The theory of Norbert Elias, with regard to the ‘civilising process’, widely taken up and nourished by his epigons such as Eric Dunning, does not fully explain the reasons why sport, far from systematically pacifying, tends equally to reproduce or amplify certain violent tendencies in societal groups, when it does not in itself constitute the germ of the violence in the heart of contemporary societies. In fact, Elias considers the ‘new’ social configuration as a tool used to control violence, forgetting that the institutionalisation of budding practices also bears witness to social and societal transformations, including free time, access to education, growth of cities, the economic development of states, circulation of goods, merchandise and people, the forming of the media and communication cultures, and the dissemination of information and cultural models. The purpose of this study is to show how his singular posture prevents Elias from understanding all the facets of sport as being prey to its own tensions and contradictions, particularly when it is a case of examining the ‘educational’ positions of the activity reflected in the mirror of the socio-historical conditions of the production of culture and the ways in which the practice of sport has been instrumentalised.
Read full abstract