This month I would like to centre my blog around an interview that I gave a week ago on the BBC 5 Live Show with Tony Livesey. I really enjoyed representing fencing on the live show. I thought the format was fun, and on listening to the show again I feel that the discussion was relaxed and it gave us a chance to get fencing out there on live national Radio.
Despite the surprise and unscripted negative angle given to fencing by one of the participants, I believe some serious points were raised; not least that fencing is perceived as an elitist sport and whereas it may be an exciting sport to participate in, it is perceived as not being a spectator sport.
Although relatively few people do fencing as a sport in Great Britain, in my experience this does not necessarily mean that participants come from elite backgrounds (mostly Public Schools). Indeed, throughout my time in fencing, be it at my club, during domestic and international competitions, or whilst coaching children in the North East of England while at university, I have mixed with people from all backgrounds who have in common their fascination for this exciting and challenging sport.
I feel really strongly about defending fencing against accusations that it is an elitist sport as it is simply not true. I was discussing this with a friend the other day and she pointed out that most sports are elitist to some extent. Look at rowing or horse-riding for instance. They are both watched and enjoyed by millions of spectators but aren’t necessarily the most accessible of sports to the general public. Even tennis is becoming a relatively closed sport, reserved for the financially secure as court hire denies access to many working class families.
My point is that fencing isn’t necessarily more costly or inaccessible than any other regular sport; it simply has an elitist label attached to it from an era where fencing was a gentleman’s sport. My personal goal is to spend some time presenting fencing in schools and break away from the age-old image of the wealthy gentleman's pursuit. I am convinced that schools are an important recruiting ground for fencing whether they be private or state. It was at school that I started and where my passion for the sport was ignited.
Transforming fencing into a media friendly spectator sport is another thing altogether, but a question that no doubt needs to be addressed in the run up to the London Olympics and beyond. As far as making fencing more spectator-friendly, I think it needs knowledgeable commentators and enthusiasts to sell the sport. There are many sports that I watch where I have little understanding of what is going on but I can still appreciate them. Ultimately the test will be whether fencing can be accepted as a televised sport. Presentation will be all important.
Fencing is currently receiving much more exposure in the British press than it used to in the past (check out BBC’s coverage of a men’s foil event last weekend http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/8595806.stm ) and received more mainstream media attention at the Beijing Olympics than in previous years. I can only hope that people will give fencing a chance before judging it based on common misconceptions.
I feel really strongly about defending fencing against accusations that it is an elitist sport as it is simply not true. I was discussing this with a friend the other day and she pointed out that most sports are elitist to some extent. Look at rowing or horse-riding for instance. They are both watched and enjoyed by millions of spectators but aren’t necessarily the most accessible of sports to the general public. Even tennis is becoming a relatively closed sport, reserved for the financially secure as court hire denies access to many working class families.
My point is that fencing isn’t necessarily more costly or inaccessible than any other regular sport; it simply has an elitist label attached to it from an era where fencing was a gentleman’s sport. My personal goal is to spend some time presenting fencing in schools and break away from the age-old image of the wealthy gentleman's pursuit. I am convinced that schools are an important recruiting ground for fencing whether they be private or state. It was at school that I started and where my passion for the sport was ignited.
Transforming fencing into a media friendly spectator sport is another thing altogether, but a question that no doubt needs to be addressed in the run up to the London Olympics and beyond. As far as making fencing more spectator-friendly, I think it needs knowledgeable commentators and enthusiasts to sell the sport. There are many sports that I watch where I have little understanding of what is going on but I can still appreciate them. Ultimately the test will be whether fencing can be accepted as a televised sport. Presentation will be all important.
Fencing is currently receiving much more exposure in the British press than it used to in the past (check out BBC’s coverage of a men’s foil event last weekend http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/8595806.stm ) and received more mainstream media attention at the Beijing Olympics than in previous years. I can only hope that people will give fencing a chance before judging it based on common misconceptions.
Great blog Claire, very interesting.
ReplyDeleteI think historically, some sideline sports that have become increasingly televised and ensue the media spotlight have done so through gold medal success. I think all of us can find most sports interesting, but the possibility of a medal takes it from interesting to positively exciting. Take cycling as an example. No one really knows why two riders proceed to galavant around a track almost at a stand still, to only shoot off in the final lap for a victory, but it sure makes for exciting tele when one of them is a Brit.
Despite a land of political correctness, I think the British public still have enough national pride to will their athletes to victory. Convincing the media to cover fencing will need the same successes. One gold medal at the Olympics and you can guarantee fencing will wield powerful ratings with it's athletes advertising Branflakes and appearing on Jonathan Ross.
Oh... and I saw heard the Radio 5 interview. You came across really well. Ignore the social bigamist who had the problem with elitism, she sounded extremely middle class, bless her and her 3 bed semi and beige Volvo. Bitch.
Claire, I fully agree with you about the non-elitist nature of fencing. That biggoted woman with her biased views assumed that, just because fencing was not in state schools when she was a child, it is not there now. She obviously has no idea about the progammes operated in London by Fighting Fit and the schools sport partnership programmes organised through England Fencing. But then those who have the loudest opinions who usually have the least evidence to back it up.
ReplyDeleteI do have to agree with her however that fencing is not televisual, at least in live action. The action is so fast and difficult to follow that most non fencers don't even see the hit, just the light coming up. There is then not enough time to watch the slow motion before the next action. Watched as a recorded event however, with slow motion interspersed and the correct commontators, there is no reason why it should not take its place with other minority sports in the schedules.