body, too. For me I think it’s too late, and when I was between my twenties and thirties, I wasn’t interested and found female bodies more important than the shapes of my own as compared to other young mens’ bodies. Repent comes after sin. Sloterdijk notices also another difference: Greek sports were more sophisticated, Roman sports were cruel and relentless. They served an un-democratic goal: bread and games. In our modern sports, we have incorporated the values of enlightenment: fair play, teamwork, scientific research and last but not least money and marketing. The aim of winning has remained. Fair play also includes some recognition that the numbers two and three made also a good achievement. We abandoned the punishment for the looser namely death (Roman view on sports), and we don’t see sports anymore as a religious cult (Greek view). What also remains is the emotion. The tension during the penalties at the end of the match Russia-Netherlands reached heights that one normally feels only a few times in a lifetime. The euphoria after a goal is immense. After the match we could see how the Russian star-player burst out in tears, not tears of grief but of joy and relief. Not tears that quietly crawled down his cheeks, but his whole face looked like a baby crying.
I realized all of a sudden that emotions like these are sought for and exploited also in business, religion and politics more and more. It’s not sports that serves as an example, but sports is only one of the realms of society in which it manifests itself. Think of the way election campaigns are held, of populist leaders, think of how evangelical movements experience their religious services, etc. In previous decennia we saw this with pop artists (Elvis Presley, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones) and now it seems to have expanded to all other human activities in which motivation and achieving something are important. Everything within the rules, nowhere in lawless let-it-go. Rules of the game, rules of the company, rules of the music culture, rules of the religious movement (churches with their inner-directed inspirational traditions are becoming out-dated), but vehement and all-encompassing.
Mr. Stephen Covey fits exactly in this social movement with his “seven steps of very effective people”. I refer to Stephen Covey to websites with information about him. He is one of the most succesfull management “gurus” in the USA and he, and later his son who is also in his training business, visited our school during last year. His training programs have been incorporated in our curricula and a number of colleagues have become “certified” Covey-trainers. What bothers me a bit, but this off the record, is that his theories and viewpoints have been introduced in the school not by the teaching staff but by members of the board who are supposed not to interfere with curricula. Our professional discipline “Business Ethics” has been replaced by what I call “Coveyology”. His teaching materials are also “for sale”, everything that comes from or is derived from one of his books or courses, must be paid for. Even his seven “Steps of Very Effective People” have a trade-mark sign behind each of them. But apart from this, for many students and teachers it seems to work, to be effective. This cannot be said about the discipline of “Ethics” which consists of book theory and group discussion materials. All he says and recommends is picked up and brought together from all kinds of religious and spiritual movements of mankind during history. Tao, Christianity, Buddhism, Greek philosophy, Hinduism, are his main sources. There is no theory, only short explanations and practical exercises. His books flow over by one-liners and examples (also taken from existing cultural realms). Effectiveness that’s what it’s all about.
After the soccer match I saw suddenly the applicability of his seven steps on soccer. Next time more about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment