Assessing the sociology of sport: On Brazil and Latin American perspectives

Introduction

Over a relatively recent historical period, sport has become a relevant and recognized object of study in the social sciences (Elias and Dunning, 1992). This development is particularly striking if one considers the trivialized status of sport within the academic and scientific community. Despite these barriers, a much more favorable scenario has emerged for current scholars of sociology of sport, both internationally and in Brazil. However, to understand the current context, it is important first to explore the various paths for and obstacles to, as well as achievements of and future challenges for, the sociology of sport in Brazil.

To begin, one can draw upon a quotation from French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. Asked at a conference to talk about sport to an audience of scholars whose disciplines touched on sport, Bourdieu noted that

…on one side, there are people who are very knowledgeable about the sport in a practical way, but do not know about it. And on the other, people who know the sport very poorly in practice and who could speak about it, but not deign to do so, or do so willy-nilly. (Bourdieu, 1990: 207)

One can view the trajectory of the sociology of sport as a field of inquiry in Brazil and other quarters of Latin America in a similar light. In turn, this present essay explores the contours, composition and strategies of socio-cultural inquiries into sport in Brazil and Latin America.

Reflections on the trajectory of the sociology of sport as a field of inquiry

Sociology of sport is a new academic discipline in Brazilian universities, with the first record of related links to physical education curricula dating from the 1970s (Betti, 2001). The inclusion of material related to the sociology of sport in the curriculum initially occurred in physical education courses, officially located in the areas of healthcare and the biological sciences – fields underpinning most of its national undergraduate courses. Notably, sport was not included in courses in the humanities and social sciences at this time. Another key point to be made here is that the first courses in the field were not originally called ‘Sociology of Sport’ in Brazil. Rather, they tended to be given names such as the ‘Sociocultural Aspects of Sport’, ‘Diagnosis of Contemporary Reality’, and the ‘Social and Philosophical Study of Sports’, among others (Ferreira, 2009; Ferreira et al., 2013).

Moreover, the appearance of sociology of sport in the curriculum was isolated and invariably disconnected from political and pedagogical projects in physical education courses. Despite this, certain professors and researchers persisted in including such inquiry in public and private institutions of higher education.

Albeit with less intensity, the debate about the ‘division’ of knowledge between the humanities and the biological sciences in the study of sport continues today. Beyond physical education, sport has become an important object of study in the biological sciences, driven by strong public and private investment, whereas it remains a secondary consideration in the humanities. This tendency began with the development of postgraduate courses in the late 1970s and early 1980s, with the creation and expansion of sports training centers and laboratories of physiology of exercise, biomechanics and other areas that involve bio-analysis of human movement. In this context, several researchers sought postgraduate qualifications abroad, particularly in Germany and in the United States, usually subsidized by the Brazilian government. In contrast, social science and humanities study of sport received few incentives and little formal recognition.

Additional information that corroborates this argument is provided in surveys of scholarly production within the sociology of sport in major national journals in the fields of physical education and sociology (Ferreira, 2009; Ferreira et al., 2013). In sociology journals, articles tended to be of good quality with respect to theoretical discussions, but the quantity was small and there were few empirical analyses of sports in the socio-cultural context. In physical education journals, most of the articles dealt with aspects of bio-physiological performance . These findings reinforced the earlier observation about the historic route of the sociology of sport in Brazil and provide reminders that knowledge production in the area followed a different path than is traditional either in the humanities and biosciences (Marchi Júnior and Cavichiolli, 2008).

Important changes took place at the end of the twentieth century. Physical education programs started to incorporate postgraduate researchers with specializations in education, history, psychology, sociology, and economics, among others. This ‘academic oxygenation’ brought new – or, rather, different – visions of sport as a scientific object. As a result, new studies and research projects were designed and developed in humanistic inquiry about sport, an academic area that became institutionalized and differed from the isolated efforts of past decades. In other words, what once predominantly stemmed from individual initiatives now had an institutional space that guaranteed the development of a new area or field of knowledge in higher education institutions for the sociology of sport. Consequently, over the past decade most courses in physical education have included in their curricula disciplinary knowledge from the humanities and social sciences, making sociology of sport an important focal point. Conversely, undergraduate courses in the humanities and social sciences continue only rarely to include reference to sport or the sociology of sport, in contrast to the situation in North America, the UK and Western Europe (Ferreira, 2009; Marchi Júnior, 2013; Marchi Júnior and Cavichiolli, 2008).

Assessing the challenges ahead for the sociology of sport

Throughout this process, we can point to some theoretical trends, topics and methodological perspectives in the initiation and development of the sociology of sport in Brazil. In the beginning, studies about sport from a sociological perspective were strongly influenced by scholars using critical theory and Marxist perspectives. This trend probably resulted from the influence of postgraduate scholars who not only studied in Germany but also reflected upon the Brazilian socio-political context in developing critical theory, translating books and inviting their foreign advisors to attend conferences or classes in Brazil. At this stage, sport was the target of scathing critiques, with much attention given to its potentially alienating and demobilizing effects.

Over time, given the increasing number of academics with a background in social sciences and humanities, sport began to be studied from a range of perspectives based on the theories of culturalists and structuralists. For example, in Brazil there is strong evidence of studies influenced by the theoretical and methodological perspectives of Norbert Elias and Pierre Bourdieu (Marchi Júnior, 2013). Seeking to describe and systematize the trends established in the development of the sociology of sport in Brazil, Souza and Marchi Júnior (2010) highlighted three possible pathways for the road ahead, while acknowledging other possible developmental patterns. The first pathway involved socio-anthropological studies of football, which later formed the basis for a proposed ‘Sociology of Football’. The second consisted of scholars with links to physical education in the 1980s who adopted critical, even revolutionary, views on sport. Finally, the third pathway, inspired by figurational scholars, emphasized the historical and sociological practice of sports which, in turn, allowed for the emergence and inclusion of new and more nuanced understandings.

With this in mind, we can now characterize the development and challenges for a sociology of sport in Brazil. Among them is the incorporation of a Eurocentric model in the development of studies and research in sociology of sport in Brazil, as well as a predisposition to adopt the theoretical and methodological perspectives linked to empirical, statistical and analytical research from the United States (Marchi Júnior, 2013). However, a principal challenge lies in defining what can be called – if, indeed it exists – a ‘Brazilian School of Sociology of Sport’. To this end, it is worth noting that the formation of research centers is very much in progress, with each such center being in the process of defining particular theoretical-methodological allegiances. In the future, these centers may play a key role in consolidating a Brazilian sociology of sport.

In addition to the previous historical and contemporary barriers and constraints on the development of a sociology of sport in Brazil (and other non-English speaking nations) another key challenge can be added: language. Although it holds global status as a universal language and the language of science and academia, English remains elusive for most Latin American scholars and this poses challenges in writing for an international academic audience. Therefore, the ability to assimilate new research, to have dialogue about and debate key issues, and to collaborate with international colleagues all remain limited. It must also be acknowledged that even within Latin American countries, language is a barrier to the advancement of knowledge, given that Brazilians speak Portuguese while those in the majority of other countries speak Spanish.

Future directions for the sociology of sport: on Brazil and Latin America

The future of sociology of sport for Brazilians and Latin Americans can be viewed with considerable optimism with respect to the continued development of the field. According to Lovisolo (2006) and Alabarces (2012), the sociology of sport in Latin America has developed in three main stages. First, during the 1980s, there were discussions of the oppressive social aspects of sport based on critical theory. Second, scholars focused on the aesthetic aspects of sports and its practice. In the third stage, scholars have expanded the sociology of sport by reconstructing its legitimacy through increased intersectional analysis that bridges knowledge and understanding across the social sciences and humanities. Given such recent trends, it is likely that there will be important theoretical and thematic realignments in mounting new comparative perspectives on the sociology of sport in Brazil and other Latin American countries.

Alongside this stage of theoretical and methodological development in conjunction with the incorporation of analytical models and assessments, a parallel movement has emerged. This comes from the initiative of several Latin American researchers (with strategic collaboration of foreign colleagues from North America, Europe and elsewhere) and focuses on enhancing the development of professional academic associations aligned with the Sociology of Sport in Latin America. For example, one of the most significant developments was the creation of the Asociación Latinoamericana de Estudios Socioculturales del Deporte (ALESDE), which held its first bi-annual meeting in Curitiba (Brazil) in 2008 and has since held conferences in Maracay (Venezuela) in 2010, Concepción (Chile) in 2012, and Bogotá (Colombia) in 2014. ALESDE, which offers a model to other fledgling organizations, has a founding constitution based on three official languages (Spanish, Portuguese, and English). It has grown significantly to support new researchers and scholars of sport from a range of nations. This development arguably ensures greater levels of representation, legitimacy and visibility of research conducted within the sociology of sport (Alabarces, 2012; Almeida et al., 2012; Marchi Júnior et al., 2008). Advancing the goals and objectives of ALESDE, the association launched its official journal in 2011, enabling the dissemination of knowledge of sociology of sport from across Latin America.

However, challenges remain in terms of both the quality and quantity of scholarly production that would enable greater penetration of the international scientific community. One positive development in this area is the cooperation and support of organizations such as the International Sociology of Sport Association (ISSA) and the North America Society for the Sociology of Sport (NASSS), which have worked to include representatives of ALESDE (and other national and regional sociology of sport associations) on their administrative and journal editorial boards. These examples show that Latin America is being recognized as an important region and that the foundation is being established for future collaboration. Certainly, events such as the 2014 FIFA World Cup and the 2016 Olympics Games in Brazilian territory may help contribute to a range of international collaborations. Nevertheless, advancing uniquely Latin American perspectives on the socio-cultural study of sport in the global context will have many challenges in the future.

In summary, a range of historical, international and geo-political factors, including the reified position of English as the global language of academia, has tended to push Latin America to the periphery, leading to a situation where scholarly inquiry about the sociology of sport is comparatively under-developed and where non-English speaking scholars have been often relegated to the role of spectators and listeners. However, it is difficult today not to be optimistic about the future because there is much evidence that the international community of the sociology of sport is working to ensure that Latin American perspectives are included in a more inclusive, democratic approach that will ultimately make our field stronger.