Heritage and Sport

An Introduction

Gregory Ramshaw

• Publisher: Channel View Publications
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9781845417017
• eBook ISBN: 9781845417048
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Museum Studies
• Index: Business

This book provides a holistic view of the relationship between heritage and sport. It examines four types of sport heritage: tangible immovable sport heritage (sports venues, monuments and memorials, landscapes); tangible movable sport heritage (museums and halls of fame, events, living sport heritage); intangible sport heritage (intangibility of sport heritage, institutions, existential); and goods and services with a sport heritage component (tourism, marketing, management). It offers both theoretical and applied approaches to the heritage–sport relationship and intersects with many contemporary topics in heritage, sport, tourism, events and marketing. It will be useful to students and researchers in sport tourism, sport studies, heritage studies, sport history, museum studies and sports management.

1 Introduction: The Relationship Between Heritage and Sport

Introduction

Heritage and sport share an important relationship. Sporting events and achievements are markers of collective memories, while sporting traditions are ingrained into the behaviours and activities of spectators and competitors alike. Famous sporting sites, like arenas and stadiums, are conserved as historic places and become magnets for devoted sporting pilgrims, while sports museums and halls of fame are catalysts for both preserving sporting artefacts and as anchors of tourism development. Sporting pasts are frequently commoditised into experiences, souvenirs, and memorabilia of all shapes and sizes, while sporting moments are commemorated, replayed, and nostalgised through various media outlets. Chants and cheers at sporting events regularly reflect heritage values, and can become heritage in and of themselves, while the very act of playing a particular sport can represent a kind-of heritage performance. Sport plays a role in broader national heritage moments and events, frames contemporary debates and discussions, and is used as a tool of both power and resistance. In short, there is little doubt that heritage is integral to sport, and sport is integral to heritage.

However, sport has only recently started to receive attention as a distinctive form of heritage. Part of this attention is due to its public popularity and ability to be commodified into a variety of different products and experiences. However, the recognition also has to do with a change in our understanding of heritage, and that recent heritages from popular sources can be important catalysts of identity. As such, a variety of topics in sport heritage have received research attention, including examinations of its role in tourism development (Gammon & Ramshaw, 2013b; Wood, 2005), its creation, construction, and interpretation at sports halls of fame and museums (Danilov, 2005; Moore, 2012; Reilly, 2015), its role in defining and conserving sports stadia and sporting venues (Gaffney, 2008; Gammon, 2011), its relationship to sporting events (Pinson, 2017), its role in dissonant heritage (Schultz, 2013; White, 2013), its function as a constructor of liminal space (Anton et al., 2013), and its use as a form of pilgrimage (Williams, 2012), to name but a few. There have also been edited texts dedicated to sport heritage as a whole (Hill et al., 2012; Ramshaw, 2015) and edited texts which explore specific manifestations of sport heritage such as events or museums (Gammon et al., 2013; Phillips, 2013a). Similarly, many sport history and sport management conferences regularly include papers about sport heritage, and there are also professional organisations in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom dedicated to the issues faced by staff at sport-based museums. However, heritage and sport interact in a variety of ways and contexts, but this has yet to be fully explored. As such, this book provides readers with an introduction to this increasingly vital and important relationship.

Heritage, Sport and Sport Heritage

Heritage is a complex, and frequently misunderstood term. Often, heritage is castigated as ‘bad history’ when, as Lowenthal (1998) argues, heritage and history – though related – have very different tasks, audiences, and outcomes. Timothy succinctly argues that heritage is ‘what we inherit from the past and use in present day’ (2011: 3). Similarly, Harrison (2013) emphasises that heritage is a present consideration, noting that heritage is both current circumstances and inherited concerns. Waterton and Watson (2015) further describe heritage as ‘a version of the past received through objects and display, representations and engagements, spectacular locations and events, memories and commemorations, and the preparations of places for cultural purposes and consumption’ (2015: 1). Although this definition reflects the popular understanding of heritage as both tangible (buildings, objects) and intangible (traditions, language), it also reflects heritage as a discursive practice which has led some scholars such as Smith (2006) and Ashworth (2008) to suggest that all heritage is ultimately intangible. However, Harrison’s (2012) exploration of heritage argues that, though heritage remains a discursive practice that is defined through language, it is also rooted in tangible places, objects, and people. Furthermore, as a discursive practice, heritage reflects notions of power which may legitimise and delegitimise various viewpoints and perspectives; what Smith (2006) terms the ‘Authorised Heritage Discourse.’ As such, because heritage is frequently a source of dissonance and disagreement (Graham et al., 2000), the idea of a singular, unified heritage narrative has largely been discredited and, rather, heritage is often understood through a range of competing agendas and narratives.

What constitutes ‘sport’ is similarly contentious. Hinch and Higham’s (2011) characteristics of sport, which suggests that sport must include rules, competition, play and physical activity is useful in delineating sport from other types of activities and recreational practices. Richards’ (2006) argument (in reference to rugby union) notes that an activity becomes a sport when it is codified, governed and mobile, suggesting that institutional structures also are important in understanding what constitutes sport and sporting practices. Similarly, contemporary media coverage also may help to define public understandings of sport. If an activity or competition appears on a sport-based television channel, such as ESPN, or appears in the pages of a sport-based magazine or website, such as Sports Illustrated, or is labelled on YouTube as ‘sport,’ or is positioned as sport through gambling companies and bookmakers, a wide range of activities may be popularly understood and considered as sport. Other types of activities, such as art (Cordner, 1988) and dance (Guarino, 2015), have been compared to sport, particularly as sport and many artistic endeavours share similar characteristics including movement, competition, governance and spectacle. As such, delineating sport from a pastime or game or other form of kinaesthetic, competitive, or physical activities is a challenge, and therefore may reflect an evolving discursive process about the meaning of ‘sport’. Examining sport alongside heritage adds an additional dimension, as many heritage locations and commemorations may include activities which are termed ‘sport’ but may not necessarily fit the characteristics of what might now be considered as sport. Much of what is termed as ancient and medieval ‘sport,’ such as archery, most likely would have had an understood – if highly localised – set of rules and certainly would have had a clearly defined winner and loser, while other activities from these eras, such as hunting, may have been termed ‘sport’ but do not necessarily conform to contemporary definitions of sport in terms of, for example, rules or governance. More recently, eSports certainly include competition and institutional governance, although there is debate about the kinaesthetic nature of this activity (Hilvoorde & Pot, 2016). As such, the discursive use and practice of sport heritage – in particular its use by heritage researchers and heritage agencies – requires consideration. For example, Inglis’ (2014) text about sport heritage in London, which was published by English Heritage – a national heritage agency – includes sites related to bear-baiting and cock-fighting as part of the city’s sport heritage. If heritage agencies and heritage researchers define an ancient or medieval practice as ‘sport heritage’, then consideration of that activity as a ‘sport’ should be given, even if it does not necessarily reflect many of the characteristics of contemporary sporting practices. Similarly, electronic gaming is considered an emergent form of cultural heritage (Aydin & Schnabel, 2016; Champion, 2016) and, undoubtedly, eSports will most certainly generate a new type of sport heritage through classic matches, players, and heritage-based merchandise. As such, our understanding of sport and sport heritage may need to be flexible.

Both heritage and sport are evolving concepts and, as such, definitions and understandings of sport heritage should reflect this evolution. Certainly, there are many places and practices that are now termed ‘heritage’ which may not have been considered as such even a decade ago, while one need only look at the listings for any number of sports networks to see that what constitutes ‘sport’ is also undergoing significant changes. A definition for sport heritage must recognise this evolution. As such, for the purposes of this book, sport heritage is defined as the recognition and use of the sporting past as a means of addressing or illuminating a variety of contemporary social, cultural, and economic processes and practices. This definition recognises that there are many bodies of knowledge which inform contemporary constructions of sport heritage, that there are many different forms and types of sport heritage, and that sport heritage is often interpreted in the present differently by different actors to achieve different objectives. It also recognises heritage as a discursive process which may create, enshrine, and legitimise any number of sport-based places and activities under a heritage-banner for a variety of contemporary reasons.

The relationship between heritage and sport must also be viewed from two broad perspectives: the heritage of sport and sport as heritage (Ramshaw & Gammon, 2005; 2017). The heritage of sport perspective views the heritage/sport relationship primarily as self-contained within a sport’s specific culture and history. In other words, this view considers the important records, achievements, artefacts, and places of a sport as being important to the athletes, fans and administrators of that sport, but which may not transcend that sport into broader heritage discourses. An example of the heritage of sport might be the championship records of a particular team, or the goal scoring record of a particular athlete, each of which may be vitally important to the supporters of that sport, particularly in terms of understanding the history and heritage of a particular sport or athletes, but which may not necessarily have any broader heritage implications outside of the sport itself. In addition, those who play a sport – whether at the professional, amateur, or recreational level – will also maintain and preserve some of the intangible heritages of the sport, such as the traditions, rituals, and norms within the sport’s culture and practice. The other perspective, sport as heritage, considers sport heritage which transcends sport and becomes part of a broader heritage discourse. For example, some athlete ‘firsts’ – such as the first African-American in a sport or the first openly LGBTQ+ athlete in a sport – is certainly important to the heritage of sport, although often these become part of sport as heritage discourses as they become touchstones of larger cultural moments. Similarly, playing particular sports may also reflect broader cultural identities and practices, particularly when connected to national identities and heritages. Of course, sport heritage can be simultaneously the heritage of sport and sport as heritage. Perhaps the most pertinent example is that of Jackie Robinson who, on 15 April 1947, broke baseball’s ‘colour barrier’ and became the first African-American to play Major League Baseball. Robinson’s achievements on the field, including being the first African-American in Major League Baseball as well as his statistics and championships, are certainly part of the heritage of sport. However, his accomplishments both on and off the field are a defining moment of American cultural heritage, thus he becomes an example of sport as heritage.

Why Sport Heritage?

A dedicated book that provides an overview of the heritage/sport relationship and the sport heritage field is long overdue. Beyond the interdisciplinary research in sport heritage, there is significant use of sport heritage in popular and public arenas. For example, sport heritage is often now used by sports teams, leagues, organisations, and communities looking to recognise or commodify their sporting pasts, or by government organisations and institutions looking to acknowledge and create a sense of identity through sport heritage. Similarly, individuals and groups create and practice sport heritage in a variety of contexts and purposes. As such, sport heritage requires further exploration. Harrison (2012) argues that many different heritages experienced a ‘boom’ in popular interest due in large part to the commoditisation of heritage through the ‘experience economy’ of tourism, retail, and other service industries. As Ashworth (2008) suggests, heritage cannot simply ‘be’ – one of its main characteristics is that it must ‘do’ – and, as such, one does not have to look particularly far to see numerous popular manifestations of sport heritage engaged in a variety of tasks. Many communities have sport museums or preserve important historic sporting venues often in the recognition of their community history, while individuals look to sport to create or maintain personal or collective heritage identities. Sport organisations use their heritage in terms of marketing or creating new types of memorabilia and souvenirs. Destinations use sport heritage places and experiences in place promotion for tourism, while numerous sporting events explicitly recognise – or are entirely based-upon – sport heritage symbols and traditions. Public heritage bodies have also started to recognise sport as an important topic of revealing, interpreting, and preserving the past. International organisations such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) recognise sport as an important part of both the tangible and intangible heritage landscape (ICOMOS, 2016a), while national heritage organisations such as Historic England and the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States frequently champion sport heritage sites and events. As such, there appears to be a significant – and growing – public and organisational interest in sport heritage.

Beyond public interest in sport heritage, there is an increasing interest in popular – and, often, relatively recent – heritage from a number of different research perspectives. Graham et al. (2005) note that most heritage is placed in a dichotomy of high/low culture, with ‘high’ cultural heritage, such as fine art and important national treasures and artefacts, traditionally receiving the most attention in terms of conservation, funding, and display. However, many recent and popular heritages have started to receive increased attention in recent years, not only as these heritages become part of the commodification process through tourism and other commercial services, but because recent heritages also play a significant role in narrative and identity-building, conservation of historic buildings and spaces, and engaging diverse audiences. Heritage associated with music (Cohen et al., 2014; Frost, 2008; Roberts, 2014), television (DeGroot, 2016; Kompare, 2003) film (Higson, 1996; Martin-Jones, 2014), literature (Caton & Santos, 2007; Hebert, 2001), and food and drink (Brulotte & Di Giovine, 2016), have been some of the ways in which traditional heritage practices and recent, popular cultures overlap. In terms of sport, both Moore (2008) and Gammon (2007) argue that sport’s public popularity, along with the fact that much of its important heritage is relatively recent, may have positioned sport heritage as trivial and unworthy of scholarly attention. However, Cronin and Higgins (2011) argue that conserving and experiencing heritage places and activities associated with sport is essential in understanding the fabric of many nations and societies. The fact that sport heritage is now recognised by a variety of disciplines and fields, including history (Hill et al., 2012; Phillips, 2013a; Wilson, 2014), geography (Strohmayer, 2013; Titterington & Done, 2012), archaeology (Moore et al., 2014), management (Stride, Wilson et al., 2013), conservation (Bairner, 2015; Pfleegor et al., 2013), marketing (Kellett, 2015), and tourism (Timothy, 2018), further suggests the need for a dedicated sport heritage text. Furthermore, the texts that are specifically sport heritage-based typically focus on the sport heritage of a particular geographical location, such as London (Inglis, 2014) or Ireland (Cronin & Higgins, 2011), rather than exploring the concept of sport heritage as a whole.

Sport, along with other recent popular cultures, also has a unique relationship to heritage. Sport has a strong and enduring relationship with the recent past, as it has generated important moments, helped to create important places and spaces, and has become part of collective memory and moments – many of which reside in living memory and, frequently, have intergenerational connections. However, sport also generates new heritage through sporting events, magnificent performances, remarkable athletes, and defining moments. Critchley notes this Janus-head approach to sport heritage in his examination of football, suggesting that sport has ‘the potential for the creation of new moments, a future heritage’ (2017: 151). Certainly, other forms of heritage, such as ancient or medieval heritage, can be interpreted differently by different contemporary actors, while new and recent finds might change how we view those pasts. However, there is not ‘future’ Roman or Medieval heritage in the same way as there is future sport heritage. As Ramshaw (2014b) notes, sport’s role in generating future heritage is one of the defining characteristics of the heritage/sport relationship.

Sport heritage also needs to be understood as a broad topic area with many component parts. Certainly, sport heritage is strongly related to areas such as museums or tourism – though, these topics are not synonyms for sport heritage. Sport heritage also intersects with a variety of topics and concepts and is much more wide-ranging than is currently understood within the literature. As illustrated earlier in this chapter, sport heritage research also requires an interdisciplinary approach, involving fields ranging from management and marketing to anthropology and archaeology. Traditionally, sport heritage has been understood within sport history and, specifically, public sport history, where academic sport history is translated and interpreted for general public and not-specialist audiences. Clearly, sport history plays a vital role in the understanding of sport heritage, not only in terms of providing content and context but also in understanding how sport heritage – particularly in its focus on the present – may mask, obscure, or misrepresent the factual past. However, the creation, construction and interpretation of sport heritage involves numerous academic disciplines beyond sport history, as this text demonstrates and, as such, sport history and sport heritage are not synonymous despite their close relationship.

Finally, sport heritage can be a vehicle for both celebration and resistance. Many forms of sport heritage celebrate sport’s remarkable moments, places, and achievements. Indeed, many – if not most – of the examples of sport heritage provided in this book celebrate and commemorate elements of the sporting pasts. That said, in terms of the wide variety of heritages on offer, sport heritage seems the least likely to incorporate dissonant and contested heritage approaches. In addition to celebratory narratives, sport heritage often advocates hero-worship (Snyder, 1991) or dominant political agendas, such as honouring military personnel and veterans (Scherer & Koch, 2010), whereby dissonant social or political considerations are often marginalised or entirely absent (Springwood, 1996). As Graham et al. (2000) argue, heritage can be seen as a duality of economic and cultural capital and, in general, there is often conflict between the cultural and economic outcomes of heritage. As such, if a form of sport heritage is created or conserved for its economic value through tourism and marketing, other approaches which highlight contested and dissonant perspectives – particularly those approaches that challenge or embarrass teams, leagues, owners, sponsors or other groups of supporters – may not always be saleable. However, with greater fr...

Table of contents

• Frontcover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Figures
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction: The Relationship Between Heritage and Sport
• Part 1: Tangible Immovable Sport Heritage
• 2 Sports Venues and Sport Heritage
• 3 Monuments, Memorials and Sport Heritage
• 4 Landscapes and Sport Heritage
• Part 2: Tangible Movable Sport Heritage
• 5 Sports Museums, Sports Halls of Fame and Sport Heritage
• 6 Events and Sport Heritage
• 7 Living Sport Heritage
• Part 3: Intangible Sport Heritage
• 8 Intangibility and Sport Heritage
• 9 Institutions and Sport Heritage
• 10 Existential Sport Heritage
• Part 4: Goods and Services with a Sport Heritage Component
• 11 Tourism and Sport Heritage
• 12 Marketing and Sport Heritage
• 13 Managing Sport Heritage
• 14 Conclusion: Future Directions in Sport Heritage
• References