The book makes several comparative comments between the development of football

Item Type Note
note <ol><li>The book makes several comparative comments between the development of football in Argentina and Brasil.</li> <li>They look at football as an expressive practice (39) in which it is necessary to see not only individuals (cracks) but also collective trajectories. When commenting about Garrincha as representative of the football developed inside factories and empresas, they said that usually Garrincha is seen as talentoso individual and not as someone who is building in a collective trajectory and appropriation of the game. (39)  <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">* here there is something very interesting: Collective appropriation and trajectory of the sport. He also argues that the success of the players represented success for all the team, community and not only the individual. </span></li> <li>They explain that the Left, Intellectuals and Frankfurt Thinkers were very critical of the sports because they saw how Mussolini organized the World Cup in 1934, Hitler and Goebbels spoke about football and used sports and photographs of muscular bodies to promote their political projects. Also in France 1938, sport was linked to authoritarian political projects. (42..)</li> <li>They refer to Archetti for arguing that because elites practiced several sports they embodied modernity. (Oliven, Damo, and Fragasso 2001, 39)</li> <li>They comment on the history of Brazilian football. Insist on the link between Brazilian elites and English entrepreneurs and migrants. They comment on the “mitic” origins of the game but also about its distinctive popularization. Although they do not discuss the “local conditions” shaping the popularization they suggest interesting differences regarding how, who, and when the football reached popular sectors. They compared what happened in Rio with what happened in Sao Paulo. In some cities, the clubs accommodated new members and elites went to the “managerial” positions. In Sao Paulo, the elites abandoned football and reinforced their separation with people from other sectors.  ** I love this kind of view: what local conditions, local trajectories, conflicts shaped the “expansion” and “popularization” of football</li> <li>As in Argentina, there is an intimate connection and mutual development among football clubs, popular associations, popular press(77,85), radio. I realized the earlier development of the cultural industries in the southern cone and what it meant to the development of football.  Earlier urbanization, industrialization, working class developments. Do I have some demographies?</li> <li> They argued that there are several ways to live football.</li> <li>Many Argentinians went to Italy to play in the late 20s and early 30s. Brazil also suffered that kind of inverse immigration. 103</li> <li>They mentioned different conflicts about amateurismo and football professional. Very difficult separation. Professional league in 1934.</li> <li>10.  They also referred to Ley Pele and the numerous conflicts about pases, businesses and other growing “economic” logics shaping what football is going to be.</li> <li>11. They have a chapter about clubs and how important clubs are for people. They learned what club to root for earlier in their lives for family bonds.  </li> <li>They argued also that football connected with the symbolic value of using <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">the foot instead of the hands and because of that it opened other space of symbolic meaning </span></li> </ol><p> </p>
Date Added 2013-02-02 17:32
Date Modified 2013-07-26 04:40

Note text