Dr Clive Palmer (2003) : A qualitative investigation of aesthetic evaluation in men's artistic gymnastics - PhD thesis
Browsing through the British Library databases I came across a 2003 PhD thesis entitled 'A qualitative investigation of aesthetic evaluation in men's artistic gymnastics', written by Dr Clive Palmer. The thesis is based on documentary analysis, an analysis of interviews and judging observations involving men's coaches (eg Great Britain's Paul Hall), gymnasts (eg British international Kanukai Jackson), international judges and MTC President Hardy Fink, and the author's own observations of gymnastics practice. The thesis provides insights into the evolving aesthetic denudation of gymnastics, cultural differences in understanding the aesthetic, the work of the judges, and makes proposals for improvements in the system.
It seems to me that much of what Dr Palmer has written is even more relevant today and has resonance across both men's and women's gymnastics. The author has published articles based on the thesis in peer reviewed journals such as the International Journal of Olympic History and the Journal of Qualitative Research in Sports Studies. Given that the research stems from the very heart of the FIG, I can't understand why they have not adopted more of his ideas or at the very least acknowledged his work on their website. I personally do not see much evidence of his thinking in the current rather cack-handed way that the FIG approaches judging and the Code of Points.
I can't pretend to be expert in the Code but I do have a slightly more than superficial understanding of cultural theory, cultural heritage and the history of the sport. The PhD thesis is about 100,000 words long, and I haven't yet read it all the way through, but some parts of it had me jumping up and down. I think it is a fascinating piece of work, and forewarns so many of the worst effects of poor judging on the sport. So I've picked out some of the most interesting extracts here, and attempted a crude summary of some of the key points. Direct quotes from Dr Palmer's thesis will be presented in italics; the rest is me. Please comment.
Palmer provides an in-depth definitional framework of the aesthetic in gymnastics, speaking of layers of 'form' and 'expression', where 'form' describes the physical shape and composition of an exercise and 'expression' the performance elements that evoke an emotional response. He goes on to discuss the 1979 Code where Gander provides definitions of clear terms such as virtuosity, originality and rhythm, and to compare it to the 1997 Code which while making reference to the importance of the artistic, omitted any form of definition of artistry, and excluded any tool by which to evaluate artistry.
He also comments on cultural and national differences in perceptions of form:
'... there does not appear to be an internationally shared conception of ideal form in Artistic Gymnastics. That is, there may be national/cultural standards of form or body shape due to differing ideas about style between different countries. For example, the judge went on to speak about the Japanese gymnasts who appeared to exhibit a slightly different body shape in their performance compared to the Russian gymnasts and that these various styles might appeal more, or less, to different judges during a competition.'
The implications of this comment are of course the need for a certain level of tolerance in subjective judgements of form, but this brings with it inherent problems. Palmer goes on to say :
'A dilemma for the FIG appears to be that the judges demand standardisation of body shapes as depicted in their Code of Points but may reward for variation in performance if it is in accordance with the stylistic preferences of the judges. The FIG may feel a concept of idea aesthetic form draws Artistic Gymnastics closer to a concept of perfection because there may be identical examples of form exhibited at competitions ...However, the situation seems problematic to achieve theoretically and impossible to realise physically if in fact it is at all desirable in the first place.'
But ... isn't this precisely what the FIG has attempted to do in its more recent editions of the Code?
Palmer goes on to discuss ideas of subjectivity and objectivity in relation to sporting evaluation, pointing out that the idea of subjective judgement is often denigrated as 'personal opinion' when in fact it may more accurately be the judgement of a well informed and educated person. He emphasises the need to be able to say 'this is a good piece of work' as opposed to merely 'I like this work now'. Consequently, he says,
'the aesthetic evaluation of, for example, virtuosity, harmony and rhythm may be made against specific criteria for these qualities, similar to earlier FIG Codes. The point for the FIG being that these aesthetic qualities have not disappeared from gymnastics performance just because the criteria for them have been removed from the Code and also that practitioners may still perceive these qualities and react to them which is currently unaccountable for by the formal rules.'
Palmer develops a model of 'qualitative objectivity' (citing Kaufmann, 2002) as a construct involving gymnastics practitioners' concepts of both objectivity and subjectivity and including interpretation of 'sense data' (what is personally perceived rather than measured), visual measurements and educated judgement. He considers this 'qualitative objectivity' to be central to the process of judging gymnastics. (I am rather relieved that I am not, after all, the only person in the world who is interested in the subjective/objective divide in gymnastics evaluation.)
Palmer attended several championships and judging conventions, and, with regard to the importance of cultural heritage to gymnastics performances, reported this conversation with a Portuguese judge :
'it was obvious that the USA have ignored their strong cultural traditions in contemporary dance and ballet in gymnastic presentation whereas other countries utilise their cultural identity to the full ...she seemed to be shaking her head, indicating that it's a shame that a great opportunity for them to develop a significant style in gymnastics performance is being missed.'
Palmer discusses the idea of a 'sieve of taste' whereby new and innovative techniques and movements gradually disappear or become integrated into the canon of 'classical' gymnastics thanks to a process of collective appreciation and peer imitation. He comments that the classical is increasingly rare in gymnastics, something he attributes to the strongly prescriptive direction of the Codes of Points:
'For the FIG, a downgrade culture with draconian scoring limits for established actions may have been the simplest method of increasing difficulty in the sport whilst keeping the score below, but close to 'the perfect 10.00'. Consequently many of the classic actions which are easier to perform than the fashionable new tricks may be de-valued, by number, out of existence that is, out of the Code. A risk may be that the aesthetic of Men's Artistic Gymnastics is not merely altered, it becomes something completely different, which could be identified as a collection of acrobatic links whose classic aesthetic heritage has been discarded ... it is not the actions themselves, but the aesthetic they create that may be of importance.'
I find this statement remarkably prescient. Remember Palmer was researching and writing this thesis from around 1999 to its submission in 2003. Another comment which resonates with the current state of women's gymnastics is :
'... the American gymnastic concept may be so fashionable or radical that it excludes classic aesthetic material in terms of presentation style that might commonly be expected in a traditionally performed routine. If the current American concept is one of athleticism and pursuance of difficulty [author cites Gallimore et al, 2001, Fink 1999a] a consequence may be that risky gymnastics tricks that are executed in a staccato manner, ie with perceivable breaks, could become the preferred and accepted style of gymnastic skill presentation. This is compared to the traditional style of performance during which a continuous, flowing gymnastic display could maintain an illusion of ease of action with one clear start and finish to the routine. At the 2001 World Championships in Ghent, the majority of American gymnasts broke the illusion of continuous performance by having many athletic pauses; being in effect multiple starts and finishes as each big trick was attempted (personal observation). The term athlete [which the author had earlier identified as the term used to describe US competitors, as opposed to 'gymnast'] implies a performer who has objective tests applied to his performance, to throw, to jump, to run etc against a definitive standard of distance or time. The term gymnast implies a performer who has aesthetic connotations applied to his performance. Therefore the term athlete performed by the USA to the gymnast may indicate their lack of awareness of aesthetic connotations in gymnastics. That is, the qualitative evaluation of how well a gymnast performs may in some way be overlooked in preference to measuring what he executes, akin to the track and field athlete who may only be concerned with what they can achieve measured against an objective standard.'
Surely, with hindsight, we must acknowledge the huge cultural battle that is currently underway in gymnastics. The non-aesthetic cultural values of the USA (gymnastically speaking; I would not say this about their society as a whole!) currently dominate gymnastics. We increasingly read gymnasts and their coaches talk of 'going clean' 'hitting routines' and 'being strong'. These assertions, whilst being grammatically incorrect, may express laudable competitive qualities but they also totally estrange all thoughts of aesthetic in either form or expression. American is currently the dominant language of gymnastics which has already adopted an alternative model to the traditionally aesthetic one, and the rest of the world is following, far too rapidly.
There are more extracts to come from this thesis but I will break the posts down to keep their length reasonable. (I have to do my Christmas shopping at some point in the next day.) It seems to me that an understanding of Palmer's work is critically important to the FIG as well as to the national federations as it (i) provides a clear definitional framework for thinking about aspects of subjectivity and objectivity, (ii) breaks down the aesthetic and clearly labels 'form' 'technique' and 'expression', (iii) attempts to provide a construct in which the development of the sport is discussed from a cultural heritage perspective, and also (iv) undresses many of the underlying political struggles current in the sport, eg the dominance of the American voice that is promoted so strongly through the English language media, which many of the 'upcoming' countries are adopting, and which only serves to reinforce the effective burning of the aesthetic book.
I'm afraid that this only reinforces my idea that the American sporting 'state' is the enemy of gymnastics and will destroy it from within.
Thesis references used in these extracts :
Fink, H (1999a) Bonus System or Additive System FIG Statement to Technical and Executive Committees September 26th 1999, International Gymnastics Federation
Galimore, R, Sheer, J, Graham, M, Zunich, B, Bjerke, H, Allen, K and Sasvary, L (1998) Men's Code of Points : Alternative Ways to Provide Stable Rules National Judges Association Incorporated (online)
Kaufmann, D A (2002) 'Normative criticism and the objective value of artworks' The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 60, pp 151-166
It seems to me that much of what Dr Palmer has written is even more relevant today and has resonance across both men's and women's gymnastics. The author has published articles based on the thesis in peer reviewed journals such as the International Journal of Olympic History and the Journal of Qualitative Research in Sports Studies. Given that the research stems from the very heart of the FIG, I can't understand why they have not adopted more of his ideas or at the very least acknowledged his work on their website. I personally do not see much evidence of his thinking in the current rather cack-handed way that the FIG approaches judging and the Code of Points.
I can't pretend to be expert in the Code but I do have a slightly more than superficial understanding of cultural theory, cultural heritage and the history of the sport. The PhD thesis is about 100,000 words long, and I haven't yet read it all the way through, but some parts of it had me jumping up and down. I think it is a fascinating piece of work, and forewarns so many of the worst effects of poor judging on the sport. So I've picked out some of the most interesting extracts here, and attempted a crude summary of some of the key points. Direct quotes from Dr Palmer's thesis will be presented in italics; the rest is me. Please comment.
Palmer provides an in-depth definitional framework of the aesthetic in gymnastics, speaking of layers of 'form' and 'expression', where 'form' describes the physical shape and composition of an exercise and 'expression' the performance elements that evoke an emotional response. He goes on to discuss the 1979 Code where Gander provides definitions of clear terms such as virtuosity, originality and rhythm, and to compare it to the 1997 Code which while making reference to the importance of the artistic, omitted any form of definition of artistry, and excluded any tool by which to evaluate artistry.
He also comments on cultural and national differences in perceptions of form:
'... there does not appear to be an internationally shared conception of ideal form in Artistic Gymnastics. That is, there may be national/cultural standards of form or body shape due to differing ideas about style between different countries. For example, the judge went on to speak about the Japanese gymnasts who appeared to exhibit a slightly different body shape in their performance compared to the Russian gymnasts and that these various styles might appeal more, or less, to different judges during a competition.'
The implications of this comment are of course the need for a certain level of tolerance in subjective judgements of form, but this brings with it inherent problems. Palmer goes on to say :
'A dilemma for the FIG appears to be that the judges demand standardisation of body shapes as depicted in their Code of Points but may reward for variation in performance if it is in accordance with the stylistic preferences of the judges. The FIG may feel a concept of idea aesthetic form draws Artistic Gymnastics closer to a concept of perfection because there may be identical examples of form exhibited at competitions ...However, the situation seems problematic to achieve theoretically and impossible to realise physically if in fact it is at all desirable in the first place.'
But ... isn't this precisely what the FIG has attempted to do in its more recent editions of the Code?
Palmer goes on to discuss ideas of subjectivity and objectivity in relation to sporting evaluation, pointing out that the idea of subjective judgement is often denigrated as 'personal opinion' when in fact it may more accurately be the judgement of a well informed and educated person. He emphasises the need to be able to say 'this is a good piece of work' as opposed to merely 'I like this work now'. Consequently, he says,
'the aesthetic evaluation of, for example, virtuosity, harmony and rhythm may be made against specific criteria for these qualities, similar to earlier FIG Codes. The point for the FIG being that these aesthetic qualities have not disappeared from gymnastics performance just because the criteria for them have been removed from the Code and also that practitioners may still perceive these qualities and react to them which is currently unaccountable for by the formal rules.'
Palmer develops a model of 'qualitative objectivity' (citing Kaufmann, 2002) as a construct involving gymnastics practitioners' concepts of both objectivity and subjectivity and including interpretation of 'sense data' (what is personally perceived rather than measured), visual measurements and educated judgement. He considers this 'qualitative objectivity' to be central to the process of judging gymnastics. (I am rather relieved that I am not, after all, the only person in the world who is interested in the subjective/objective divide in gymnastics evaluation.)
Palmer attended several championships and judging conventions, and, with regard to the importance of cultural heritage to gymnastics performances, reported this conversation with a Portuguese judge :
'it was obvious that the USA have ignored their strong cultural traditions in contemporary dance and ballet in gymnastic presentation whereas other countries utilise their cultural identity to the full ...she seemed to be shaking her head, indicating that it's a shame that a great opportunity for them to develop a significant style in gymnastics performance is being missed.'
Palmer discusses the idea of a 'sieve of taste' whereby new and innovative techniques and movements gradually disappear or become integrated into the canon of 'classical' gymnastics thanks to a process of collective appreciation and peer imitation. He comments that the classical is increasingly rare in gymnastics, something he attributes to the strongly prescriptive direction of the Codes of Points:
'For the FIG, a downgrade culture with draconian scoring limits for established actions may have been the simplest method of increasing difficulty in the sport whilst keeping the score below, but close to 'the perfect 10.00'. Consequently many of the classic actions which are easier to perform than the fashionable new tricks may be de-valued, by number, out of existence that is, out of the Code. A risk may be that the aesthetic of Men's Artistic Gymnastics is not merely altered, it becomes something completely different, which could be identified as a collection of acrobatic links whose classic aesthetic heritage has been discarded ... it is not the actions themselves, but the aesthetic they create that may be of importance.'
I find this statement remarkably prescient. Remember Palmer was researching and writing this thesis from around 1999 to its submission in 2003. Another comment which resonates with the current state of women's gymnastics is :
'... the American gymnastic concept may be so fashionable or radical that it excludes classic aesthetic material in terms of presentation style that might commonly be expected in a traditionally performed routine. If the current American concept is one of athleticism and pursuance of difficulty [author cites Gallimore et al, 2001, Fink 1999a] a consequence may be that risky gymnastics tricks that are executed in a staccato manner, ie with perceivable breaks, could become the preferred and accepted style of gymnastic skill presentation. This is compared to the traditional style of performance during which a continuous, flowing gymnastic display could maintain an illusion of ease of action with one clear start and finish to the routine. At the 2001 World Championships in Ghent, the majority of American gymnasts broke the illusion of continuous performance by having many athletic pauses; being in effect multiple starts and finishes as each big trick was attempted (personal observation). The term athlete [which the author had earlier identified as the term used to describe US competitors, as opposed to 'gymnast'] implies a performer who has objective tests applied to his performance, to throw, to jump, to run etc against a definitive standard of distance or time. The term gymnast implies a performer who has aesthetic connotations applied to his performance. Therefore the term athlete performed by the USA to the gymnast may indicate their lack of awareness of aesthetic connotations in gymnastics. That is, the qualitative evaluation of how well a gymnast performs may in some way be overlooked in preference to measuring what he executes, akin to the track and field athlete who may only be concerned with what they can achieve measured against an objective standard.'
Surely, with hindsight, we must acknowledge the huge cultural battle that is currently underway in gymnastics. The non-aesthetic cultural values of the USA (gymnastically speaking; I would not say this about their society as a whole!) currently dominate gymnastics. We increasingly read gymnasts and their coaches talk of 'going clean' 'hitting routines' and 'being strong'. These assertions, whilst being grammatically incorrect, may express laudable competitive qualities but they also totally estrange all thoughts of aesthetic in either form or expression. American is currently the dominant language of gymnastics which has already adopted an alternative model to the traditionally aesthetic one, and the rest of the world is following, far too rapidly.
There are more extracts to come from this thesis but I will break the posts down to keep their length reasonable. (I have to do my Christmas shopping at some point in the next day.) It seems to me that an understanding of Palmer's work is critically important to the FIG as well as to the national federations as it (i) provides a clear definitional framework for thinking about aspects of subjectivity and objectivity, (ii) breaks down the aesthetic and clearly labels 'form' 'technique' and 'expression', (iii) attempts to provide a construct in which the development of the sport is discussed from a cultural heritage perspective, and also (iv) undresses many of the underlying political struggles current in the sport, eg the dominance of the American voice that is promoted so strongly through the English language media, which many of the 'upcoming' countries are adopting, and which only serves to reinforce the effective burning of the aesthetic book.
I'm afraid that this only reinforces my idea that the American sporting 'state' is the enemy of gymnastics and will destroy it from within.
Thesis references used in these extracts :
Fink, H (1999a) Bonus System or Additive System FIG Statement to Technical and Executive Committees September 26th 1999, International Gymnastics Federation
Galimore, R, Sheer, J, Graham, M, Zunich, B, Bjerke, H, Allen, K and Sasvary, L (1998) Men's Code of Points : Alternative Ways to Provide Stable Rules National Judges Association Incorporated (online)
Kaufmann, D A (2002) 'Normative criticism and the objective value of artworks' The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 60, pp 151-166
Great article. A prophetic vision of the author of the thesis concerning the essential concepts of this sport.
ReplyDeleteTo me the demorcatic-athletic approach to gymnastics makes it painful to watch at times.
Aesthetics criteria should be carefully defined and recognized in the COP.