WAG Addressing the Lack of Artistry in Current Gymnastics

[Midwestmommy]

Dunno, I've never seen any gymnast in my life who could dance even 1/20th of a long classical Pas De Deux en pointe. It's not a dance move. It's a combination of four dances in a ballet that generally the prima ballerina dances with the male lead. With tons of pointe work. I don't agree that a gymnast could learn to do it. No way. Even with unusal "gifts" for dance compared to your average gymnast, not more likely than an elite dance that "could have" been a gymnast with the right training. I used it as an example of sort of the ballerina's toughest athletic "face down" moment. It's usually incredibly incredibly difficult, and like gymnastics the goal is to make it look effortless.

Take the Nutcracker for instance. Even if during a 4 day weekend of full performances and matinees, they switch the lead with another dance, they are dang dumb tired with hurting bodies by Sunday, and the the Pas De Deux is the crowning moment of the Nutcracker (talking about a professional not a kids production) and is generally very difficult technically and physically. It goes much much longer than any floor routine! It is kind of the deep breath equivalent of a gymnast going for a tough tumble pass. And I guess it's the "top elite" of ballet dance, most professional ballerinas will never have the opportunity to perform it in a production. I forgive you though for missing the loose analogy, because I am guessing you might not have time to go to much professional dance, let alone see the best ballet in the US or Europe. I call absolute bullpucky on your assertion that professional ballet has less difficulty than elite gymnastics. It is very, very different, certainly. But is not less difficult. It is very difficult physically in a different way.

Jeez, really "not true" about the scoring system for skating? Not that it matters. But the two part score is supposed to try to make the "subjective" more "objective." Whether it works or not is another story. But yes, if you read the newer scoring system is supposed to take into account both. Agreed, if someone has much higher difficulty they will win out as they should. Particularly for men & the quads...

You don't think there is politics involved in setting code, Olympic rules etc? Really?

But I think I can officially call you a "nondance" person if you can call me a "nongymnastics" person..... No offense intended.

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

I don't think it's necessary to compare the difficulty of two different activities, both of which take thousands of hours of practice to perfect.

Here's my take: if you put thousands of hours of focused practice into ANYTHING -- be it gymnastics, ballet, juggling, starcraft, playing the xylophone, underwater basket weaving, or whatever -- you can attain a level of proficiency that is simply beyond comprehension to normal people.

Watch Kohei do a high bar routine. He makes it look easy, right? But unless you've trained or coached high-level gymnastics, you don't actually understand how hard that routine is. The difference in difficulty between this and, say, a kip, is like the difference in size between a flea and Jupiter.
The most impressive part isn't just that he can do these skills; it's that he is so confident in his ability to do them that he is willing to repeatedly wager his life on his ability to do them correctly.
If you've never been a high-level gymnast, then what Kohei is doing is simply beyond your comprehension.

Or you can watch Flash playing Starcraft. See his hands flying effortlessly across the keyboard? See how the screen jumps around between four or five separate things going on at once? Ok, now try to understand that every single click and key press is a deliberately-executed, planned-out move, done for a specific strategic purpose. Imagine playing chess such a speed. The impressive part isn't what his hands are doing; it's what his brain is doing. Unless you've played a lot of Starcraft, what he's doing here is beyond your comprehension.

Watch Vova Galchenko do a juggling routine. Again, he makes it look effortless. But again, without having practiced and performed such high-level juggling, you have absolutely no hope of ever understanding just how hard that is.
As a former pro juggler (though not even close to the level of Galchenko), let me try to explain what is going on in his head. Between each and every catch, he has to do three things. First, he spots the ball that is at the top of its arc, and calculates where it will land. Second, he has to remember the calculations he made several catches ago, back when the ball that's currently landing was at its peak. Third, he has to keep the rhythm of the pattern, precise to within a few hundredths of a second.
The difficulty of what he's doing with his hands, and with his brain, and in the coordination between them, is beyond your comprehension unless you've been a high-level juggler.

The same is true with a master of anything. Musical instruments, martial arts, or anything else.

To my untrained eyes, ballet and figure skating and musical instruments I've never played look easy and effortless. But I suspect that there are nuances that are invisible to me, superhuman maneuvers done so perfectly that laymen like myself don't even know enough to be impressed by them. I suspect that the difficulty of what they are doing, and the level of skill required to do so, are simply beyond my comprehension.


EDIT: Going back and reading this over again, I need to clarify what I was getting at.

My intention with this post was simply to point out that it's pointless to compare the difficulty of what's being done by masters of two different disciplines. I gave three examples of things in which I've developed a level of proficiency higher than that of the average person, but there are an infinite number of things of which I have zero mastery. One of those is ballet; I would never dream of trying to compare the difficulty of gymnastics to ballet, because I have zero understanding of what's going on in a top-level ballet performance. Just as I could not properly evaluate the difficulty of a great violin performance, or a great figure skating performance. Such things are beyond my comprehension.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

all i know of ballet is that my sister was a principal with Joffrey for 4 years. had these discussions with her all the time along with my other sister who was an elite gymnast. nothing in ballet will ever compare to any difficulty that is performed in gymnastics.

i am a non dancer person. but my education and experience tells me what i know about human performance. dance and gymnastics can not be compared. and i understand your point about pointe work. i don't agree that gymnasts can't do it. i have seen them do it alone. what i am trying to explain is that real difficulty can't be done at the same time. what it takes to do the difficulty diminishes the other. and the more the difficulty there is, the more diminished the artistry. again, a ballerina will never face down a double layout at the end of any performance. and there is nothing in ballet in sequence or in duration that could ever be compared. moreover, the gymnast puts out in 90 seconds what the dancer does in 90 minutes. i thought everyone knew this.

and there is really no politics involved in the code. but there is in the judging. and difficulty should not win out over artistry, especially when a vault like Pena's looks like a bad lawn compared to the competition.

 

[Midwestmommy]

You people are hopeless. It's probably a good thing you have gymnasts on such a lofty pedestal, since it is your work. I on the other hand will find what joy I can in my zombie juggling class, right after I have a glass of wine.

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

You people are hopeless. It's probably a good thing you have gymnasts on such a lofty pedestal, since it is your work. I on the other hand will find what joy I can in my zombie juggling class, right after I have a glass of wine.

Again, I think you misunderstood me. I'm not denigrating ballet at all. I'm simply saying that, since it's not my area of expertise, I have no way of evaluating its difficulty, nor do I care to. I suspect that it is, in its own way, every bit as challenging as gymnastics. In fact, that was my whole point.

If, however, you were wondering whether or not I think gymnastics is in general superior to all other athletic activites, here's a straight up answer:
Of course I do. That's why I coach it.

 

[Redford]

Um...I think I actually planned on writing something when I entered this thread...

I don't feel like opinions are very welcome on this one anyway.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

sure they are. but there will be back and forth. this is good.

 

[Redford]

Hmm..
Now, I've always had a fine tuned relationship with the art of words.
I don't know you, not at all and maybe I'm getting it all wrong because of my language barrier. But after reading your posts (and Geoffrey Taucers as well in this case) I get the feeling you have a hard time realizing what you are telling in between the lines.

This is completly Off Topic, so all I'm gonna tell is that I took quite a bit out of this discussion, but I don't feel there's any need to share at this point.

 

[happychaos]

all i know of ballet is that my sister was a principal with Joffrey for 4 years. had these discussions with her all the time along with my other sister who was an elite gymnast. nothing in ballet will ever compare to any difficulty that is performed in gymnastics. .

That sounds like some interesting genetics going on there. Roughly guessing your age, ballet companies at the time were not accepting of anything less than "ideal" ballet proportions. Although perhaps back then elite gymnastics could be done by a wider variety of body types. Was one of your sisters an anomaly in her sport?

As for the difficulty discussion, dancers, gymnasts, skaters, etc., all train many, many hours per week, for many years to arrive at a level that very few are able to achieve. I think the difficulty is more obvious in gymnastics, in that difficulty= danger. The difficulty in ballet is more subtle.

It's like comparing a world-class sprinter to a world-class marathoner. You could argue all day about which is most difficult, but both are so tremendously impressive that it seems pointless to do so.

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Hmm..
Now, I've always had a fine tuned relationship with the art of words.
I don't know you, not at all and maybe I'm getting it all wrong because of my language barrier. But after reading your posts (and Geoffrey Taucers as well in this case) I get the feeling you have a hard time realizing what you are telling in between the lines.

So perhaps you can explain what I may be inadvertently saying.

I want to emphasize this again I absolutely do not think that calling something "art" as opposed to "sport" denigrates it in any way. My point in this thread has not been to imply that what an artist does is somehow less impressive than what an athlete does -- just the opposite, in fact.

 

[Kiwi]

I think the difficulty is more obvious in gymnastics, in that difficulty= danger.

I think this is part of the misunderstanding that is going on. When Dunno keeps saying that dancers, etc. don't have the same level of 'difficulty', I think he is really meaning the danger level. A lot of things in both sports and arts are extremely difficult, but not dangerous. For example, concert pianists may play extremely difficult pieces, but playing piano, even at a very high level, is not dangerous. There is somewhat more risk of injury involved in ballet dancing, but still it is not the same high danger level as in elite gymnastics.

I kind of get what Geoffrey Taucer is saying about sports and arts being different, but I just don't think the difference is that clear cut. There are a number of sports involving giving a performance of a routine and there is some subjectivity in aspects of the scoring. If we take this away and make it totally objective, using technology to measure everything, those sports will change and artistry will disappear completely. In that case we would no longer have 'artistic' gymnastics, so the sport would need to be renamed. I think this would be enormously sad and something precious would be lost. (The same if it happens to ice skating).

There are also competitions in the art world. Dance competitions, music competitions, and so on, as well as examinations. Performances are judged according to defined criteria, with some criteria more subjective than others. Not all art criteria are subjective, for example, whether someone is playing in time or in tune, these can be measured. So to my way of thinking, there can be a fine line between some sports and some arts.

I understand why the D score was introduced to reward difficulty and I think it was a good idea in principle, however there has to be the right balance, and it seems that difficulty has been rewarded too much. I don't have all the background knowledge of the people involved in creating the code, like Dunno has. (Again I think there is some misunderstanding, as what Dunno refers to as a 'gymnastics person' seems to really mean a person who has been involved in gymnastics at elite level). All I know is that I find the earlier routines a joy to watch and I don't get the same feeling watching the modern day routines. I feel that I am not watching a routine as such, rather a series of tumbling passes interspersed with a few dance moves and poses. It makes me sad and I know we can't turn back time, but I hope that somehow someone can find a way to create a better balance.

 

[Pineapple_Lump]

Gymnast: jack of all (difficult) trades... masters none, one if you are very lucky

Many people could attempt a tour jete although it may not be recognizable
Very few could even physically attempt a double double or even get them self into a position to try

I would rather go back to floor routines that have one stand out tumble with two decent other passes and plenty of nice dance/ thoughtful movement in between, and no twisting jumps and leaps unless it is the gymnasts forte.

 

[gracyomalley]

I think the key is the DANGER not the difficulty....I danced en pointe through Medical school...the strength and flexibility and control of ones body to do high level ballet well does take years of work and dedication to develop....but the worst injuries I got were a stress fracture in my foot and early arthritis....there's a precision needed in dance to even get to pointe shoes -tight control of every muscle in the body is involved...no such thing as being strong and "chucking" pointe work!! Not better/worse - but whole different approach than gym.

DD11 danced for 16 months at a local dance studio and moved through 4 levels to early pointe during that time...genetics? I doubt is - strength and dedication from several years of gym! However, when it comes down to it, although I hate to see her not progressing in her "artistry" (once a dancer always a dancer and I just know those leap deductions add up)...I'd rather her time be in safely drilling chenkos and release moves, double back dismounts, etc...then perfecting a plie....which I know seems easy, but like scales to a musician, and glides to a gymnast, has layers of subtlety....

There is only so much time and a body that trains for strength and power in tumbling trains AGAINST the muscle memory and lengthening needed for "artistic" dance....guns for double backs don't look as pretty in leaps....etc.

It is definitely true that pointed toes, actually noticing that music is playing while you do your floor routine, and trying to feel it, precision in foot and hand position, etc could be taught better at compulsory/low optional levels without sacrificing safety, and would lead to more control in upper level gymnasts too....but you simply can't have it both ways - and I'd rather have my kid strong and safe if a bit ackward, than the other choice...although I very much doubt DD will get beyond JO - if she is lucky!

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Ok, after a brief chat with redford, it's become clear that I need to clarify the point I was getting at in my last post.

My point was NOT to imply that the opinions of those who haven't coached or done high level of gymnastics are not welcome. My point was that given years of proper training in ANYTHING, humans can become superhuman, and do things that seem impossible for mere mortals, and that the untrained eye cannot always appreciate the level of mastery on display. Therefore, it's completely pointless for dunno (who is not a high level dancer) and mwgm (who is not a high level gymnast) to argue about the comparative difficulty of ballet and gymnastics.

It would be like if I were to opine on the relative difficulty of, say, speed-solving a rubick's cube (something I've never done or even attempted).

This was NOT in response to the comments on artistry; it was NOT a dismissal of differing opinions on the artistry of the sport. It was intended as a response to posts about comparing the difficulty of ballet and gymnastics. My entire point is that comparing the difficulty of any two different activities is pointless, because a true master of ANYTHING will make superhuman feats look easy.

That's all I was saying; that post was not intended to have amything whatsoever to do with the discussion of artistry.

 

[JBS]

There is a lack of artistry in artistic gymnastics...because addressing artistry is a waste of time. This is not determined by anyone's opinion...it is determined by the rules.

 

[JBS]

Gymnastics is a sport...go to any gym and ask the kids if they do "gymnastics" or "artistic gymnastics". They are trying to "win" and "get new skills"...not paint a picture.

The only art we do is the team banners we paint and hang on the wall.

You want to see "art" with bad gymnastics...watch Abby Lee Miller and the Dance Moms.

 

[beamer]

This thread provides an example of why I love reading ChalkBucket. I have, of course, listened over the years to judges, coaches, TV commentators, gymnasts, parents, etc. bemoaning the lack of artistry in the sport.

Now I understand the reasons for this and the problems inherent in making judgments about it.

Thanks to Geoffrey Taucer and Dunno for the great tutorial on why and how we have come to this and also to Midwestmommy for her thoughtful and interesting questioning of the whys and hows.

 

[Midwestmommy]

There are reasons that gymnastics is one of the most popular Olympic events, and one of them is that people see what gymnasts can do and are really amazed at how difficult, beautiful and effortless it looks. It is a thing of beauty, that's why people are amazed.

Nobody is amazed or impressed by injuries or at the spectacle of children risking catastrophic injury. In fact I would say this is the single biggest criticism of the sport, along with hours little kids put in (not throwing stones with that one, my daughter put in lots of hours compared to anyone else I know too, other than maybe dancers her age). It's a tricky balance. This sport hopefully will not turn so extreme that there are catastrophic injuries that create an outcry one day.

Fortunately, civilized society isn't the thrill seekers of centuries ago when we thrilled with watching other human beings get torn apart by lions.

There seems of late to be a bit of a concerted effort on this board to "attack" anyone who talks about the importance or say they care about artistry in this sport. And if that doesn't convince the poster, personally attack the poster (GT, not talking about you on that one). Attack away. I respectfully disagree with the anyone who feel that obliterating artistry is the way to go with this sport. There is also a difference between sports and stunts. Extreme stunts such as extreme kayaking down waterfalls are an exampe. Extremely dangerous and extremely stupid and zero artistry. If my kid risked the precious life they were given that way, I would be beyound furious. That's a stunt not a sport, in my opinion. There are all sorts of variations on the shades of grey between artistry and sport and stunts. Downhill skiing is very dangerous, very athletic, extremely technical. The elite ranks are for the most part consenting adults.. Tweenies are certainly not the idea body type for elite skiiers.

I find grown men (or women) on this board deriding other female sports and dancing to be really disappointing. Virtually no kids (well there are a few but let's call it statistically miniscule) will obtain fame and fortune via this sport. It's all about the other lessons, and bringing up great kids, and private club owners who are running businesses. Let's support and be amazed by other female athletes and sports, not get so wrapped up in the chalk dust eating world that that we think we are so superior to other sports and life forms....

A skier is not a "lesser" athlete than a gymnast,n or is a skater or a hockey player. They are different. Teamwork is in itself an amazing "skill" that other sports require more of. Guts? I know a parent of an elite skiier, whew talk about scary.

And I also find the danger danger danger talk in gymnastics to be unsettling. We are there because of the direction the ADULTS in this sport have steered it over the years. And simply because of the nature of gymnastics, the female elite in the sport are mostly kids, nonconsenting adults. I think that is fairly unique to gymnastics and therefore the people running the show have a unique burden to be responsible when it comes to the danger factor. How far should it be pushed? Not expecting an answer on that, but the fact that this sport from the very start is also driven by private clubs--that gives it this really exclusive "insider" sense of ownership/domination of this sport. That also places a burden on the adults running the show. If gets so dangerous that there is ZERO room for artistry, then the danger for these children has been pushed too far. I know, I know, many disagree and fire away and tell me how I don't "get it." I actually think I do get it, I just don't happen to agree 100% with the people throwing the daggers at me on this board. I respectfully agree to disagree. And while gymnastics is an insular world, we do need to be aware that we are talking about children not adults.

Well, except the NCAA. They are adults. And those adult athletes are subject to more rules and restrictions (not saying whether I agree with those or not just stating the fact) than the children athletes in the private clubs.

 

[Natalia]

Layman question:

How do you define artistry in gymnastics?Is it:
a-graceful flow of movement,aesthetically pleasing physical expression of emotion?

In that case,Geoffrey Taucer is 100% right on the mark.This type of artistry has NO place in sport.If we wish to be awakened to the beauty of existence through splendid physical skills then we go to the Cirque du Soleil,their performance is SPLENDID ! Magnificient art.

b-Artistry in gymnastics is clean execution,legs are straight when they are supposed to be straight.Is artistry correct form?

In this case it can be evaluated,and the gods of the gymnastics world can lower the difficulty, allow for improved execution, and increase safety?

 

[Natalia]

I think there might be a bit of misunderstanding going on during this fascinating debate because Dunno is thinking in terms of very high level elite gymnastics.

The laypersons here are usually parents,such as myself.Our kids ,for the most part are not high level Elite gymnasts.Our kids still have a margin for artistry,because their lives may not yet be on the line every single time they're starring down that beam.

I 'm going to illustrate the laypersons point of view with a video.In my ignorence,I will say that I consider this 8 year old ittle girl to have huge talent.As a layperson I will also say that her coaches should be hung out to dry for making her do a level of difficulty that she had not yet mastered.Her life was Not in danger,but she could have done a perfect BHS BHS instead of that low croocked leg mess.Her D score was high,she won.

So here goes tell me what you think