Females and Art

While pondering my post for this week, which i realize is a little late, I have decided to focus on two topics: Women's athletics and sports as art.

Women's Athletics:

After watching most of the Australian Open, I noticed a profound difference in the men's and women's sides of the bracket. The men were the more physically powerful; with faster serves, harder volleys, and faster footspeed. The women appeared to rely more upon the fundamentals of the game. But, the women were not as far behind physically as in other sports. For example, in basketball the men would be able to physically dominate their female counterparts. If you care to dispute that, examine the rules for the Co-ed leagues here at Northwestern. Men are not allowed to guard women within the three point arc, since they would be able to overpower the females in the paint. Back to tennis though; Roger Federer won, but he was not the most physically impressive of the men. Andy Roddick has a faster serve, Rafeal Nadal has a harder return, and others trump his game in different areas. But, if Roger Federer can defeat physically superior males in his own matches, why wouldn't a woman, like Serena Williams, be able to defeat an athletically superior man in a match? Just a thought.

Sports as Art:

I don't agree with this. When i think of art, sports are not what comes to mind. I think about 90 percent of the world does not conjure up an image of a sporting event when they think about art. Not to say that sports don't have their own beauty, but they certainly aren't art. A sport can be very beautiful to watch, or even to play. Art is something different, with it's own beauty. Art is beautiful because of it's existence, but sport is beautiful because of the actions which go into it. Sport is action and violence, but art is peaceful and calming, most of the time. Exceptions to both theses exist, so please don't burn me on either.

Like a fat kid in dodgeball, I'm out.
Brett