The Olympic Games (ANSWERED)

QUESTION

Case Study #2

“Chariots of Fire” is an inspiring story of two highly talented British runners that captures their story as they prepare for and compete in the 1924 Summer Olympics in Paris. Harold Abrahams (Ben Cross) is an English Jew with Lithuanian roots, who faces both prejudice for his origins and criticism for his use of a professional trainer in his preparations for the Olympics. He is an ambitious sprinter from the Cambridge University who is eager to win. However, in order to succeed, he needs to overcome his inner demons.

His rival and teammate, Eric Liddell (Ian Charleson), is a devout Christian, a Scottish Presbyterian protestant whose life ambition is to become a missionary, but who is a talented and passionate sportsman. Due to his religious principles, Liddell refused to run in the 100-meter Olympic heats, which were held on a Sunday.

Your assignment is to profile both Harold Abrams and Eric Liddell. Please write a minimum two-page double spaced paper answering the following questions about each character;

What motivates each runner to compete?

How does “nationalism” become a prominent theme for each runner?

How is “classism” an issue for both runners? Explain how Abrams feels about his English heritage and how Liddell feels about his Scottish heritage.

Explain how Abrams and Liddell feel about their religion. Is it a positive or negative force in their lives?

ANSWER

The Olympic Games

Motivations

Harold Abraham’s motivation stemmed from his individualism, competitive spirit, and desire to redeem himself after losing to his rival. Cashmore (2008) indicates that after his loss, Abraham stated, “If I can’t win, I won’t run”. This comment captures his individualistic, self-centered approach to competition. On the other hand, Liddell was motivated by his religious beliefs. As a Christian, Liddell believed running was the only way to honor God.

Nationalism

Nationalism became a central theme in both athletes’ lives when he got recruited into the British team. His performance now represented Britain’s identity in sports’, causing significant pressure from his coaches and sponsors. Llewellyn (2012) indicates that in response to Britain’s humiliating past performances in which it won only six of the sixty-five events, Winston Churchill appealed to the public to finance sports organizations. He stated, “This was not creditable to this country …. ―There is nothing that our race cannot do if it tries—but we must have the organization and the funds necessary to secure an equal opportunity for our men” (Llewellyn, 2012). Harold Abrahams reiterated Churchill’s speech, assuring the public to get the money, and they will do the rest (Llewellyn, 2012). In another conference, Harold and Liddell both expressed their support for Britain’s participation in the Olympics (Llewellyn, 2012). Although Abraham and Liddell did not initially compete for national pride, their recruitment into the British Olympics’ team made them brand ambassadors for Britain’s nationalistic endeavors. Their performance was no longer part of their identity but also Great Britain’s. Consequently, they gave up their interests and motives to support Britain’s nationalistic agendas.

Classism and Heritage

Classism is an issue for both athletes as it affects how they are treated. Both athletes face snobbery and patronizing attitude due to classism (Cashmore, 2008). For example, Abraham loses the 200-meter race because his competitors, who were upper class, were more favored. The class-based favorism cost him some medals and forced him to work harder than his competitors to win. Liddell is seen as inferior and treated with a dismissive attitude because of his poor background and simple lifestyle.

Both athletes have a sense of patriotism for their countries. In one scene, Abraham sings with his friends, ‘He is an Englishman!’ while playing in an HMS Pinafore production, demonstrating his pride in being an Englishman (Cashmore, 2008). Liddell demonstrates his patriotism by refusing to compete on Sabbath day. He confirmed his loyalty to his country by sticking to its religious values (Cashmore, 2008).

Religion

Both Abraham and Liddell value their religious identities. Liddell is passionate about his evangelical orations and has an immutable faith in God, in which he participates tirelessly. Liddell is passionate about the sport as he is about religion. He believes running is a service to God and hopes to evangelize in the future. While Abraham identifies as a Jew, God is not a dominant force in his as He is in Liddell’s life. Abraham sees himself as a victim who belonged to a group subjected to a history of persecution. Although he is protected from maltreatment, Abraham is wary of anti-Semitists around him. He complains that he feels semi-deprived … they [Gentiles] lead me to water, but will not let me drink’.

Religion was an opposing force in Abraham’s life because it affected his subjective well-being. Abraham seems insecure about his religious identity and interprets any objections and perceived criticism or cold treatment from an anti-Semitist perspective. These perceptions affect his attitude and subjective well-being. Also, because he is a minority group, the media treats his victory as an emblem. Instead of focusing on his individuality, the media sensationalize his victory as a Semitists thing. In contrast, religion was a positive force in Liddell’s life because it was his source of motivation.

References

Cashmore, E. (2008). Chariots of Fire: bigotry, manhood and moral certitude in an age of individualism. Sport in Society, 11(2-3), 159-173. http://elliscashmore.astonwordpress.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/55/2013/05/chariots_of_fire.pdf

Llewellyn, M. P. (2012). Rule Britannia: Nationalism, identity and the modern Olympic games (p. 30). London: Routledge. https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/files/final_submissions/4290