you can have it both ways

"Of the thousands of evils which exist...there is no greater evil than the race of athletes.  In the first place, they are incapable of living, or of learning to live properly...They glisten and gleam like statues of the city itself when they are in their prime, but when bitter old age comes upon them they are like tattered and threadbare old rugs.  For this I blame the custom of the Greeks who assemble to watch athletes and thus honor useless pleasures."

—Euripides, 480-406 B.C.

sometime in the last 2500 years (okay, earlier), a rift has developed between intellectuals and athletes.  it's a predictable but powerful split, with stereotypical arguments based in accurate perceptions from both sides.  

here are the questions.  jocks prefer sports and nerds prefer knowledge, but is it their choice?  in other words, did athletic people focus on athletics as a result of being incapable of succeeding in academics? did intellectuals specialize in mental prowess because they failed in sports from a young age?  or, as each would claim, do they actually prefer their choice to the alternative?  do they create their reasons ex post facto, or consider both sides and weigh the benefits carefully before making a decision? 

in a lot of ways, those questions are unfair, but they are unfair in the same way stereotypes are unfair — a sort of necessary unfairness.  we generalize because we can't process all the information thrown at us every second of the day.  and, irregardless of the answers to the questions, both sides think their side is superior, and both resent the other side for  (wrongly!) thinking the opposite.  we can't be happy believing one thing, we have to hate those who disagree.  we don't necessarily even hate them for disagreeing, we hate them for thinking they are right.  this cycle builds on itself.

many of these sorts of rifts are presented in our society as fact.  you have to choose between two alternatives.  if something is presented as fact, people take it to be fact more often than they should.  this cycle builds on itself.  

it's a lie.  i spent most of my teenage life in the sports world.  though i did have drive to succeed in the classroom, i didn't care about learning for the sake of bettering myself.  i don't remember much from that time.  Hillsdale converted me.  ever since my experience with the liberal arts, i've been soaking up all the knowledge i can, and loving every second.  i first started thinking on this subject a few years ago, since then i've been in a variety of situations which have given me unique insights...  i've been on a college track team (for a semester) with a slew of scholarship athletes.  i've lived with a college baseball player.  i've worked for the college newspaper.  i flew on a charter plane with the football team to Hillsdale's second-ever DII playoff game.  i was the sports editor and associated with athletes/coaches on a regular basis, meanwhile, a solid percentage of my closest friends were in the honors program.  that's not to say there was no overlap in the two worlds, but i gained a good idea of how both sides operated.

there is real value in both sides, and no real reason they have to be exclusive.  i can get just as much enjoyment, and benefit, from reading a good book as i can from playing pick-up basketball on the weekend, and i often do both.  for a few years i've been steadily shifting over from the extreme athlete position, and i think i've finally settled into my groove near the middle of the spectrum.  

as much as i love the idea of being a life-long learner, i would never turn my back on physical activity.  one reason why i resist thinking of myself as an academic or an intellectual is that, in my mind, those people severely undervalue the role of fitness in living the examined life.  they live too much of their life in their heads, and too much in the past.  

the typical jock, on the other hand, is flawed in thinking being good at one sport for a few years is enough to make him/her immortal.  some sports are more toxic than others, depending on how much coverage they get.  but, seriously, we tend to respect some sports and athletes to absurdly high levels, and ignore others entirely.  i try to appreciate one feat of athleticism as much as the next, irregardless of the glamour involved.   

this subject has been on my mind recently, as i observe the effects these perceived differences have on my students.  i have 6th and 7th grade boys on my football team who are already convinced it's not cool to learn and get good grades, and they may never reconsider.  these kids are already walking down the halls like they own the place, and they are already struggling to stay on my team (because of grades and/or behavior/discipline issues).  last week we lost our biggest game of the regular season while my starting running back watched from the sidelines.  the worst part is, they haven't earned anything yet.  i can almost pardon Usain Bolt for being an ass, because everyone treats him like a god, and he may legitimately be the fastest man who's ever lived.  those influences would have an impact on anyone's opinion of themselves.  junior high athletes don't have that excuse.  our society continues putting the spotlight on them at increasingly younger ages, however, which is a real factor, and a different post..

i'm not the best teacher in the world, or my school, or my grade, or even my house.  but, part of what i bring to the classroom is the message you don't have to choose between all of these perceived alternatives.  you can have it both ways!  you can love learning, and be passionate about sports, and find success in both arenas.  someone needs to tell them.