Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Mundanity of Excellence - An Ethnographic Report On Stratification and Olympic Swimmers
The Mundanity of Excellence - An Ethnographic Report On Stratification and Olympic Swimmers
Swimmers
Author(s): Daniel F. Chambliss
Source: Sociological Theory, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1989), pp. 70-86
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/202063 .
Accessed: 25/06/2014 02:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Sociological Theory.
http://www.jstor.org
Olympic sports,and competitive swimming swimmers from another town; one swimmer
in particular, provide an unusually clear may consistently qualify for the Junior
opportunity for studying the nature of Nationals, but not for Seniors; a third may
excellence. In other fields, it may be less swim at the Olympics, and never return to
clear who are the outstanding performers: Junior Nationals. The levels of the sport
the best painter or pianist, the best business- are remarkably distinct from one another.
person, the finest waitress or the best This is convenient for the student of
father. But in sport (and this is one of its stratification. Because success in swimming
attractions) success is defined more exactly, is so definable, and the stratificationsystem
by success in competition. There are so (relatively) unambiguous (so that the
medals and ribbons and plaques for first athlete's progress can be easily charted),
place, second, and third; competitions are we can clearly see, by comparing levels
arranged for the head-to-head meeting of and studying individuals as they move
the best competitors in the world; in between and within levels, what exactly
swimming and track, times are electronically produces excellence. In addition, careers
recorded to the hundredth of a second; in swimming are relatively short; one can
there are statistics published and rankings achieve tremendous success in a brief
announced, every month or every week. period of time. Rowdy Gaines, beginning
By the end of the Olympic Games every in the sport when 17 years old, jumped
four years, it is completely clear who won from a country club league to a world
and who lost, who made the finals, who record in the 100 meter freestyle event in
participated in the Games, and who never only three years. This allows the researcher
participated in the sport at all. to conduct true longitudinal research in a
Within competitive swimming in par- few short years.
ticular, clear stratification exists not only In short, in competitive swimming one
between individuals but also between de- can rather quickly learn something about
fined levels of the sport as well. At the stratification; here is a prime location for
lowest level, we see the country club studying the nature of excellence.'
teams, operating in the summer-time as a
loosely-run, mildly competitive league,
with volunteer part-time coaches. Above I. THE RESEARCH
that there are teams which represent entire From
cities and compete with other teams from January 1983 through August 1984 I
attended a series of national and inter-
other cities around the state or region;
national-class swimming meets conducted
then a "Junior Nationals" level of competi-
tion, featuring the best younger (under 18
' The general approach taken here derives from
years old) athletes; then the Senior
Nationals level (any age, the best in the symbolic interactionism and phenomenology, as
by Berger and Luckmann (1966), Blumer
nation); and finally, we could speak of practicedSchutz (1971), and Schutz and Luckmann
world or Olympic class competitors. At (1986), (1973).
each such level, we find, predictably, The sociology of sport literature is thin on
certain people competing: one athlete swimming; however, the following are either classics
swims in a summer league, never seeing or recent work which was helpful: Elias andGuttmann Dunning
Fine (1986), Goffman (1961),
(1979, 1987),
(1978), Lever (1983), and Rigauer (1981). Perhaps
* The author wishes to thank Randall Collins and one of the finest pieces of social critique of sport
Gary Alan Fine for their comments on an earlier appears woven throughout David Halberstam's The
draft of this paper. Breaks of the Game (1981).
by United States Swimming, Inc., the lifting sessions, team meetings, parties,
national governing body for the sport. and other events. In addition, I was
United States Swimming sanctions the present in Mission Viejo during the U.S.
selection process for American teams for Olympic Team Training Camp, which was
international events (the Olympic Games, held there in July of 1984, and was the only
for example), and charters several thousand non-staff member on the pool deck during
amateur swimming clubs around the coun- the (closed) afternoon practices of the
try with membership of several hundred Olympic Team. In addition, I have recently
thousand athletes, by far the majority of completed five years of coaching a regional-
whom are children and teenagers. These level age group swimming team (children
clubs provide the organizational base for 7-16 years old) in New York State. In that
amateur swimming in America. The meets capacity I traveled to many meets, from
attended included both the Indoor (March) the smallest "country club" events to the
and the Outdoor (August) National Eastern Zone Championships, as well as
Championships, the USS International other large meets east of the Mississippi
Meet, the Seventeen Magazine Meet of River. I have also coached in the southern
Champions, the Speedo/Dupont Meet of U.S. and worked with beginners as well as
Champions, the 1984 Olympic Trials, and National Age Group record holders.
the 1984 Summer Olympic Games. I carried In short, this report draws on extended
standard press credentials, and was free to experience with swimmers at every level of
go anywhere and talk to anyone. At most ability, over some half a dozen years.
meets I traveled with the Mission Viejo Observation has covered the span of
(CA) Nadadores, National Team Cham- careers, and I have had the chance to
pions at the time, sharing plane flights, compare not just athletes within a certain
hotel accommodations, meals, and in- level (the view that most coaches have),
town transportation with them. I lived but between the most discrepant levels as
with the coaches and athletes of this team well. Thus these findings avoid the usual
in a traditional participant observer role. It "sociology of knowledge" problem of an
was clear to all involved that I was there as observer's being familiar mainly with ath-
a researcher; no deception was involved at letes at one level. When top-rank coaches,
any stage of the research. During this for instance, talk of what makes success,
period and several occasions since, I inter- they are often thinking of the differences
viewed a total of some 120 national and between athletes whom they see within the
world-class swimmers and coaches.2 top level of the sport. Their ignorance of
Over these years I frequently spent from the day-to-day realities of lower levels
3 days to a month and a half in Mission (learn-to-swim programs, country club
Viejo (about an hour's drive south of Los teams) prevents them from having a truly
Angeles) living with coaches, visiting prac- comparative view. Or when sports journ-
tices, and interviewing swimmers, coaches alists write about Olympic athletes, they
and officials. The Nadadores gave me typically begin the research after the great
complete access to their practices, weight deed is done, and so lack a legitimate
longitudinal view; the athlete's memory of
his or her own distant history will be
distorted.
2
This study of Olympic swimmers, by
Interviews were either recorded on tape (in the contrast, (1) looks at different levels of the
early stages of the research) or in written notes. Tape
recording had a somewhat inhibiting effect on when sport, and (2) was begun well in advance
and where interviews could be conducted, and so was of the Games, when no one (obviously)
abandoned. Interviews proceeded from a base of a knew who would win and who not; it was
few standard questions-e.g. "How did you begin in designed with the explicit idea of seeing
swimming?" "When did you first achieve national how the plant grew before the flower
standing?" to a more open-ended conversation around bloomed. The research was both cross-
issues of becoming a champion, finding the right
coach, etc. For further details, see "Sources and sectional (looking at all levels of the sport)
Acknowledgements" in Chambliss, 1988. and longitudinal (over the span of careers).
sides; or from lifting oneself up out of the Olympic Trials. Consider three dimensions
water at the turn to staying low near the of difference:
water. Other qualitative changes might
include competing in a regional meet, (1) Technique: The styles of strokes,
instead of local meets; eating vegetables dives and turns are dramatically different
and complex carbohydrates rather than at different levels. A "C" (the lowest rank
fats and sugars; entering one's weaker in United States Swimming's ranking sys-
events instead of only one's stronger events; tem) breaststroke swimmer tends to pull
learning to do a flip turn with freestyle, her arms far back beneath her, kick the
instead of merely turning around and legs out very wide without bringing them
pushing off; or training at near-competition together at the finish, lift herself high out
levels of intensity, rather than casually. of the water on the turn, fail to take a long
Each of these involves doing things differ- pull underwater after the turn, and touch
ently than before, not necessarily doing at the finish with one hand, on her side. By
more. Qualitative improvements involve comparison, a "AAAA" (the highest rank)
doing different kinds of things. swimmer, sculls the arms out to the side
Now we can consider how qualitative and sweeps back in (never actually pulling
differentiation is manifested: backwards), kicks narrowly with the feet
finishing together, stays low on the turns,
*Different levels of the sport are quali- takes a long underwater pull after the turn,
tatively distinct. Olympic champions don't and touches at the finish with both hands.
just do much more of the same things that Not only are the strokes different, they are
summer-league country-club swimmers do. so different that the "C" swimmer may be
They don't just swim more hours, or move amazed to see how the "AAAA" swimmer
their arms faster, or attend more workouts. looks when swimming. The appearance
What makes them faster cannot be quan- alone is dramatically' different, as is the
titatively compared with lower level speed with which they swim.
swimmers, because while there may be The same is true for all the other strokes
quantitative differences-and certainly (to a greater or lesser degree), and certainly
there are, for instance in the number of for starts (dives) and turns. Olympic-class
hours spent in workouts-these are not, I swimmers, to make one other observation,
think, the decisive factors at all.5 are surprisingly quiet when they dive into
Instead, they do things differently. Their the water-there is little splash. Needless
strokes are different, their attitudes are to say, this is not true for a novice 10-year
different, their group of friends are differ- old.
ent; their parents treat the sport differently, (2) Discipline: The best swimmers are
the swimmers prepare differently for their more likely to be strict with their training,
races, and they enter different kinds of coming to workouts on time, carefully
meets and events. There are numerous doing the competitive strokes legally (i.e.,
discontinuities of this sort between, say, without violating the technical rules of the
the swimmer who competes in a local City sport)6, watch what they eat, sleep regular
League meet and one who enters the hours, do proper warmups before a meet,
and the like. Their energy is carefully
channeled. Diver Greg Louganis, who .44 seconds, a gap of only /io of 1%.
won two Olympic gold medals in 1984, Between Gaines and the 8th place finisher
practices only three hours each day-not a (a virtual unknown named Dirk Korthals,
long time-divided up into two or three from West Germany), there was only a
sessions. But during each session, he tries 2.2% difference in time. Indeed, between
to do every dive perfectly. Louganis is Rowdy Gaines, the fastest swimmer in the
never sloppy in practice, and so is never world that year, and a respectable 10-year
sloppy in meets. old, the quantitative difference in speed
(3) Attitude: At the higher levels of would only be about 30%.
competitive swimming, something like an Yet here, as in many cases, a rather
inversion of attitude takes place. The very small quantitative difference produces an
features of the sport which the "C"swimmer enormous qualitative difference: Gaines
finds unpleasant, the top-level swimmer was consistently a winner in major inter-
enjoys. What others see as boring national meets, holder of the world record,
swimming back and forth over a black line and the Olympic Gold Medalist in three
for two hours, say-they find peaceful, events.
even meditative8, often challenging, or
therapeutic. They enjoy hard practices,
look forward to difficult competitions, try *Stratificationin the sport is discrete, not
to set difficult goals. Coming into the 5.30 continuous. There are significant, quali-
AM practices at Mission Viejo, many of tative breaks-discontinuities-between
the swimmers were lively, laughing, talking, levels of the sport. These include differ-
ences in attitude, discipline, and technique
enjoying themselves, perhaps appreciating which in turn lead to small but consistent
the fact that most people would positively
hate doing it. It is incorrect to believe that quantitative differences in speed. Entire
teams show such differences in attitude,
top athletes suffer great sacrificesto achieve
their goals. Often, they don't see what discipline, and technique, and consequently
certain teams are easily seen to be "stuck"
they do as sacrificial at all. They like it. at certain levels.9 Some teams always do
(See also, Hemery 1986). well at the National Championships, others
These qualitative differences are what do well at the. Regionals, others at the
distinguish levels of the sport. They are County Meet. And certainly swimmers
very noticeable, while the quantitative typically remain within a certain level for
differences between levels, both in training most of their careers, maintaining through-
and in competition, may be surprisingly out their careers the habits with which they
small indeed. David Hemery, who won a began. Within levels, competitive improve-
Gold Medal in the 400-meter intermediate ments for such swimmers are typically
hurdles at the 1968 Olympics, reports the marginal, reflecting only differential growth
results of interviewing world-class athletes rates (early onset of puberty, for instance)
in 22 different sports. "In many cases, the or the jockeying for position within the
time spent training [a quantitative factor, relatively limited sphere of their own level.
I am suggesting here that athletes do not
in our terms] did not alter significantly
from the start of specialization right up to reach the top level by a simple process of
the top level." Yet very small quantitative
differences in performance may be coupled 9 For
with huge qualitative differences: In the example: several well-known teams con-
finals of the men's 100-meter freestyle sistently do well at the National Junior Olympics
("Junior Nationals," as it is called informally), and
swimming event at the 1984 Olympics, yet never place high in the team standings at the
Rowdy Gaines, the gold medalist, finished National Championships ("Senior Nationals"), the
ahead of second-place Mark Stockwell by next higher meet.
These teams actually prevent their swimmers
from going to the better meet, holding them in store
7
From an interview with his coach, Ron O'Brien. for the easier meet so that the team will do better at
s Distance swimmers frequently compare swimming that lesser event. In this way, and in many others,
to meditation. teams choose their own level of success.
"working their way up," by accumulating read and talked about. No sheer number
sheer time in the sport; improvements of papers given at local conferences or
across levels of the sport are not generated published in minor journals "add up to" a
through quantitative changes. No amount single Sorokin-award winning book (in
of extra work per se will transform a "C" sociology), or an article in Daedalus.l At
swimmer into a "AAAA" swimmer with- the micro-level, simply increasing the
out a concurrent qualitative change in how number of hours one works each day will
that work is done. It is not by doing not produce a major change in status if the
increasing amounts of work that one be- kind of work done remains the same.
comes excellent, but rather by changing It may be hard to believe this completely.
the kinds of work. Beyond an initial It seems to contradict our "common sense,"
improvement of strength, flexibility and what we know from daily experience. The
feel, there is little increasing accumulation fact is, when people around us do more,
of speed through sheer volume of swim- they do tend to do better. When we play in
ming. Instead, athletes move up to the top a weekend softball game, sheer increased
ranks through qualitative jumps: notice- effort (at running the bases, say) brings
able changes in their techniques, discipline, increased success ("Would a bunch of guys
and attitude, accomplished usually through really go at it this hard just for a beer?").
a change in settings, e.g. joining a new Children in Little League are told-and
team with a new coach, new friends, etc, their coaches believe-that hard work is
who work at a higher level. Without such the major cause of success (Fine 1987),
qualitative jumps, no major improvements and swimming coaches widely believe that
(movements through levels) will take place. those who stay in the sport the longest and
We find the same phenomenon in other swim year-round will be more successful.
areas of endeavor. Carl von Clausewitz, The top swimming coaches in America fall
writer of the classic 19th century text on into the same prejudice, attributingsuccess
military strategy On War, noted that great often to "hard work" or "talent." Since
generals (and he could have added, great they habitually, unreflectively, live at the
swimmers and coaches)"' rise quickly. top level (having spent almost their entire
Especially in wartime, when battlefield coaching career there), they never see
performance is the vital need, there is no what creates the differences between levels.
long period of apprenticeship before one The fact is, quantitative changes do bring
achieves the highest ranks, no tedious success-but only within levels of the
"accumulation" of knowledge or skills: sport. 12 Doing more of the same pays off,
but only in very limited, locally visible
. .The most distinguishedgenerals have ways. One can achieve a slight advantage
never risen from the very learned or really over peers by doing more without changing
eruditeclassof officers,but have been mostly the quality of what is done.
men who, from the circumstancesof their Having seen that "more is better" within
position,couldnot have attainedto anygreat local situations, we tend to extrapolate:13
amount of knowledge. (p. 196). . .the only If I work this hard to get to my level, how
question therefore is, of what kind should hard must Olympic swimmers work? If I
these ideas be. . .(Clausewitz, etc, p. 197)
(emphasisadded)
" One realizes this in reading job candidates'
vitae: far better to see one page that lists a Guggenheim
The same pattern holds true in academic Fellowship and a National Book Award than fifteen
life. The leading figures of a discipline are pages of book reviews in the regional association's
not those whose quantity of production is journal.
12 Increased
effort, for instance, does bring in-
so high-although that may give an added creased success. But at the higher levels of the sport,
advantage to those who are widely read- virtually everyone works hard, and effort per se is not
but rather those who write the quality, or the determining factor that it is among lower level
kind, of articles and books that are widely athletes, many of whom do not try very hard.
13 For a different explanation of the tendency to
reduce qualitative factors to quantitative, see Lukacs,
10 Chambliss, 1988, Chapter 1. 1976.
respect and praise. The big event of the the obvious fact that moving "up" to the
season may be the National Champion- Olympic level is very difficult, while moving
ships, where the athletes may spend much "down" is apparently easy, as if a sort of
time-sitting under huge tents, playing gravity obtained. We all know that people
cards, reading, listening to music and don't become Olympic champions in a
gossiping.17 day. It takes time to learn all those skills,
Each such world has its own distinctive pick up the techniques, develop the sta-
types of powerful people and dominant mina, change the attitudes, practice the
athletes, and being prominent in one discipline. The physical work as well as the
world is no uarantee of being prominent social and psychological readjustments are
in another.l At lower levels, the parents significant. This difficulty seems to suggest
of swimmers are in charge; at the higher an asymmetry to these worlds.
levels, the coaches; perhaps in the Masters Less obvious, though, is that "sliding
teams which are made up only of swimmers back down" is empirically difficult indeed.
over 25 years old, the swimmers themselves. For one thing, techniques once learned
Each world, too, has its distinctive goals: and habitualized don't deteriorate over-
going to the Olympics, doing well at the night. Quite a few swimmers, years past
National Junior Olympics, winning the retirement from the sport, can come out
City Meet, having a good time for a few and with a few months' practice do quite
weeks. In each world the techniques are at well. In 1972 a 16-year old named Sandra
least somewhat distinct (as with the breast- Nielson won three gold medals in the
stroke, discussed above) and certain de- Munich Olympics in swimming. In 1984,
mands are made on family and friends. In just after turning 29, she entered the
all of these ways, and many more, each so- National Long Course Championships,
called "level" of competitive swimming is placed in the finals, and swam faster than
qualitatively different than others. The she had 12 years earlier-and with far less
differences are not simply quantifiable training.19 At that point she had been
steps along a one-dimensional path leading away from competition for 10 years, re-
to the Olympic Games. Goals are varied, turning only months before the Nationals.
participants have competing commitments, Nielson had lost very little of her ability.
and techniques are jumbled (again, see Then too, there seem to be permanent
March and Olsen, 1976). or at least persistent effects of hard training;
This notion of the horizontal differen- attitudes of competitiveness and strat-
tiation of the sport-of separate worlds egies for racing once learned are rarely
within competitive swimming, rather than forgotten.2" And finally-perhaps as
a hierarchy-may appear to be refuted by significantly-the social pressures are
strongly against "going back" to a lower
17 Again, personal observations from a level of competition. Hotshots simply are
large number
of cases. While there are significant differences not welcome in the country club leagues
between swimmers of the Olympic class and a while they are hotshots, and if their skills
country club league, the basic sociability of their do begin to deteriorate, embarrassment
worlds is not one of them. will more likely lead one simply to quit the
' "Indeed, prestige ladders in the various worlds
are so different that a man who reaches the pinnacle sport rather than continue. This may be
of success in one may be completely unknown roughly akin to the older professor who,
elsewhere." Shibutani in Rose, 1962. rather than attempt to compete with
Similarly in academia: one may be a successful
professor at the national level and yet find it difficult 19
to gain employment at a minor regional university. The training information comes from her coach
Professors at the regional school may suspect his/her and, later, husband, Dr. Keith Bell.
motives, be jealous, feel that he/she "wouldn't fit in," 2" Some anecdotal evidence from swimmers (e.g.
"won't stay anyway," etc. Many top-school graduate Steve Lundquist) and coaches (e.g. Terry Stoddard)
students discover upon entering the markets that no- suggests that the physical effects of hard training can
name colleges have no interest in them; indeed, by last for years, so that a swimmer in effect "rachets
attending a Chicago or Harvard Ph.D. program one up" to higher levels with better training, and will not
may limit oneself to the top ranks of employment slow down appreciably once the training load is
opportunities. reduced.
younger colleagues in a fast-moving field, what about talent?. "Talent" is perhaps the
begins to fill his or her time with more most pervasive lay explanation we have
committee duties and foundation con- for athletic success. Great athletes, we
sultantships. Graceful senior retirement is seem to believe, are born with a special
preferable to humiliating decline. gift, almost a "thing" inside of them,
All of this (admittedly provocative) denied to the rest of us-perhaps physical,
argument is to suggest that the swimming genetic, psychological, or physiological.
world is really several different worlds, Some have "it," and some don't. Some are
and the "top" performers are better seen "natural athletes," and some aren't. While
as different than as better. Even that an athlete, we acknowledge, may require
formulation suggests that at one point the many years of training and dedication to
excellent performer could have been domi- develop and use that talent, it is always "in
nant at a lesser level in that other world. there," only waiting for an opportunity to
But as Clausewitz pointed out, in com- come out. When children perform well,
paring the highest commanders in Napo- they are said to "have" talent; if perform-
leon's army with a colonel, ance declines, they may be said to have
"wasted their talent". We believe it is that
There are Field Marshalswho would not talent, conceived as a substance behind the
haveshone at the head of a cavalryregiment, surface reality of performance, which finally
and vice versa. (Clausewitz1984, p.198). distinguishes the best among our athletes.
But talent fails as an explanation for
Some people don't even begin to shine, athletic success, on conceptual grounds. It
that is, until they reach the higher levels. mystifies excellence, subsuming a complex
For our purposes here, Clausewitz's "vice set of discrete actions behind a single
versa" in the quotation above reminds us undifferentiated concept. To understand
of the separation of subworlds, and of the these actions and the excellence which
major points made: "levels" of swimming they constitute, then, we should first de-
are qualitatively distinct; stratification in bunk this concept of talent, and see where
the sport is discrete, not continuous; and it fails. On at least three points, I believe,
the sport is most accurately seen as a "talent" is inadequate:
collection of (relatively) independent
worlds. *Factors other than talent explain athletic
success more precisely. We can, with a
little effort, see what these factors are in
II. Why "Talent"does not lead to Excellence swimming: geographical location, par-
ticularly living in southern California where
Up to now, I have suggested that there are the sun shines year round and everybody
discrete social worlds of competitive swims; fairly high family income, which
swimming, and that an athlete joins those allows for the travel to meets and payments
different worlds by adopting the behavior of the fees entailed in the sport, not to
patterns of members. This argument im- mention sheer access to swimming pools
plies, first, that most people actually don't when one is young; one's height, weight,
want to belong to the highest rank, and and proportions; the luck or choice of
second, that the role of effort is exagger- having a good coach, who can teach the
ated. I am suggesting that athletic excellence skills required; inherited muscle structure
is widely attainable, if usually unsought. -it certainly helps to be both strong and
Many people-let us say, hundreds of flexible; parents who are interested in
thousands in this country-have the physi- sports. Some swimmers, too, enjoy more
cal wherewithal to belong to the Olympic the physical pleasures of swimming; some
class. While there may be an "entry level" have better coordination; some even have
of physical characteristics necessary for a higher percentage of fast-twitch muscle
Olympic performances, that level may be fiber. Such factors are clearly definable,
quite low, and in any case is not measurable. and their effects can be clearly demon-
At this point most readers will ask, But strated. To subsume all of them, willy-
nilly, under the rubric of "talent" obscures until after its effects become obvious.
rather than illuminates the sources of Kalinowski's research on Olympic swim-
athletic excellence. mers demonstrates this clearly:
It's easy to do this, especially if one's
only exposure to top athletes comes once One of the more startlingdiscoveries of
every four years while watching the Olym- our study has been that it takes a while to
pics on television, or if one only sees them recognizeswimmingtalent. Indeed, it usually
in performances rather than in day-to-day takesbeingsuccessfulat a regionallevel, and
training. Say, for instance, that one day I more often, at a national level (in AAU
turn on the television set and there witness swimming)before the child is identified as
a magnificent figure skating performance talented. (p. 173)
by Scott Hamilton. What I see is grace and "Theydidn'tsay I had talentuntilI started
to get reallygood [andmadeSeniorNationals
power and skill all flowing together, seem- at sixteen]; then they started to say I had
ingly without effort: a single moving picture, talent. . ." (p. 174)
rapid and sure, far beyond what I could .. despitethe physicalcapabilitieshe was
myself do. In phenomenological terms, I bornwith, it took Peter severalyears (six by
see Hamilton's performance "monothetic- our estimate) to appear gifted. This is the
ally," at a single glance, all-at-once. (Schutz predominant,though not exclusive, pattern
and Luckmann, 1973, p. 75) "His skating," found in our data on swimmers. Most of
I may say, referring to his actions as a them are said to be "natural"or "gifted"
single thing, "is spectacular." With that afterthey hadalreadydevoteda greatdeal of
time and hardwork to the field. (p. 194)
quick shorthand, I have captured (I believe) . .whatever superiorqualitieswere attri-
at a stroke the wealth of tiny details that
buted to him as he grew older and more
Hamilton, over years and years, has fitted successful, they were not apparent then
together into a performance so smoothly [before he was thirteen].(p. 200)
that they become invisible to the untrained
eye.2 Perhaps, with concentration, Hamil- The above quotations suggest that talent
ton himself can feel the details in his
is discovered later in one's career, the
movements; certainly a great coach can
see them, and pick out the single fault or implication being that while the athlete's
mistake in an otherwise flawless routine. ability existed all along, we were unaware
But to me, the performance is a thing of it until late. Kalinowski, like many of
entire. us, holds to the belief that there must be
this thing inside the athlete which precedes
Afterwards, my friends and I sit and talk
about Hamilton's life as a "career of and determines success, only later to be
discovered. But the recurring evidence he
excellence," or as showing "incredible
finds suggests a different interpretation:
dedication," "tremendous motivation"-
again, as if his excellence, his dedication, perhaps there is no such thing as "talent,"
his motivation somehow exist all-at-once. there is only the outstanding performance
His excellence becomes a thing inside of itself. He sees success and immediately
him which he periodically reveals to us, infers behind it a cause, a cause for which
which comes out now and then; his life and he has no evidence other than the success
habits become reified. "Talent" is merely itself. Here, as elsewhere, talent (our
the word we use to label this reification. name for this cause) cannot be measured,
But that is no explantion of success. or seen, or felt, in any form other than the
success to which it supposedly gives rise.
*Talent is In Kalinowski's analysis, then-and the
indistinguishable from its
effects. One cannot see that talent exists lay view is much the same as his-there
lies an analytic error of the first degree: the
21
"Now, no one can see in an artist's work how it independent and the dependent variables
evolved: that is its advantage, for wherever we can cannot be measured separately.22
see the evolution, we grow somewhat cooler. The
complete art of representation wards off all thought 22
of its solution; it tyrannizes as present perfection." I am not saying "natural ability doesn't matter."
(Nietzsche 1984, p. 111) I am saying that to use "talent" as a way of
*The "amount" of talent needed for look at what people actually do that
athletic success seems to be strikingly low. creates outstanding performance.
It seems initially plausible that one must The concept of talent hinders a clear
have a certain level of natural ability in understanding of excellence. By providing
order to succeed in sports (or music, or a quick yet spurious "explanation" of
academics). But upon empirical examin- athletic success, it satisfies our casual
ation, it becomes very difficult to say curiosity while requiring neither an em-
exactly what that physical minimum is. pirical analysis nor a critical questioning of
Indeed, much of the mythology of sport is our tacit assumptions about top athletes.
built around people who lack natural At best, it is an easy way of admitting that
ability who went on to succeed fabulously. we don't know the answer, a kind of
An entire genre of inspirational literature layman's slang for "unexplained variance."
is built on the theme of the person whose But the attempt at explanation fails. What
even normal natural abilities have been we call talent is no more than a projected
destroyed: Wilma Rudolph had polio as a reification of particular things done: hands
child, then came back to win the Olympic placed correctly in the water, turns crisply
100 Meter Dash. Glenn Cunningham had executed, a head held high rather than low
his legs badly burned in a fire, then broke in the water. Through the notion of talent,
the world record in the mile. Such stories we transform particular actions that a
are grist for the sportwriter's mill. human being does into an object possessed,
More than merely common, these stories held in trust for the day when it will be
are almost routine. Most Olympic cham- revealed for all to see.
pions, when their history is studied, seem This line of thought leads to one more
to have overcome sharp adversity in their step. Since talent can be viewed only
pursuit of success. Automobile accidents, indirectly in the effects that it supposedly
shin splints, twisted ankles, shoulder sur- produces, its very existence is a matter of
gery are common in such tales. In fact, faith. The basic dogma of "talent" says
they are common in life generally. While that what people do in this world has a
some necessary minimum of physical cause lying behind them, that there is a
strength, heart/lung capacity, or nerve kind of backstage reality where the real
density may well be required for athletic things happen, and what we, you and I,
achievement (again, I am not denying see here in our lives (say, the winning of a
differential advantages), that minimum gold medal) is really a reflection of that
seems both difficult to define and markedly true reality back there. Those of us who
low, at least in many cases. Perhaps the are not admitted to the company of the
crucial factor is not natural ability at all, elect-the talented-can never see what
but the willingness to overcome natural or that other world of fabulous success is
unnatural disabilities of the sort that most really like, and can never share those
of us face, ranging from minor inconve- experiences. And accepting this faith in
niences in getting up and going to work, to talent, I suggest, we relinquish our
accidents and injuries, to gross physical chance of accurately understanding ex-
impairments. cellence.
And if the basic level of talent needed, Still, we want to believe in talent. As
then, seems so low as to be nearly univer- Jean-Paul Sartre put it, "What people
sally available, perhaps the very concept of would like is that a coward or a hero be
talent itself-no longer differentiating born that way."23, knowing that it protects
among performers-is better discarded us by degrading the very achievements
altogether. It simply doesn't explain the that it pretends to elevate (Staples 1987);
differences in outcomes. Rather than talk magically separating us from those people
about talent and ability, we do better to who are great athletes, ensuring that we
are incomparable to them; and relieving
those of us who are not excellent of
explaining performance is to resort to tautology. The
action of performing is reified-turned into a thing- 23
and we call it "talent." Sartre 1957, p. 34.
responsibility for our own condition. "To squeezed together over the head, and a
call someone 'divine'," Friedrich Nietzsche little faster; then how to place the hands in
once wrote, "means 'Here we do not have the water so no air is cupped in them; then
to compete.'" (Nietzsche, 1984, p. 111) In how to lift them over the water; then how
the mystified notion of talent, the un- to lift weights to properly build strength,
analyzed pseudo-explanation of outstand- and how to eat the right foods, and to wear
ing performance, we codify our own deep the best suits for racing, and on and on.26
psychological resistance to the simple reality Each of those tasks seems small in itself,
of the world, to the overwhelming mun- but each allows the athlete to swim a bit
danity of excellence.24 faster. And having learned and consistently
practiced all of them together, and many
more besides, the swimmer may compete
III. The Mundanity of Excellence
in the Olympic Games. The winning of a
"People don't know how ordinary success gold medal is nothing more than the
is," said Mary T. Meagher, winner of 3 synthesis of a countless number of such
gold medals in the Los Angeles Olympics, little things-even if some of them are
when asked what the public least under- done unwittingly or by others, and thus
stands about her sport. She then spoke of called "luck."
starting her career in a summer league So the "little things" really do count. We
country club team, of working her way to have already seen how a very small (in
AAU meets, to faster and faster com- quantitative terms) difference can produce
petitions; of learning new techniques, a noticeable success. Even apparent flukes
practicing new habits, meeting new chal- can lead to gold medal performances:
lenges.25 What Meagher said-that success
is ordinary, in some sense-applies, I In the 100 Meter Freestyle event in Los
believe, to other fields of endeavor as well: Angeles, Rowdy Gaines, knowing that the
to business, to politics, to professions of all starterfor the racetendedto firethe gunfast,
kinds, including academics. In what follows anticipated the start; while not actually
I will try to elaborate on this point, jumpingthe gun, it seems fromvideo replays
drawing some examples from the swimming of the race that Gaines knewexactlywhen to
research, and some from other fields, to go, and others were left on the blocks as he
indicate the scope of this conception. took off. But the starterturnedhis back, and
the protests filed afterwardsby competitors
were ignored. Gaines had spent years
*Excellence is mundane. Superlative per- watching starters, and had talked with his
formance is really a confluence of dozens coach (RichardQuick)beforethe race about
of small skills or activities, each one this starter in particular.(Field notes; see
learned or stumbled upon, which have Chambliss,1988for full description)
been carefully drilled into habit and then
are fitted together in a synthesized whole. Gaines was not noticeably faster than
There is nothing extraordinary or super- several of the other swimmers in the race,
human in any one of those actions; only but with this one extra tactic, he gained
the fact that they are done consistently and
enough of an advantage to win the race.
correctly, and all together, produce excel- And he seemed in almost all of his races to
lence. When a swimmer learns a proper find such an advantage: hence the gold
flip turn in the freestyle races, she will medal. Looking at such subtleties, we can
swim the race a bit faster; then a stream-
lined push off from the wall, with the arms say that not only are the little things
important; in some ways, the little things
are the only things.
24 To coin an Peter Drucker, the dean of American
ungainly but accurate phrase. I
borrow the term "mundanity"from phenomenological management consultants, suggests a similar
philosopher Maurice Natanson, in The Journeying idea when he writes of business "practices,"
Self.
25 26 Such
Meagher's entire career is described in detail in techniques are thoroughly explained in
Chambliss, 1988. Maglischo (1982) and Troup and Reese (1983).
"Chariots of Fire" may inspire one for lower resistance to subsequent proposals.
several days, but the excitement stirred by Small wins are controllable opportunities
a film wears off rather quickly when that produce visible results. (Weick 1984,
confronted with the day-to-day reality of p. 43).
climbing out of bed to go and jump in cold
water. If, on the other hand, that day-to- For instance, many top swimmers are
day reality is itself fun, rewarding, chal- accustomed to winning races in practice,
lenging, if the water is nice and friends are day after day. Steve Lundquist, who won
supportive, the longer-term goals may well two gold medals in Los Angeles, sees his
be achieved almost in spite of themselves. success as resulting from an early decision
Again, Mary T. Meagher: that he wanted to win every swim, every
day, in every practice. That was the
I neverlooked beyondthe next year, and I immediate goal he faced at workouts: just
never looked beyond the next level. I never try to win every swim, every lap, in every
thoughtabout the Olympicswhen I was ten; stroke, no matter what. Lundquist gained
at that time I was thinkingabout the State a reputation in swimming for being a
Championships. When I made cuts for ferocious workout swimmer, one who
Regionals [the next higher level of compe- competed all the time, even in the warmup.
tition], I started thinking about Regionals; He became so accustomed to winning that
when I made cuts for NationalJuniorOlym- he entered meets knowing that he could
pics, I startedthinkingaboutNationalJunior beat these people-he had developed the
Olympics. . .I can't even think about the
[1988] Olympics right now. . .Things can habit, every day, of never losing. The
overwhelmyou if you think too far ahead. short-term goal of winning this swim, in
(Interviewnotes) this workout, translated into his ability to
win bigger and bigger races. Competition,
when the day arrived for a meet, was not a
This statement was echoed by many of shock to him, nothing at all out of the
the swimmers I interviewed. While many
of them were working towards the Olympic ordinary.31
Games, they divided the work along the This leads to a third and final point:
way into achievable steps, no one of which *In the pursuit of excellence, maintaining
was too big. They found their challenges in
small things: working on a better start this mundanity is the key psychological chal-
lenge. In common parlance, winners don't
week, polishing up their backstroke tech- choke. Faced with what seems to be a
nique next week, focusing on better sleep tremendous challenge or a strikingly un-
habits, planning how to pace their swim. usual event such as the Olympic Games,
They concentate on what Karl Weick has the better athletes take it as a normal,
called "small wins:" the very definable,
minor achievements which can be rather manageable situation32 ("It's just another
swim meet," is a phrase sometimes used by
easily done but which produce significant top swimmers at a major event such as the
effects30, not the least of which is the
confidence to attempt another such "small Games) and do what is necessary to deal
with it. Standard rituals (such as the
win." Weick's article on the subject is,
warmup, the psych, the visualization of the
typically, insightful and suggestive. He race, the taking off of sweats, and the like)
says: are ways of importing one's daily habits
into the novel situation, to make it as
A small win is a concrete, complete, normal an event as possible. Swimmers
implementedoutcome of moderate import- like Lundquist who train at competition-
ance. By itself, one small win may seem
unimportant.A series of wins at small but
significanttasks, however, reveals a pattern -3 Interviewnotes.
that may attractallies, deter opponents,and 32
An interesting parallel: some of the most
successfulgenerals have no trouble sleeping before
3'For an applicationof this notion to college and after major battles. For details on Ulysses Grant
education,see Chamblissand Ryan, 1988. and the Duke of Wellington, see Keegan, p. 207.