body culture, classification and the paralympic

http://eth.sagepub.comEthnography

DOI: 10.1177/1466138108096989 2008; 9; 499 Ethnography

P. David Howe Paralympic movement

The tail is wagging the dog: Body culture, classification and the

http://eth.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/4/499 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Ethnography Additional services and information for

http://eth.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://eth.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://eth.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/9/4/499 Citations

by carmen rial on October 26, 2009 http://eth.sagepub.comDownloaded from

The tail is wagging the dogBody culture, classification and the Paralympicmovement

P. David HoweLoughborough University, UK

A B S T R A C T The rules and regulations regarding the classificationprocess through which athletes must be vetted to determine eligibility forParalympic competition have been transformed drastically over the lasttwo decades. A complex classification system initially developed by theInternational Organizations of Sport for the Disabled (IOSD) has been thedistinctive feature of the Paralympic movement over this period. Keyconsideration must be given to the equitable nature of any classificationsystem imposed by the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) in orderto comply with the ideology of Paralympism. Paralympism is manifest inthe dictum of the Paralympic movement: empower, inspire and achieve.Using ethnographic data obtained by the author while a Paralympicathlete and journalist, this article explores recent debates within the sportof athletics surrounding classification. This is achieved by highlighting theprocess of classification and how, as a result of this process, some bodiesare celebrated and others are not within a sporting culture established asa ghetto for imperfection.

K E Y W O R D S Paralympism, ethics, classification, athletics, habitus

Research into Paralympic sport has most often focused upon media repre-sentation of elite sporting practice for the disabled1 (see Schantz andGilbert, 2001; Schell and Rodriguez, 2001; Smith and Thomas, 2005). As

graphyCopyright 2008 SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, and Singapore)http://www.sagepublications.com Vol 9(4): 499517[DOI: 10.1177/1466138108096989]

A R T I C L E

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 499


such, this research has been rather disembodied. Using ethnographic datacollected as both an athlete and a journalist within the Paralympicmovement, this article seeks to redress this lacuna by exploring the bodyculture of sport for the disabled. For the purposes of this article, bodyculture, following Brownell (1995), may be seen as the nexus between thephysical embodiment of athletes with a disability and the structuresimposed upon them in light of the development of institutions which governParalympic sport. In particular this article focuses upon the system usedwithin sport for the disabled to classify bodies and explores how thisclassification impacts upon Paralympic sporting practice.

The process of categorizing bodies as eligible (or not) in sport for thedisabled is known as classification. Classification is simply a structure forcompetition similar to the systems used in the sports of judo and boxingwhere competitors perform in distinctive weight categories. Within sport forthe disabled, competitors are classified by their bodys degree of function andtherefore it is important that the classification process is robust and achievesequity across the Paralympic sporting practice and enables athletes tocompete on a level playing field (Sherrill, 1999). The InternationalParalympic Committee (IPC) currently organizes and administers both theParalympic Games and the quadrennial World Championships for individ-ual Paralympic sports such as athletics, using athletes who have been througha process of classification. The resources of the International Organizationsof Sport for the Disabled (IOSDs)2 (including athletes, volunteer administra-tors, and classification systems) have been used by the IPC to turn the Para-lympic Games into the most recognizable and possibly most influentialvehicle for the promotion of sport for the disabled. The Paralympics is wellorganized with a relatively high profile that attracts significant mediacoverage and commercial sponsorship like many other modern sporting spec-tacles. Athletes from 136 nations competed in the 2004 Paralympic Gamesin Athens, making the Paralympic Games unquestionably the main inter-national sporting forum for athletes with varying degrees of impairment.

In this article, I undertake a critical examination of the process andapplication of the classification regulations within the sport of athletics aspractised throughout the Paralympic movement. In order to do so I drawon Morgans (1994) notion of practice community to characterize elitedisabled athletes as actors central to the Paralympic movement. It is theconceptualization of the practice community, as articulated by Morgan(1994, 2002; see Howe and Jones, 2006), that provides the conceptualframework for a critical exploration of the role of classification withinParalympic sport. Morgan makes the distinction between the institution in this case the IPC and the practice community, comprising those whoare actively involved with the practice athletes, coaches and officials ofthe IOSDs.

Ethnography 9(4)500

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 500


I also use Bourdieus (1977, 1990) conceptualization of habitus to situatethe individual athletes bodies within the social environment of the practicecommunity. Habitus can be understood as habitual, embodied practices thatcollectively comprise and define a culture. In other words, habitus is thenexus between the decisions individuals make and the structured environ-ment of which they are a part. Within the field of sport for the disabled,key elements of this particular habitus are the charitable mandate for IOSDsand the systems adopted for the organization of the sporting practice,commonly referred to as classification. The main aim of the practicecommunity in this context is facilitating the empowerment of athletes witha disability through the encouragement of sound ethical decisions in theclassification process of the Paralympic movement.

In terms of its structure this article may be seen as a sandwich where thebread is made up of two diachronic ethnographic novellas, extracted fromfield diaries. The filling comprises analysis of and reflection upon the fieldexperience. The first novella is a personal account of my own body under-going the process of classification. Following this is a discussion regardingthe control of Paralympic bodies. This is followed by an exploration of thehabitus of IPC Athletics and how their habitus relates to classification. Thesecond novella highlights an episode that I characterize as the coming ofage of the Paralympic Games. This episode draws attention to the mediagenerated importance of certain disabled bodies, which ultimately leads tothe marginalization of those who are unable to meet redefined norms.

The classification of a body

Seoul, South Korea September 1988 diary extract

After two days of travelling and very little sleep I am still unable to rest.The weather outside is very humid and the waiting area is far too small andcramped. To make matters worse there is limited seating. The nature of myimpairment (mild cerebral palsy) means that I have suffered less from thetravel than some of my fellow participants. Many athletes that use wheel-chairs for mobility were confined to their seats for over 15 hours. I shouldbe delighted to be in Asia for the first time. The Paralympic Games in Seoul,Korea have been the focus of my attention, sporting and otherwise, for thelast three years. In order to get clearance to compete in Seoul I am waitingin no-mans-land at the edge of the Paralympic village where I must gothrough the process of classification. Several weeks from now I will pit mywits (body and soul) against the best athletes in the world that are classi-fied as cerebral palsy seven (CP 7). This is the presumed outcome of theclassification process as I have been competing within the category for the

Howe Body culture, classification and the Paralympic movement 501

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 501


past three years and my body is a textbook example of hemiplegia, theimpairment that is at the heart of CP 7. In spite of this I must wait my turnto go through the classification drills. It is the waiting and uncertainty thatbother me with regards to classification. From time to time the classificationprocess has been engaged in too close to my races but at least this time weare a couple of weeks away from my first competition.

Being pigeonholed as a particular type of body is an odd experience. Itdetermines many things within sport for the disabled for example withwhom I am allocated a shared room within the athletes village, andwhether or not I am considered an elite athlete.3 Why should the impairedbody that I possess influence living arrangements and my status as anathlete? I am well trained, regularly running 100 miles a week. Can othersnot see beyond my cerebral palsy and see that I am as committed as anymiddle or long distance runner regardless of my impaired state?

Here we go! It is my turn next after four hours in this sterile room. Thewait is over, my classification begins. To date I have undergone the processof classification three times. It is an alienating experience as each time adifferent team of individuals determines whether your body fits into thetextbook of carnal typology that is acceptable to those who govern thisaspect of Paralympic sport officialdom. My body is poked and prodded. Itis measured. I am asked to walk, run and jump in a room that is really notsuitable for any physical activity whatsoever too small to build up a headof steam while running and lacking ventilation, so that I am grateful thatI cannot run. Yet, this is unfortunate because my impairment means that Ihave trouble controlling my muscles and stopping running is as tricky asstarting it. This is a result of spasticity brought on by my cerebral palsy. Inessence I am a spaz, as the public might colloquially and prejudicially referto my physical state.

The classifiers see me as a difficult character. On several occasions I amtold to simply do as they ask and not to bother them with trivial ques-tions. What strikes me as odd is how questions regarding the medical stateof my body can be seen as trivial in light of the fact that the process ofclassification will enable me to compete in the Paralympic Games. Later inthe Paralympic village I hear stories of athletes who try to cheat the system.They try to make their bodies appear more impaired than they actually areso that they are classed with a more impaired group. The result of suchfraudulent activity means that they will have a better chance of winningbut it is most certainly against the ethos of fair play.

The team of classifiers look like they have been working all night longand I wonder whether this will lead to an inaccurate diagnosis. Will any ofthe athletes I race against have beaten the system? It seems rather robustbut rumours of cheating abound. Each team comprises a medical doctor, aphysiotherapist and a sports technical expert.4 The technical expert one

Ethnography 9(4)502

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 502


assumes would be different if I had been attempting to compete inswimming rather than athletics. It transpires that the sport technical personon the classification team is normally someone training in physicaleducation or kinesiology and therefore has an understanding of movementand sport in a general sense. None of these individuals are particularlyfriendly, in part due to the drawn out nature of the process, but they alsoappear to have treated me as a specimen pickled in formaldehyde and placedon a shelf in a biology classroom. My body has been processed classified as an object of medical science where my disembodied identity does notseem to matter.

I was successful in classification as expected. I would go on to compet-ing in the CP 7 class. Unsurprisingly it turned out my roommate was alsoa CP 7 athlete, though while my impairment was congenital his was theresult of a head injury. The manner in which impairment is acquired canhave an impact on the physical potential of an athlete. Cerebral palsyacquired through a head injury can lead to an altered and sometimesunstable mental state. A head injury can also leave an athlete with musclememory which means that physically these athletes have a head start interms of the way their muscles are developed. Other than the degree ofcerebral palsy and the spasticity it creates when fatigued (a regular occur-rence for athletes with CP) we had little in common. I was concerned as towhether I would be able to live with someone I had little in common with,other than an impaired embodiment, for three and a half weeks.

Controlling Paralympic bodies

The classification process highlighted above is continually evolving in aneffort to ensure equitable and fair competition. As Sherrill suggests:

A basic goal of classification is to ensure that winning or losing an eventdepends on talent, training, skill, fitness, and motivation rather than uneven-ness among competitors on disability-related variables (e.g., spasticity,paralysis, absence of limb segments). (Sherrill, 1999: 210)

The habituation of classification as a process that bodies must go throughin order to be involved in Paralympic sport is not dissimilar to the weighingof boxers before they fight since weight along with gender are theparameters for classification within boxing and other combat sports. In thecase of a boxers weight it determines the category in which they fight andis presumed to be appropriate as it delimits the risk associated with gettingin the ring with a much larger opponent (Wacquant, 2004). While boxingis not a Paralympic sport the combat sport judo, classified according to anathletes weight, is contested by visually impaired athletes. Ultimately,


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 503


whether classifying by weight and gender or degree of impairment, classifi-cation should provide an equitable environment for the practice of a sport.

Processes of classification within sport for the disabled make distinctionsbetween the physical potential of athletes, and attempt to achieve anequitable environment whereby after competition the successful athletes ineach class will have an equal chance of accumulating physical capital (Jonesand Howe, 2005). In reality, however, there are a number of factors thatimpact upon the accumulation of capital (both physical and cultural) invarious classifications. The first factor is the number of athletes within aparticular event. In the case of an event having a small number of competi-tors, the amount of capital that can be accumulated, in most cases, islimited. In some classes there may only be six athletes from four countries(the IPC minimum for eligible events), meaning winners are less likely toreceive the same kudos as an athlete who defeats 20 athletes. Anotherimportant factor in terms of whether winners ultimately gain capital fromtheir involvement in sport is the nature and degree of their impairment. Acomponent of the habitus of elite sport for the disabled illuminates a hier-archy of acceptable impairment within the community of athletes (Sherrilland Williams, 1996) as well as mainstream society (Schell and Rodriguez,2001).

Another element of this particular habitus is the charitable mandate ofthe IOSDs and latterly the IPC. It was the IOSDs and their predecessorsthat helped to organize the Paralympic Games from 1960 through to 1988.The fact that these Games were staged at all is a testament to the commit-ment of those involved with the IOSDs. Official sponsors and suppliers werein short supply and my own personal involvement and that of other athletesrequired us to raise funds to attend the Paralympic Games in 1988. Thosewho could not raise the funds were replaced by athletes who were less profi-cient but better fundraisers. Athletes as well as officials went cap-in-handto charitable organizations in order to fund their involvement in the Games.As a result emphasis was placed less on high performance and more on theopportunity for international participation. This is not to say that eliteathletes were not involved in the Games, but that participation was themain imperative.

The charitable ethos of the IOSDs led the Paralympic movement tocelebrate participation over performance, and as such is still a centralcomponent of the habitus of elite sport for the disabled. Key to the debateregarding performance and participation models of sport within the IPC isthe classification system. This system has its foundation in a sporting worldwhere disability specific classification was seen as the marker of an equi-table system and where sport was organized by the IOSDs to provide a levelplaying field (Howe, 2008). As a result the classification system developedby the IOSDs often creates classes that at times make sporting contests

Ethnography 9(4)504

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 504


meaningless to the extent that every participant could receive a medal. Sucha result is considered incompatible with high performance by most withinthe IPC (Howe and Jones, 2006).

William Morgans (1994) concept of the practice community is usefulhere, as it provides a means for critiquing the control institutions have overthe practice of sport. While Morgan does not talk about sport for thedisabled specifically, his claim that we should wrest control of such prac-tices from bureaucratic types and turn them over to the practice communitywhere they belong (1994: 208) is pertinent to Paralympic sport. Accord-ingly, in the case under consideration, the IPC should return the control ofthe practice of sport to the IOSDs. This act of revolution is needed ifindividuals with impairment are to be empowered through the sport. In factMorgan suggests that all substantive policy matters regarding the conductand reform of sport be turned over to practice communities (Morgan,1994: 237). In other words the rational deliberations of the members of thepractice community, primarily but not exclusively the athletes, ought todrive policy and the proper conduct of the practice.

A complex disability specific classification system made it initially diffi-cult for the IPC to attract desired media attention toward Paralympic sport.Since the establishment of the IPC there has been constant pressure toremove the IOSDs from decisions about classification in order to stream-line Paralympic programmes. The IOSDs were on the front line offeringexpertise when the IPC was established in 1989. Many of the first officialsof the IPC had previously held posts within these founding federations.Consequently, there was initially carte blanche acceptance of the IOSDsclassification systems in the early days of the Paralympic movement.According to Steadward, the potential benefit of decreasing classes by usinga functional integrated classification system is that it may simplify theintegration into the rest of the sports world (1996: 36). Such a functionalintegrated classification system was developed in some sports such asswimming and downhill skiing. In this system athletes are classified accord-ing to what they can and cannot achieve physically rather than by theseverity of their disability, as is the case with the disability specific classifi-cation system. The use of the functional integrated classification systemreduces the number of classes for a group of athletes by focusing upon func-tional ability rather than disability and ultimately leads to an increase inthe number of viable events at major championships (Vanlandewijck andChappel, 1996). This system is akin to performance banding where athletesare grouped together based on results they have achieved rather than bythe results they could achieve and as such the act of classifying athletesbecomes less problematic.


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 505


Classifier as gatekeeper

Classifiers working within the Paralympic movement are more often thannot able. Athletics appears to be policed by the able or ABs as the otherathletes refer to them. As a result individuals who work on classificationteams may be seen as agents of social control (Wu et al., 2000). In recentyears the extrinsic rewards (money, sponsorship, and awards) associatedwith the Paralympic Games have increased. This, I would argue, is a directreason for changes to the classification process and regulation within themovement. Changes to classification systems have been about packagingthe most attractive and commercially viable product that will be sold to thehighest bidder. The act of transforming the classification system establishedby the IOSDs where an equitable chance of achieving success is lessenedheightens media interest but at a cost to the practice community.

The practice community in sport for the disabled is made up of bothprimary and secondary agents (Howe and Jones, 2006). Athletes areprimary agents because in a traditional view of sporting practice they areconsidered of greatest importance. In other words they are the reason fora sport. Secondary agents on the other hand consist of medical staff,coaches, game officials, volunteer administrators, spectators, and journal-ists, who organize, regulate, maintain and view sporting practice. Manysecondary agents have been involved with the practice community andthen have moved into leading roles within the IPC that as an institutionis still in its infancy. The flexible boundaries between institution and thepractice community make it difficult to establish who is sincerelyconcerned with the cultural practice of high performance sport for thedisabled.

As a result the distinction between primary and secondary agents withinpractice communities is important but it can be difficult to sustain and,moreover, fails to adequately address the heterogeneous nature of thesegroups. For example, an athlete may have been born with a disability ormay have acquired it from some form of trauma later in life. Athletes canalso be distinguished as members of sub-groupings by their race, ethnicity,class and gender, both inside and outside of a given practice community.The athletes identity is not simply tied to their impairment. In addition,athletes may vary in the degree to which they value intrinsic and extrinsicrewards. As primary agents within the practice community athletes areinterested in the intrinsic rewards of their chosen sport (Morgan, 1994).Intrinsic rewards are peculiar to the practice, such as the skills required toperform in a given sport such as athletics. Athletes may, however, becometempted by the extrinsic rewards or economic capital acquired byinstitutions such as the IPC and may begin to feel that their labours needrewarding.

Ethnography 9(4)506

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 506


The shift in focus from intrinsic to extrinsic rewards is something thatcan also readily befall secondary agents, particularly those eager to gain orestablish their position within the structure of the IPC. Secondary agentsare primarily able-bodied persons who may have been involved in sportthemselves, but usually not in sport for the disabled. Able-bodied sportsfacilitators may be aware of the intrinsic rewards of a particular sport buttheir experience is different from disabled athletes because they are notdisabled themselves. In order to situate this analysis in the cultural environ-ment surrounding the Paralympic sport it is important now to turn to adiscussion of the habitus of IPC Athletics and the role it plays within theclassification process.

Classification in IPC Athletics

Despite the adoption of an integrated functional classification system withinswimming and political pressure for change from the IPC, the disabilityspecific classification systems have been retained in the sport of track andfield athletics. The integrated functional classification system was adoptedin the sport of swimming almost 20 years ago. In spite of two decades ofdebate and political manoeuvring within athletics it is currently still believedthe IOSDs developed systems provide the most equitable means of classifi-cation (Howe, 2008). The federations have attempted to structure compe-tition so that only similarly affected athletes compete against one another.An amputee athlete does not compete against an athlete with cerebral palsy,for example. They use functionally specific guidelines to place the athletein a suitable competitive class. The process of classification is normallyundertaken when individuals first become involved in sport for the disabledand often confirmed when they attend their first major international compe-tition such as the Paralympic Games. Given the number and complexity ofthe classification systems within each disability group, the organization ofcompetitions is logistically complicated. There were fifteen 100m finalraces5 for men and eleven for women in athletics at the 2000 ParalympicGames. This compares with one final race for each sex in the 100m at theOlympic Games.

The many classes eligible for participation in the Paralympics programmeled the IPC to implement a rule in 1992 that required an event to have atleast six competitors from four nations to make it viable within theGames. While such a rule would be unlikely to have significance in main-stream sport, it has had a profound impact on the viability of some sportswithin the Paralympic programme. Within athletics this rule ignited thedebate about the type of classification system to be used in the sport.


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 507


Disagreement in athletics over the equity of different systems of classifi-cation and the best way to achieve fairness in competition was central tothis debate. To date the debate has resulted in a stalemate and the disabil-ity specific classification system within athletics continues to be used. Thishas meant that many athletic events for the more severely impaired andwomen have been cancelled or combined in recent years on IPC athleticsprogrammes. Due to the importance placed upon equitable competition, thedisability specific classification systems may create competitive pools thatproduce insufficient numbers of competitors to meet the IPC regulations forviable competition. In addition, the IPC Athletics committee in 2001 ruledthat an event must have at least ten athletes on its official ranking list forit to be considered for the Paralympic or world championship programme.Events with a small number of competitors have been placed underconsiderable strain as a result. The problem of low numbers of competitorsis exacerbated by the onset of injury in an already small number of athletes(Howe, 2004). The practice community is being compelled by the IPC toadhere to a policy that in no way resembles the key principle ofParalympism, the empowerment of athletes with a disability.

The specification of a minimum number of athletes within an eventhas significantly influenced the organization of Paralympic athletics. Thecancellation of an event altogether or, in some cases, the movement ofcompetitors to a less impaired class in order to make the event viable, hasan impact on future programmes. A competitor who is moved to a lessimpaired class is not competing on a level playing field and is unlikely towin. Although winning is not central to Paralympism as formulated by theIPC, it is a major consideration for National Paralympic Committees whenmaking team selection. National Paralympic Committees emphasizewinning since they receive greater publicity and increased funding basedupon their position in the medal table. Individual nations therefore are notconcerned whether events are removed from the programme unless theyhave athletes that were potential medallists. Events disappear from theParalympic programme and from future programmes because of theapparent disinterest by those in the relevant classification grouping whenin fact it is not solely athletes making the decision but their NationalParalympic Committee in conjunction with the IPC.

There are a number of ways that the sport of athletics has tried to rectifythis issue of low number of entries within constituent events in the sport.For example, IPC Athletics has considered combining wheelchair classes intrack events. Both the Cerebral Palsy-International Sport and RecreationAssociation (CP-ISRA) and the International Wheelchair and AmputeeSport Association (IWAS) have athletes who compete from a sitting positionin a wheelchair. At the current time elite male wheelchair CP-ISRA athletesare in limited supply. Consequently the IPC has removed the last remaining

Ethnography 9(4)508

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 508


mens cerebral palsy wheelchair classes from the Paralympic programme. Ina bid to improve the quality of racing and to ensure that a small numberof competitors does not become an issue in the future for the small numberof CP-ISRA male athletes, IPC Athletics combined two impairment classi-fications of male wheelchair racers. Rather than trying to establish anequitable system where existing classes from both federations are thestarting point for a new system, administrators have merged classes ofcerebral palsy athletes into the IWAS classification system. The IPC wantedto establish an official rule for a combined system for athletics competitorsin wheelchairs before the 2006 World Championships after testing it at the2002 World Championships and the 2004 Paralympic Games. While sucha rule has not been formalized in practice it was used in 2006 at the WorldChampionships and it is just a matter of time before it is made official, withlittle resistance in spite of the problems with establishing a consensus aboutwhat is fair for all competitors. In addition, from 2006 the practicecommunity (IOSDs) no longer has membership in the IPC AthleticsCommittee.

Many difficulties exist in attempting to combine all athletic competitorsin wheelchairs. For example, the location of the lesion on the spine influ-ences the degree of power that can be generated by those with spinal injuryimpairment. Meanwhile, athletes with cerebral palsy who race in a wheel-chair cope with issues of motor control (Richter, 1999). Combining all usersof wheelchairs in athletics is problematic, as it becomes an issue of givingpoints to athletes involved in the classification process based on two distinctcomponents: power and control. In fact no point system for the ratiobetween power and control has yet been established as part of the IWASclassification system. Since power and control are distinct elements inmanaging embodied performance it would be inappropriate for thoseinvolved in classification of wheelchair track athletes not to establish arelationship between these two components of movement. Class three andfour cerebral palsy athletes are currently placed in classes two and three ofthe IWAS system because world best performances for these athletes weresimilar to average performances in their respective IWAS class.

During the 2002 IPC World Championship three male athletes withcerebral palsy were competitive enough to qualify into their new class. Allwere world record-holding athletes in their respective cerebral palsy classesbut struggled to get out of their heats when competing against their equalsfrom IWAS. So the question remains how this system can be consideredequitable when it collapses two distinct forms of impairment into one classand those with one form consistently achieve superior competitive resultsacross the board. Only two men made the grade for the 2004 AthensParalympics while the other retired disenchanted with the sport. Usingperformance as a premise for classification in the context of sport for the


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 509


disabled appears to contradict the principle of equity on which systems ofclassification should be based (Richter, 1999). Unfortunately CP-ISRAwomens wheelchair events that were still a viable part of the Paralympicprogramme until 2004 were cancelled in 2008. At other IPC internationalevents the combining of the male wheelchair classes has brought about thedemise of elite male wheelchair racing for athletes with cerebral palsy eventhough it continues to attract high-level performances at the CP-IRSA worldchampionships.

In contrast to track events, IPC athletics has adopted a distinctapproach to organizing field events when there are insufficient competi-tors in one class to stage a viable competition. Classes are combined acrossthe IOSDs system using decathlon style tables facilitating viable competi-tion from low athlete numbers across numerous classes. Each individualsporting performance is assigned points based on existing tables, estab-lished for each class. The winner is determined not by the furthest distancethrown or length/height of jump but by the number of points each effortis worth. In principle this system of tables could be used in track eventsbut the nature of athletics means that it has a first-past-the-post approachto competition. In track events the winner is selected by running in directcompetition with other athletes over standardized distances whereas in thefield competitors are arguably competing against themselves.7 The first-past-the-post principle means that a carte blanche adoption of tables fortrack events as well as the field would be considered undesirable by theIPC since it would ruin the spectacle. Many spectators would be dis-appointed after watching a nail-biting finish to a race only to find out theathlete in fifth actually won.

Within the body culture of which the practice of athletics is a part, theneed to develop an equitable system of classification is problematic. Theclassification of my body highlighted at the outset of the article occurreddirectly after the Olympic Games, in Seoul. If my body were classified todaythe result would be the same. My classification has not changed but thelandscape of sport for the disabled has. There has been a decrease in thenumber of classes that are considered viable in the context of the Para-lympic Games, as a result of low numbers of athletes. Elsewhere it has beenargued (Howe, 2006) that a register of injured Paralympians should betaken so that events are not cancelled prematurely. As Paralympians trainharder their bodies will break down from time to time like all high perform-ance athletes. However, since Seoul in 1988, there has been a markeddecline in the number of severely disabled athletes participating in the Para-lympic Athletics program. In many respects this helped to legitimate elitesport for the disabled. In other words some bodies are worth watchingand others are not. Under the supervision of the IPC there has been a movetoward the commercialization of sport for the disabled that has been

Ethnography 9(4)510

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 510


managed in partnership with increased media coverage of flagship events(Schantz and Gilbert, 2001; Schell and Rodriguez, 2001; Smith andThomas, 2005).

Events in Sydney 2000 marked the zenith of the Paralympic movement,as the games benefited tremendously from sharing the same organizationalstructure of the preceding Olympics. The organization of the games was ona par with the Olympics and the performances within the various sportingarena were of the highest quality none more so than the womens T548

800m wheelchair race that captured the attention of the internationalmedia. What follows is an edited extract from a field diary started duringthe 2000 Paralympic Games.

Paralympic athletics comes of age

Sydney, Australia 22 October 2000

This evening there was a classic confrontation on the track at StadiumAustralia. Just weeks after the media frenzy that marks the Olympic Gamesthe Paralympics are producing their own drama. Unlike 20 years ago a largecollection of the worlds press are present and tonight one of the blue ribbonevents of the athletics programme the womens T54 800m wheelchair finalwas taking place. The 800m for women wheelchair (and for that matterthe mens 1500m wheelchair) race have a special place in the history anddevelopment of high performance sport for the disabled. Since 1984 theseevent have held demonstration status at the Olympic Games. By 1993 theInternational Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) also includedthese events as demonstrations as in their bi-annual world championships.These two wheelchair races have done a great deal to showcase the abilityof Paralympians. Performances produced by the athletes involved aresuperior in terms of time achieved for the distance in comparison toambulant Olympians. For the public this may be the only opportunity theyget to see Paralympic athletes in action as the demonstration events areslotted into the regular Olympic program.

For the first time the Olympic and Paralympic Games were marketedto the world as a single entity. The enthusiasm for the Paralympics by theAustralian public has been great with over a million tickets sold across allvenues. This evening the Australian Paralympic teams most prominentsportsperson, Louise Sauvage, is racing over 800m and her victory has beenstrongly anticipated by the local media. Sauvage has been so dominant inwomens wheelchair racing that since 1993 she has won every IAAF andOlympic demonstration event. The event today was destined to be anotherreaffirmation of her physical superiority over the other elite women.


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 511


However, in this event, eight of the worlds most talented womens wheel-chair racers compete in a keenly contested final. Powerful torsos draped inthe latest Lycra racing gear in a luscious rainbow of national colours. Fromthe waist up these athletes are as chiselled as any on the planet. This isdefinitely not an event for the light-hearted. Rivalry here is as keen asanywhere in sport. On the first lap there was some jostling, as can beexpected in all 800m races, and this is one of the reasons that the IPC stip-ulates that wheelchairs races that are not run in lanes, such as the marathon,require all athletes to wear a helmet. The physical nature of this race wasnot, therefore, unexpected.

Down the back straight an accident occurred behind the leading athletes,including Sauvage. In a surprise result, Canadian Chantel Petitclerc soundlydefeated Sauvage. Petitclerc, while a vastly experienced athlete, had seldommanaged to get the better of Sauvage and never until this point on the worldstage. Sauvage finished second. The look of despair on her face was evidenceof how much the defeat hurt. In contrast the celebration by Petitclercconveyed her delight at realizing a dream. In the next days paper Petitclercwas quoted as saying I dream about Louise more than I do my boyfriend,9

a clear indication of how much this victory meant to her.Petitclercs victory has been received with complaint by the host nation.

Australian officials filed a protest to have the race re-run because one oftheir athletes, Holly Ladmore, had been involved in the crash. Race refereesdisqualified Irelands Patrice Dockery for leaving her lane before the breakin the back straight and the race is set to be re-run in a few days time.Outraged Canadian officials appealed the decision, knowing full well thatthe Australians protested more because Sauvage had lost the race. Canadasappeal cites the fact that the crash occurred behind the chief protagonists.A long and frustrating debate ensued into the small hours of the nextmorning. Canadas appeal was ultimately upheld and the result Petitclercsvictory was confirmed as official.

The result of the womens T54 800 metres at the Sydney ParalympicGames can be seen as a watershed moment for the Paralympic Movement.It was the first time that media outlets captured an explicitly nationalisticrivalry. Rivalries have had their parts to play in the Paralympic Games buttransmitting them to a viewing public is often seen as a hallmark ofprofessional sport that is worthy of public consumption (Smart, 2005;Whannel, 1992). As a rivalry Petitclerc and Sauvage fit into the classicathletics mould made famous in middle distance terms by EnglishmenSebastian Coe and Steve Ovett, most notably in the lead up and at the 1980Moscow Olympics. Petitclerc is small and graceful, not unlike Coe;Sauvage, on the other hand, is a powerhouse with immense physical talent,much in the manner of Ovett. The outcome of this event and the

Ethnography 9(4)512

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 512


controversy surrounding the unexpected result brought the winner, Petit-clerc, numerous sponsorship deals but more importantly brought thedynamism and drama of Paralympic sport to a much wider audience.

After the surprise victory by Petitclerc, Sauvage continued to have successon the IAAF stage, winning demonstration events in both 2001 and 2003.However, Petitclerc proved to herself and her fans at the 2002 Common-wealth Games that her victory over Sauvage in Sydney two years earlierwas not a flash in the pan. The Manchester Commonwealth Gamesmarked another crucial development in Paralympic sport. Petitclerc,Sauvage, and others in the womens wheelchair 800m for the first time ata mainstream athletics event were competing in an event that had full medalstatus. After the second victory over Sauvage, Petitclerc was clear that itwas the status of the race that was the real achievement. It is a very specialmedal. No matter who might have won this gold medal, it would have beenan historic occasion (Kalbfuss, 2002). Without question this victory inManchester was a personal achievement for Petitclerc but the historicalimportance of the recognition of the elite status of wheelchair athletes isperhaps more significant.

Since the 2000 Paralympic Games Petitclerc has been treated as a heroineby the Canadian Press and applauded as a role model for high performanceathletes across the country. In relation to other Paralympic champions sheis in part the acceptable face of sport for the disabled photogenic, charis-matic, high functioning and a winner. By its very nature, however, someathletes who are world and Paralympic champions are excluded from themedia spotlight often filled by the likes of Petitclerc. Petitclerc is a very ableuser of a wheelchair, and while she is one of the best within her classifi-cation there are other athletes who are also great champions that competein different classes who do not get the same degree of attention. As a result,issues and debates surrounding classification continue to be of concern (Wuand Williams, 1999). The lack of equity of treatment of champions is justone issue facing Paralympic athletics.

Cultural interpretation of aesthetic beauty may be blamed for a lack ofequity in the treatment of athletes with disabilities and the result of a bodyculture that celebrates superior movement as long as the body that achievesit is normal. The public, in part because of the inclusion of demonstrationevents for wheelchair racers in the Olympic Games since 1984, are willingto accept a chiselled torso that needs to use a wheelchair to move. Thewheelchair used by T54 athletes allows them to move around the track atdistances from 800m to 10,000m at a much faster pace than able-bodiedrunners. As a result their impressive physical ability is obvious. It is thesebodies that are the most celebrated within sport for the disabled. Data frommy involvement in the Paralympic movement suggest that an increase inthe severity of the disability is directly linked to the marginality felt by


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 513


individuals within sporting practice. In other words, greater impairmentequates to lesser acceptance for a sportsperson. The Paralympic athletesthat receive the greatest exposure are in fact the most able, that is, theleast impaired.

Conclusion

The provision of competitive categories or classes that maximize partici-pation may satisfy the inclusive aims of the IOSDs but may undermine theIPCs desire of providing contests for highly motivated and skilled eliteathletes. In addition, the talent pool may be spread too thinly across toomany events. With heterogeneity so evident within the practice communitythere appears to be a need for open and frank discussions in order to estab-lish the best way forward. The danger is that the IPC is in such a powerfulposition, with support from many quarters including the IOC, that theIOSDs may have missed an important opportunity to shape sport for thedisabled in an athlete friendly manner.

[F]or the Paralympic Movement [there] lurks the danger of becoming top-heavy, of concentrating ever more energies and financial resources on fewerrather than on the equally deserving majority. The sensible chord of overallsocial responsibility and accountability should thus continue to be theguiding light of the Paralympic Movement. This does not always appear tobe the case as concerns the ever-resource-hungry-elite-high-performance-sporting-system. (Landry, 1995: 14)

The success of athletes like Chantel Petitclerc has gone a long way to elim-inating many stereotypes about the elite athlete with a disability. The highperformance able wheelchair racer is now a part of contemporary sporting[body] culture. However, it is only this very able disabled image that isrecognized. For those whose bodies are more impaired the stigma remains.The IPC needs to adopt a more accommodating body culture if it is to liveup to its dictum of empower, inspire and achieve. The difficulty with thisis that few athletes are empowered by a mode of practice, ostensibly estab-lished for their benefit, which actively promotes a body culture thatnecessarily excludes them.

Notes

1 It has been widely accepted within disability studies circles that a personfirst approach should be adopted when addressing athletes with a disabil-ity. In this article I have stuck to this convention except when referring to

Ethnography 9(4)514

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 514


sport as an institution. I use the term sport for the disabled instead ofdisability sport because through my research it is clear that sportingprovision for the disabled is part of what might be labelled a disabilityindustry (Albrecht, 1992).

2 The federations, namely the Cerebral Palsy International Sports andRecreation Association (CP-ISRA), International Blind Sport Association(IBSA), International Sports Federation for Persons with IntellectualDisability (INAS-FID), and the International Wheelchair and AmputeeSport Association (IWAS). This is a federation that was launched inSeptember 2004 at the Athens Paralympic Games. It is the result of amerger of two federations, the International Stoke Mandeville WheelchairSports Federation (ISMWSF) and the International Sports Organization forthe Disabled (ISOD), that have been part of the Paralympic movement sinceits inception.

3 There is a tendency in mainstream sport to award elite status to thosewho achieve the most in terms of physical performance. This is also tosome degree the case within sport for the disabled where certain types ofdisability lead to the assumption of non-elite status. As far as I wasconcerned my status as an elite athlete was related to the commitment intraining my body in the pursuit of excellence. By comparing the qualityand quantity of training an athlete has undergone to achieve their bestperformance, and relating this to their impairment, it is possible to get areasonable barometer on their elite status within Paralympic sport.

4 In some federations the classification team is different. The Cerebral PalsyInternational Sports and Recreation Association (CP-ISRA) requires amedical doctor, a sports technical official and a physiotherapist whereasthe International Blind Sports Federation (IBSA) only requires the servicesof a certified ophthalmologist.

5 Most of these also required the timetabling of heats within the stadium.6 The rules on competitiveness that eliminated the cerebral palsy male wheel-

chair racers from the Paralympic programme are not as rigorously followedwhen it comes to female competitors. This tolerance is part of an attemptto actively recruit more women to the sport for the disabled. Thus men andwomen compete under different rules.

7 It could be argued that tactics in the high jump, which is a Paralympic eventfor the visually impaired and amputee competitors, come into play in thecount back rituals where the athlete who has missed the least attemptshas an advantage. Other than in this situation field events requirecompetition against oneself as the format is not head-to-head.

8 T54 is an event classification. The T says that this is a track event. The5 says that it is an event for a wheelchair athlete and the 4 means thatthe athlete is a highly mobile user of a wheelchair.

9 Sydney Morning Herald, 23 October 2000.


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 515


Reference

Albrecht, G.L. (1992) The Disability Business: Rehabilitation in America:Political Economy of Rehabilitation in America. London: SAGE.

Bourdieu, P. (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1990) The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford UniversityPress.

Brownell, S. (1995) Training the Body for China: Sport in the Moral Order ofthe Peoples Republic. London: University of Chicago Press.

Howe, P.D. (2004) Sport, Professionalism and Pain: Ethnographies of Injuryand Risk. London: Routledge.

Howe, P.D. (2006) The Role of Injury in the Organization of ParalympicSport, in S. Loland, B. Skirstad and I. Waddington (eds) Pain and Injury inSport: Social and Ethical Analysis, pp. 21125. London: Routledge.

Howe, P.D. (2008) The Cultural Politics of the Paralympic Movement: Throughthe Anthropological Lens. London: Routledge.

Howe, P.D. and C. Jones (2006) Classification of Disabled Athletes: (Dis)Empowering the Paralympic Practice Community, Sociology of SportJournal 23(1): 2946.

Jones, C. and P.D. Howe (2005) Conceptual Boundaries of Sport for theDisabled: Classification and Athletic Performance, Journal of Philosophy ofSport 32(1): 13346.

Kalbfuss, E. (2002) Petitclerc Rolls Home With Gold, The Gazette, 5 August.Landry, F. (1995) Paralympic Games and Social Integration, in M. De Moragas

Sp and M. Botella (eds) The Key of Success: The Social, Sporting, Economicand Communications Impact of Barcelona 92, pp. 117. Bellaterra: Serveide Publicacions de la Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.

Morgan, W.J. (1994) Leftist Theories of Sport: A Critique and Reconstruction.Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Morgan, W.J. (2002) Social Criticism as Moral Criticism: A Habermasian Takeon Sport, Journal of Sport and Social Issues 26(3): 28199.

Richter, K.J. (1999) The Wheelchair Classification Debate, paper presented atthe Cerebral Palsy International Sport and Recreation Association GeneralAssembly, Ottawa, Canada, September.

Schantz, O.J. and K. Gilbert (2001) An Ideal Misconstrued: NewspaperCoverage of the Atlanta Paralympic Games in France and Germany,Sociology of Sport Journal 18(1): 6994.

Schell, L.A. and S. Rodriguez (2001) Subverting Bodies/Ambivalent Represen-tations: Media Analysis of Paralympian, Hope Lewellen, Sociology of SportJournal 18(1): 12735.

Sherrill, C. (1999) Disability Sport and Classification Theory: A New Era,Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 16(2): 20615.

Ethnography 9(4)516

499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 516


Sherrill, C. and T. Williams (1996) Disability and Sport: Psychosocial Perspec-tives on Inclusion, Integration and Participation, Sport Science Review 5(1):4264.

Smart, B. (2005) The Sport Star: Modern Sport and the Cultural Economy ofSporting Celebrity. London: SAGE.

Smith, A. and N. Thomas (2005) The Inclusion of Elite Athletes withDisabilities in the 2002 Manchester Commonwealth Games: An ExploratoryAnalysis of British Newspaper Coverage, Sport, Education and Society10(1): 4967.

Steadward, R. (1996) Integration and Sport in the Paralympic Movement,Sport Science Review 5(1): 2641.

Vanlandewijck, Y.C. and R.J. Chappel (1996) Integration and ClassificationIssues in Competitive Sports for Athletes with Disabilities, Sport ScienceReview 5: 6588.

Wacquant, L. (2004) Body and Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Whannel, G. (1992) Fields of Vision: Television Sport and Cultural Transform-ation. London: Routledge.

Wu, S.K. and T. Williams (1999) Paralympic Swimming Performance, Impair-ment, and the Functional Classification System, Adapted Physical ActivityQuarterly 16(3): 25170.

Wu, S.K., T. Williams and C. Sherrill (2000) Classifiers as Agents of SocialControl in Disability Swimming, Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 17(4):42136.

P. DAVID HOWE is the Deputy Director of the Peter HarrisonCentre for Disability Sport at Loughborough University, UK. Histeaching focuses on the cultural politics and anthropology/sociology of body within the fields of sport and leisure. Equityrelated issues are central to his main research focus, the ParalympicGames. He is author of Sport, Professionalism and Pain:Ethnographies of Injury and Risk (Routledge, 2004) and The CulturalPolitics of the Paralympic Movement: Through an AnthropologicalLens (Routledge, 2008). Address: Deputy Director, Peter HarrisonCentre for Disability Sport, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences,Loughborough University, Loughborough LE11 3TU, UK. [web:http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/sses/contact/staff/pdh.html,email: [email protected]]


499-517 096989 Howe (D) 12/11/08 13:59 Page 517


body culture, classification and the paralympic

Documents