Much of this blog recently has involved discussing the Code of Points, aesthetics and the impact changes to the Code have had on the sport. In respect of artistry, these changes appear to be almost universally considered as negative amongst both observers and participants of the sport, but it remains to be seen whether the FIG will bring about the necessary changes to the Code. So much of their business is conducted in camera - even though they publish minutes on their website, they are not properly open or accountable for their decisions.
As the new year approaches, I wanted to offer my readers a positive suggestion for improvement. I make no apology that this is taken verbatim from the work of Dr Clive Palmer, whose work I consider to embrace many fundamental truths (see my three previous posts, and you can also download Dr Palmer's thesis from the British Library EThOS database if you want a nice chunky read).
"The whole evaluation system should be rethought to include the range of possible evaluation areas : Technical, Aesthetic and Compositional: all three areas considering various levels of aesthetic form in gymnastics performance.
A technical jury would be analysing, with the applied use of technology, aspects of execution which can be measured in minute detail such as degrees of angles, finishing positions and seconds of hold in each element and combination.
An aesthetic jury would be assessing aspects of skilfulness and technique in a performance when the gymnast may be able to demonstrate his special ability to individualise a routine, this being a synthesis of his aesthetic persona and a balance in routine construction to demonstrate a wide gymnastic vocabulary. The aesthetic jury's assessment of form would be considered in a linear fashion when the aggregation of actions makes up the routine. That is to say they would comsider what elements were performed in relation to the abilities of that gymnast to utilise the space and time on the apparatus available to him.
A composition jury would be assessing the aesthetic of performance from a deeper sense of form as may result from notions of standards, skilfulness and technique in gymnastics. They would be observing qualities of composition, structure and design and theme and variation in performance as may become evident from a choreographic process and 'polishing' a performance;. They would be eager to consider the gymnast's clever use of dynamic rhythm, phrase and use of gesture as these might contribute towards the overall aesthetic effect of performance. Composition Jury members, being educated and in tune with these areas, would be observing how well a gymnast is able to self-express his gymnastic character to meet the demands of demonstrating unity in variety in gymnastics which may become an aesthetic ideal for this jury to assess their view of performance qualities.
To achieve the latter, judges, coachhes and gymnasts need to be educated in aesthetic appreciation. Aesthetic awareness should be tutored, not just left to be intuitive. The tutored view will resulted in a reasoned view and it is the status of aesthetic reasons which should be considered valuable for making an evaluation system objective. The reduction of logical reasoning into numbers (under 10.00) may filter out important facets of reasoning, which could contribute to the aesthetic assessment of performances. Also, the sensible contribution towards aesthetic reasoning and final judgements which gymnasts and coaches could make should be integrated as it appears that at present (2003) two thirds of expert opinion who attend at competitions may be overlooked. ...
The FIG should encourage cultural diversity in performance. Competing nations may want to speak the same gymnastic language but in different ways. Further research into the aesthetic of gymnastics needs to be carried out and should include investigation of cultural perception, aesthetic value in the sport and motivational drives to compete and perform at the highest level. This kind of research will inform the educational process and could indicate alternative value systems for ascribing aesthetic value within the sport.
The FIG should not 'throw out the baby with the bath water'. Some of the old rules were good and worthy of being maintained for the compositional features in performance they appeared to bring about. ...
The reasons why practitioners seem to reject artistic criteria and artistic notions of qualities in their sport as subjective (perjorative, 'anything goes' sense) may be because they don't see how they relate to their context. This is by no means a travesty or shortcoming ... as similarly artists who paint, sculpt or dance may not understand gymnastic [sic - read 'aesthetic'] criteria as there is no apparent need for them to do so to improve the quality of their work ... in assessing the quality of performance many practitioners utilise informally what they conceive to be artistic notions of understanding to account for and appreciate pleasing qualities of gymnastics. Therefore, there may be a problem of translating aesthetic emotions and personal aesthetic assessment into a format which can contribute towards formal assessment ... it is a recommendation of this research that the FIG consider further investigation in to the aesthetic understanding of their sport in order to expand their current means of assessment."
(I'm afraid this probably isn't the last post I'll make on Dr Palmer's thesis - the fact is that for me it is the 'missing link' in so many ways. It was always my intention to use this blog as a means of developing my scholarship in the area of gymnastics as a cultural form, as well as expressing my highly partisan preference and support for the Soviet and Russian style of gymnastics. It's kind of interesting to have found a piece of work that so neatly packages many of the core concepts that underpin my thoughts and will help me to develop them.)
As the new year approaches, I wanted to offer my readers a positive suggestion for improvement. I make no apology that this is taken verbatim from the work of Dr Clive Palmer, whose work I consider to embrace many fundamental truths (see my three previous posts, and you can also download Dr Palmer's thesis from the British Library EThOS database if you want a nice chunky read).
"The whole evaluation system should be rethought to include the range of possible evaluation areas : Technical, Aesthetic and Compositional: all three areas considering various levels of aesthetic form in gymnastics performance.
A technical jury would be analysing, with the applied use of technology, aspects of execution which can be measured in minute detail such as degrees of angles, finishing positions and seconds of hold in each element and combination.
An aesthetic jury would be assessing aspects of skilfulness and technique in a performance when the gymnast may be able to demonstrate his special ability to individualise a routine, this being a synthesis of his aesthetic persona and a balance in routine construction to demonstrate a wide gymnastic vocabulary. The aesthetic jury's assessment of form would be considered in a linear fashion when the aggregation of actions makes up the routine. That is to say they would comsider what elements were performed in relation to the abilities of that gymnast to utilise the space and time on the apparatus available to him.
A composition jury would be assessing the aesthetic of performance from a deeper sense of form as may result from notions of standards, skilfulness and technique in gymnastics. They would be observing qualities of composition, structure and design and theme and variation in performance as may become evident from a choreographic process and 'polishing' a performance;. They would be eager to consider the gymnast's clever use of dynamic rhythm, phrase and use of gesture as these might contribute towards the overall aesthetic effect of performance. Composition Jury members, being educated and in tune with these areas, would be observing how well a gymnast is able to self-express his gymnastic character to meet the demands of demonstrating unity in variety in gymnastics which may become an aesthetic ideal for this jury to assess their view of performance qualities.
To achieve the latter, judges, coachhes and gymnasts need to be educated in aesthetic appreciation. Aesthetic awareness should be tutored, not just left to be intuitive. The tutored view will resulted in a reasoned view and it is the status of aesthetic reasons which should be considered valuable for making an evaluation system objective. The reduction of logical reasoning into numbers (under 10.00) may filter out important facets of reasoning, which could contribute to the aesthetic assessment of performances. Also, the sensible contribution towards aesthetic reasoning and final judgements which gymnasts and coaches could make should be integrated as it appears that at present (2003) two thirds of expert opinion who attend at competitions may be overlooked. ...
The FIG should encourage cultural diversity in performance. Competing nations may want to speak the same gymnastic language but in different ways. Further research into the aesthetic of gymnastics needs to be carried out and should include investigation of cultural perception, aesthetic value in the sport and motivational drives to compete and perform at the highest level. This kind of research will inform the educational process and could indicate alternative value systems for ascribing aesthetic value within the sport.
The FIG should not 'throw out the baby with the bath water'. Some of the old rules were good and worthy of being maintained for the compositional features in performance they appeared to bring about. ...
The reasons why practitioners seem to reject artistic criteria and artistic notions of qualities in their sport as subjective (perjorative, 'anything goes' sense) may be because they don't see how they relate to their context. This is by no means a travesty or shortcoming ... as similarly artists who paint, sculpt or dance may not understand gymnastic [sic - read 'aesthetic'] criteria as there is no apparent need for them to do so to improve the quality of their work ... in assessing the quality of performance many practitioners utilise informally what they conceive to be artistic notions of understanding to account for and appreciate pleasing qualities of gymnastics. Therefore, there may be a problem of translating aesthetic emotions and personal aesthetic assessment into a format which can contribute towards formal assessment ... it is a recommendation of this research that the FIG consider further investigation in to the aesthetic understanding of their sport in order to expand their current means of assessment."
(I'm afraid this probably isn't the last post I'll make on Dr Palmer's thesis - the fact is that for me it is the 'missing link' in so many ways. It was always my intention to use this blog as a means of developing my scholarship in the area of gymnastics as a cultural form, as well as expressing my highly partisan preference and support for the Soviet and Russian style of gymnastics. It's kind of interesting to have found a piece of work that so neatly packages many of the core concepts that underpin my thoughts and will help me to develop them.)
Comments
Post a Comment