I can understand the sentiments behind the last two; the former speaking for itself, but the latter is where it gets a little more complicated. The title can easily be interpreted as one that denies Michelle's American background and given the history of America towards Asian Americans, most Asians or other people like myself tend to get defensive. (And Asians are also are one of the smaller minorities in America.)
I'm sure the person who wrote the article didn't mean any harm. The title was just poorly worded.
Unlike a movie-that-shall-not-be-named-now that's come out recently ....
Last edited by aftertherain; 08-09-2010 at 12:33 AM.
Wasn't something similar written when Kristi won that set off a whole "racist headline!" too? Or maybe it was they worded it "Japanese-American" wins Gold?
However, it seems that this kind of talk is missing the most important points. I'm not a huge of resumes and lists of medals. I think the manner of winning (or losing) is the most important. pangtongfan's post seemed like a tongue-in-cheek jab at those who want to trumpet people's careers over others'--there are lots of skaters with impressive careers. When Michelle lost, she still gave it her all and accepted it gracefully--in 1998 she was silver despite skating flawlessly (IMO). And when she won, she won gloriously, making casual fans take notice, adults cry, and kids cheer. The way she skated was special. There is no reason to put down others' achievements and claim they aren't that great. No one and nothing can take away from Michelle's talent, period.
Sorry, I think my post came across a different way than I intended. There's a reason I said Michelle's dominance is "also" special, not more special. "All the more" doesn't mean "more than Yu-na", it means there is also something special in that there is significance to the fact that Michelle became popular in the sport during the time that the sport happened to be at its most popular in the United States, a country that already had a long history of greatness in the sport. It's a great thing for Michelle, if anything. Although Michelle never had the same kind of stress Yu-na had with an entire country's hopes upon her, Michelle still had her own different stresses which were much less than Yu-na's but still considerable, such as dealing with constant phenoms from her own country coming up and occasionally stealing her crown (which in a country with such a strong record as the US, throughout ten years, was a given)
You're right that trumpeting people's competitive histories doesn't mean much in the long run, Sonja Henie's competitive career would kick anyone's in the butt. I guess I just had a gut feeling that pangtongfan's post was not so "tongue-in-cheek", I've just heard similar shtick before, and I also think such "trumpeting" posts are to be expected in a thread dedicated to a certain skater. It's just the nature of fandoms. I accept there are fans of other skaters and I myself enjoyed Sarah and Tara's performances, but in his comparisons he bunched Kwan and Hughes together which I thought was laughable. Again it's all quite immature, meaningless stuff, forgive me for going over the top as I tend to do in my fan worship
Last edited by ashdustannie; 08-09-2010 at 02:51 PM.
Thanks for posting this very well written article. The Kween looks fab in her red dress and love her shoes.
Oh duhh!!!! right back at you, the judges gave MK higher presentatin at nats. That was the point I was making that I agree with the judges. I never said kwan's prsentation was better at Nagano. (this is the lp we are talking about of course, at Nagano, Kwan's marks on both were higher in the sp)And no, I don't care about your opinion and criteria, which I disagree with. Michelle's presentation in 1998 was better than Tara's for the kinds of reasons that MKFSfan and others have outlined (TO ME, duhhhHHH)
Last edited by rtureck; 08-14-2010 at 04:38 PM.
Nahh, I will agree with MKFSfan and the other posters who said that they'd give the tech at Nagano to Lipinski and the presentation to Kwan - but that I agree with the outcome regardless, because in my view Lipinski's presentation was pretty darn good as well and the tie-breaker in my mind should defer to the tech - it's more objective.
But uHHhh oH wait the judges gave the tech and presentation to Tara and that's how it was and I agree and that's my argument. Plus she did a triple loop, holy crap the triple loop. and a bit of a fluTz but who cares they judges still counted it so it counts as a real lutz, the judges r right.