Skating as art | Page 5 | Golden Skate

Skating as art

Joined
Mar 14, 2006
I see no qualms with comparing artists across genres, I'll stick to actors/performers and skaters for the purpose of this debate. Compare Michelle Kwan to Meryl Streep. In terms of numbers, both have had an unusually long streak of domination: world medals/oscar nominations etc. Meryl Streep is perhaps the most acclaimed actress ever, with classical training and a broad range of roles (and breathtaking beauty and box office numbers nowadays). Does Lyra Angelica, The Red Violin, East of Eden, Scherezade (pick four of your own) match up against Sophie's Choice, A Cry in the Dark, Adapation and Angels in America (ditto)? To me, artistically, it categorically doesn't. Does it for you? If so, how?
You addressed this to me and I would love to take up your challenge, but it would take more time than I have right now. It occurs to me, though, that skating as an art has never had an Arlene Croce - the New Yorker's remarkable dance critic who was able to see and describe Balanchine, Fred and Ginger, and many more in greater depth than anyone had ever done before. She was a literary and fearfully intelligent writer and the New Yorker gave her as much space as she wanted to develop her ideas, so that her work was far above that of the average newspaper dance critic. She could speak expertly and profoundly about technique, the essence of the specific art form, the dancers' individual styles, choreography, music, and social contexts. Skating commentators, who come mainly from the world of sports, tend to be far less global in their expertise, and thus so far they haven't much helped us grasp the full scope of the genre. The community of fans is actually doing that job in a fragmented way.

Also, I'd like to note a special dimension of skating vs. film (since you've focused on Streep's movies) -- it takes place in one moment of time (like dance and other performing arts) but a much more condensed one -- just a few minutes. Length-wise it's more like a haiku than a feature film. You can certainly compare apples and oranges, but it has to be done with care. Also (unlike the performing arts except for shows like DWTS) figure skating exists in the high-stakes environment of competition. (Like you, I'm almost exclusively interested in competitive skating.) I think this high-stakes, on-the-edge quality is part of the unique essence of figure skating that the genre's future Arlene Croce will develop.

More when I get my kitchen and bath remodel under control!
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
You addressed this to me and I would love to take up your challenge, but it would take more time than I have right now. It occurs to me, though, that skating as an art has never had an Arlene Croce - the New Yorker's remarkable dance critic who was able to see and describe Balanchine, Fred and Ginger, and many more in greater depth than anyone had ever done before. She was a literary and fearfully intelligent writer and the New Yorker gave her as much space as she wanted to develop her ideas, so that her work was far above that of the average newspaper dance critic. She could speak expertly and profoundly about technique, the essence of the specific art form, the dancers' individual styles, choreography, music, and social contexts. Skating commentators, who come mainly from the world of sports, tend to be far less global in their expertise, and thus so far they haven't much helped us grasp the full scope of the genre.

I think Dick Button aspired to that role.
My impression is that he was at least somewhat knowledgeable about performing arts and wanted to encourage viewers to appreciate skating as art.

But since he had limited air time available to express his ideas and needed to address them to casual viewers and not just aficionados, he wasn't able to go into depth on the air, even if he would have been able to write detailed analyses of the aesthetics of skating had he chosen to do so.

And I also think that focusing on aesthetic commentary in a competitive context at the expense of explaining fine points of technique and rules did a disservice to the sport as sport.
 

OS

Sedated by Modonium
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
(Firstly, please let me apologies for this lonnnnng post. I don't post often, but when I do, I'd like to contribute as much as I can :p)

A lecturer at the Royal College of Art, world's leading school in art and design once said something that stayed with me:

"The worst idea we ever had was to give children a paintbrush and a picture in front of them to say, paint like that."

I was first taken aback because that is the way all children and adults around the world are taught, and continues to learn, to draw like the masters. I asked him why. He said, it is because they should be free to express in any way they want, whether to draw with their fingers and decide what they like to do with it, draw, mark, dab, print, splash, drip or paint, and there are unlimited potentials. By putting a cap on them at the start, you are making them into craftsman and not artists. You also failed to give the opportunity to develop their own unique sense of relationship which is expressing their unique view and visions of the world. It spells the death of creativity, therefore art.

I can't help but feel much of he says can also be applied to some of the perspective shared generally including outside the forums. Although all are valid, but many of the views are conditioned by what has been 'institutionalised' as 'successful' programs/performances, by the COP of its time through in the form of scores/wins; the 'big tricks', 'social environment' and the 'cultural impact' for the skaters within certain national biases. By boxed in what is art, and the rules of 'good' art, one perhaps fails to realised perhaps we became prejudiced by such conditions therefore we are not really opens to the idea of profound possibilities.

Truth, Art, Beauty. On the face of it they can all be about similar things, but they are really quite different. In performance art as it is in life, art and beauty dies the moment it really happens (even though captured on film, these are merely reproductions but not 'real art'), and the only thing that last out of the 3 is 'Truth', which is who the skater is, and what he/she has achieved.

Figure skating is both an art and sport.

As a performance art, art is possible by the condition it must be genuine, unique, truthful, delivered on the occasion, in the contextual circumstance in the grand scheme of things. Real art in performance is the part that the performer were able to bring the heights and the depth of expression that can never replicated gain. It is what all skaters strive for but rarely achieve but all capable of achieving. But it is the occasion, the stage that set the significance of the performance apart. Real art is the peak state of liberation, freedom and abandonment of earthly conventions or rules and regulations. A spatial state of mind, but also one that is simple, spontaneous and pure.

Figure skaters are all artists and capable of creating art, but rarely do they achieve real art when it matters the most. All their potentials, what they have done during rehearsal are just craft. Through good choice of music, gorgeous costumes, brilliant make up, expertly choreograph programs and skilled skates, may all maximise chance of art happening, but it does not mean it will happen. It those rarest inspired moments, occasion, highs of simplicity and purity, spontaneity, luck and even perfection that makes us yearning for this sport.

Figure skating as a sport
Sport for me is like a supreme craft, pushing the human boundaries to its maximum and once it surpassed its peak, by its own uniqueness and wonderment, it became art. All sportman/craftsman are capable of delivery great art through inspired moments of expertise, but in sport and is in Art, what happens during rehearsals and practice doesn't matter. Only what happens when it count is the most important to appraise sport as art.

---------------------

My own personal interpretation of the different levels of aptitudes in developing relationship with the arts in learning them, appreciate them and in performing them. (Arts = alls humanity subjects Music/Performances/Dance/Painting/Fine Arts/Literary).

1. You learn the techniques.
2. You improve the techniques.
3. You perfect the techniques.
4. You develop your own techniques.
5. You forget about the techniques.
6. Let the techniques be part of you and it is seamlessly integrated in everything you do.
7. You can't see the techniques.

1. You see/ hear / interact with the arts/work at first hand with no preconceived notion and always with an open mind and a 'fresh pair of eyes' as well as all your senses.

2. Be very self aware of how it make you feel on a pure instinctual level, even based on a limited understanding.

3. Research and learn about the background, crafts, historical and cultural context, environment, personal journey of the artists and the works's creation, intention, and by product.

4. Appreciate the original 'creator/artist's vision in crafts, his/her 'persuasion' (Objectivity), and even 'lack of persuasion' speaks volumes about the work and the artists intentions.

5. Develop your own opinion and response to agree or disagree with his 'persuasion (Subjectivity).

6. One should try to perform the work acknowledge the above but the depth of knowledge might not be necessary, the intention is not to offend or mishandle the material. It is about being respectful and truthful to the work, but there's a fine line with how much you let yourself dictated by it as a performer and an artist.

7. Awareness of the audience. This is subjective to the artist's own generosity. Some artists perform / create for their own pleasure or spite. In performance arts, it is for the audience.

Even if the most well executed technically sound program are performed to its perfection, in an empty arena without an audience or record of it, it is not art, it is just work.

8. The performance itself should be a large extension of the artist within, in spirit, emotional response, and most importantly, in original thoughts as expressed within the realm of the performer's human constricts. A true artist should always bring their own 'uniqueness' to any preconceived objectivity.

9. In performance art, the success of the work should be measured by how much audience respond to it, even long after a performance has ended, and the career of the artist finishes. After all, that's the reason Arts fall under the category of 'Humanity' subjects.

Most skater at elite level is proficient in the Point 1 to 4 of the learning curves, some on occasion reaches level 5 and 6 and even 7. Art happens at 7-9. Although in rare burst of inspired moments, all skaters are capable of transcend to 8 and 9 on rarest occasions, sometimes by accident, some by personal affinity, and sometimes if you are among the rare gifted, they have the unique instinctual empathy to by passing other steps before start the process again with another new program. Some skaters were born with 8, and they can be spotted even at Juniors.
 
Last edited:

Kwanford Wife

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
GREAT TOPIC! Unfortunately, I didn't have time to read the entire thread, but here's my take on Skating as Art...


Are beauty and artistry synonymous when it comes to skating, or can you have one without the other?
I believe they should be, but sometimes you will have a skater who does a great job with the intreperation of the music, but the athletic ability isn't there which takes away from the beauty of the performance. This is probably the worst case scenario, espcially with the ladies, but skating is a sport and not a beauty contest. But when you have that skater who combines beauty & artistry - YOWZA!

Can skating with no music be art? Does the presence of music demand evaluation as art even if the skater does a bad job of reflecting the music or uses it only for counting?
Absolutely! I've seen several skaters on practice ice with iPods who gave me chills and I have no idea what they were skating to - the movement was just that powerful. In terms of actual competition, I believe the music should be used as a tool to highlight the performance and not something that's just playing in the background. This actually drives me crazy and is a reason why I do such a bad job at keeping up with the Novice & Junior skater. They are so focused on landing the jumps, that the music is secondary. Its rare to find those standouts who are able to connect the two... Jennifer Kirk excelled at this when she was a youngster.

Is show skating all about art and not a sport at all? Do cheesy shows count as art or only hoity-toity ones?
I think that rarely show skating is about more than making money. Its rare to see modern skating shows push the artistic envelope - espcially those with a theme - ala Boyz II Men, Hip Hop, Riverdance, etc. however...

What about professional competitions, or the "interpretive" programs in pro-am or "open" competitions of the late 1990s?
some of the best, most artistic performances I've ever seen were during the late 1990s with the professional competitions... esp. the pairs. Lots of those were simply breathtaking and the skaters focused on winning performances vs. skating from side to side clapping their hands and doing backflips...

What about interpretive, artistic, showcase, and Theatre on Ice competitions at amateur levels? (Club competitions, National Showcase in the US, etc.)

Senior-level competitive short and free programs (and short/original and free ice dances): Always art? Never art? Sometimes? What would be the definitive criteria?
For me, artistic senior level programs should always be art - unfortunately, they are not. I believe this to be espcially true in the early days of CoP where the skaters have specific things to complete in order to be successful. The newbies seem to be making the adjustment and I assume that within a year or two, this won't be the case. But as a fan - those rare programs that perfectly combine the artistic qualities that give me goose bumps with the technical and athletic ability that makes this sport is truly awesome to behold...
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
Here are a couple of programs I remember watching with mixed company and the non-skating fans took note and seemed to like be taken in by them.

They are totally different, and the first has a feeling of what many might think of as edgy performance art. The wacky scores give an idea of how innovative and controversial this was in it's day.
I still love it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQKawuklMDc

The second is passionate enough that even a few of the "NFL guys" who typically mocked skating got drawn in. I think it has a universal and timeless beauty that woud be recognized in many cultures as art.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpKHpIC6Yn0
 
Last edited:

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
Thanks and it should work now.
I chose a Dance and Pair team even though I am a bigger fan of singles skating. It seems to me choreographically speaking there have been many wonderful programs over the years from the teams, both competitive and in show skating.

The D/M program I linked was not skated cleanly but it doesn't matter. The program itself feels like a work of art to me and credit must go to Moskvina as well.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
And I also think that [Dick Button] focusing on aesthetic commentary in a competitive context at the expense of explaining fine points of technique and rules did a disservice to the sport as sport.

I have to disagree about that. I think Dick Button did a great service to lay audience members who were fuzzy asbout exactly why one performance was a wow and another, equally competent, was a dud.

One year it was the layback. Dick was merciless in criticising unesthetic positions and in praising correct ones. (The next year every lady had improved her layback position. :) )

Get all the way down in your sit spin. This pair is wasting the music. That spiral position is just plain ugly. His arms are too stiff. She is not reaching out to the audience. He is not utilizing the whole ice surface.

I always found that sort of commentary to be interesting and enlightening. More so than, that triple flip gets 5.5 base value but the edge was questionable, so there might be a deduction in GOE.
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
I have to disagree about that. I think Dick Button did a great service to lay audience members who were fuzzy asbout exactly why one performance was a wow and another, equally competent, was a dud.

One year it was the layback. Dick was merciless in criticising unesthetic positions and in praising correct ones. (The next year every lady had improved her layback position. :) )

Get all the way down in your sit spin. This pair is wasting the music. That spiral position is just plain ugly. His arms are too stiff. She is not reaching out to the audience. He is not utilizing the whole ice surface.

I always found that sort of commentary to be interesting and enlightening. More so than, that triple flip gets 5.5 base value but the edge was questionable, so there might be a deduction in GOE.

As Carol Heiss once pointed out, in the early days of televised figure skating the viewers were totally clueless. At Squaw Valley the vast majority of Americans had never seen a figure skating competition.

By 1968 little had changed other than we saw a bit more skating on TV.

Those who think new or casual TV viewers of today get it anymore are kidding themselves.
A broadcaster's comment about plus or minus goe means nothing to someone if they don't know what goe is in the first place.

Some have said American TV has failed and let the fans down and the fading popularity of skating in USA is the fault of TV and it's broadcasters.

I disagree and find that an inward, self absorbed type of thinking that fails to accept that the vast majority of Americans do not care about skating.

The majority of viewers do not care how the CoP works. Skating was a minor part of USA Pop/sport culture years ago and is barely a blip on the radar these days.

Don't blame the announcers, they call it like they see it and their job is not to cater to less than 1% of ther viewers.

It is fair to criticize perceived shortcomings of Button (or anyone else) but on the whole I think US Skating owes a debt of gratitiude to him that is hard to measure.
 
Last edited:

Robeye

Final Flight
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
i have to disagree about that. I think dick button did a great service to lay audience members who were fuzzy asbout exactly why one performance was a wow and another, equally competent, was a dud.

One year it was the layback. Dick was merciless in criticising unesthetic positions and in praising correct ones. (the next year every lady had improved her layback position. :) )

get all the way down in your sit spin. This pair is wasting the music. That spiral position is just plain ugly. His arms are too stiff. She is not reaching out to the audience. He is not utilizing the whole ice surface.

I always found that sort of commentary to be interesting and enlightening. More so than, that triple flip gets 5.5 base value but the edge was questionable, so there might be a deduction in goe.

hernando said:
those who think new or casual tv viewers of today get it anymore are kidding themselves.
A broadcaster's comment about plus or minus goe means nothing to someone if they don't know what goe is in the first place.

Some have said american tv has failed and let the fans down and the fading popularity of skating in usa is the fault of tv and it's broadcasters.

I disagree and find that an inward, self absorbed type of thinking that fails to accept that the vast majority of americans do not care about skating.

The majority of viewers do not care how the cop works. Skating was a minor part of usa pop/sport culture years ago and is barely a blip on the radar these days.

Don't blame the announcers, they call it like they see it and their job is not to cater to less than 1% of ther viewers.
I agree with both of you, and I'll take a stab at a synthesis:

I'll go out on a limb and speculate that the vast majority of figure skating audiences (maybe places like Canada excepted, in deference to ImaginaryPogue ;)) care about the sporting and the artistic aspects of figure skating at very different levels of granularity.

-As far as the sporting side is concerned, most of those who watch only care on a rough-grained level. That is to say, they care primarily about the result (who won? who medalled? Is it close or a blowout? (both can be exciting). Which is no different, actually, from many casual fans of football); to the extent that there is more detailed interest, it's confined to whether the jump was obviously spectacular to the naked eye in real time. I would bet that 99% of viewers can't tell the difference between a salchow and a milk cow, let alone between a lutz and a flip, and further, don't really care to know. Some may be able to vaguely distinguish a triple from a double, but that's about it.

I've thought for a long time that the only technical aspect that most viewers truly appreciate, because it's intuitive and natural, is the GOE aspect of jumps. The speed, height, ice coverage, and flow, even the air position to some extent, can be visually understood almost immediately by even untutored viewers. And don't even start about spins and spirals; most viewers, it seems to me, aren't even aware that these are sporting elements at all, and probably assume that they are part of the artistic repertoire.

-On the other hand, I do think that the majority of lay viewers focus on the "aesthetic" aspects with much greater attention and in more fine-grained detail. I speculate that this is because the average viewer has a certain amount of confidence, using his/her native abilities and innate standards as the primary instruments, to perceive and value examples of artistic beauty.

In my view, most viewers, at least at a subconscious level, believe in the existence of some objective criteria (in the epistemological sense of being commonly shared, if not in the strictly metaphysical sense of being completely explicable from first principles and axioms) for concepts such as beauty and emotional affect as applied to human beings.

It is analogous to, say, a colleague walking up to you to offer congratulations on your promotion; we are born with an innate emotional radar, and make immediate and intuitive judgments based on a plethora of cues, including the body's "language" and rhythms, and the tone of voice, as to the human, emotional truth: is that cheese-eating grin actually representative of true good wishes, or is it a false and forced action? My theory is that audiences assume that, at the most basic level, the artistic aspect of skating is something similar. And I dare say that I think they may be right. This is my "Wisdom of Crowds" theory of figure skating judgment.

-COP, in my view, was, like Magna Carta, instituted to provide assurances of good conduct by those who ruled with an authoritarian hand to those who were simmering in revolt, including the skaters as well as the great unwashed (we the viewers). Although, as with many such documents, some will argue that COP is honored more in the breach than in the observance, it was necessary under the circumstances created by the judging scandals.

-If my analysis is correct, however, those who advocate focus on the arcane technical aspects in television commentary are confusing the impetus for COP (technical rigor in judging) with the audience's motive for watching (which I argue is very much on the artistic and holistic side).

This is why I agree that people generally enjoy commentators like Dick Button, because the comments emphasize things that they are already paying attention to, and which are helpful in sharpening a facility of perception that viewers already possess. By contrast, droning on about edges and quarter-turns comes across as a dreary series of teaching moments, and cause a lot of viewers to go glassy-eyed, like Ben Stein's class in Ferris Bueller's Day Off. I personally prefer commentaries like Dick Button's, with technical commentary in small and strategically placed doses. You can't teach if the students don't want to pay attention, especially when they have the option to jump to another class if they're bored.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Some may be able to vaguely distinguish a triple from a double, but that's about it.

The number of rotations is in the mind of the beholder. :) I went to a local club show featuring performers of all ages and skill levels. I took copious notes of each element, the swifter to rush back to my keyboard and shoot off a report to Golden Skate. Almost all of the higher level performers did outstanding double Axels. :rock:

The next poster wrote, dear Mathman, no one in that show did a double Axel. They were all singles. Expect headliner Yuka Sato :love:, who, by the way, did a double toe loop as her other jump, not a triple flip. (My excuse in the case of Sato -- my eyes were all teary from having been overborn by the strains of Amazing Grace.)

Robeye said:
*the rest of the post*

Off tpic: May I say, that was beautifully paragraphed?

Such a trivial matter, and yet...:cool: (When you mention both epistemology and metaphysics in the same sentence, that paragraph had better be only one sentence long. :) )

One tiny detail to add about what most viewers are able to see and evaluate on the technical side -- falling down is a negative.

OK, one more tiny detail. I think in the case of truly jaw-dropping spinners, like Stephane Lambiel, the audience can notice that something out of the ordinary is going on. In my opinion, this can't happen any more. Under CoP the skaters are too busy counting how many revolutions they are doing on each edge of each foot in how many ungainly positions.

I don't know what I think about that. Gkelly has convinced me that this makes the sport more sporty because only the best technicians can do it.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
As Carol Heiss once pointed out, in the early days of televised figure skating the viewers were totally clueless. At Squaw Valley the vast majority of Americans had never seen a figure skating competition.

By 1968 little had changed other than we saw a bit more skating on TV.

Those who think new or casual TV viewers of today get it anymore are kidding themselves.
A broadcaster's comment about plus or minus goe means nothing to someone if they don't know what goe is in the first place.

Some have said American TV has failed and let the fans down and the fading popularity of skating in USA is the fault of TV and it's broadcasters.

I disagree and find that an inward, self absorbed type of thinking that fails to accept that the vast majority of Americans do not care about skating.

The majority of viewers do not care how the CoP works. Skating was a minor part of USA Pop/sport culture years ago and is barely a blip on the radar these days.

Don't blame the announcers, they call it like they see it and their job is not to cater to less than 1% of ther viewers.

It is fair to criticize perceived shortcomings of Button (or anyone else) but on the whole I think US Skating owes a debt of gratitiude to him that is hard to measure.
Interesting quote by Heiss.

Hernando - When Heiss skated at Squaw Valley. I don't think the arrangements for figure skating on TV were really in place like how many TV sets were in America, and what else was on? Americans thought only of show skating, so Carol is correct, they had no clue of competitive skating. It wasn't till Wide World of Sports with its snippets of skating, particularly Peggy Flemming right after the horrible plane crash killing the US Worlds Team, that people began to sit up and take an interest in the Sport. Ice Shows continued to rule the atmosphere, but Dorothy Hammil with the layered haircut was getting a lot of hype. Unfortunately for her, show skating was going down hill. The expression, if you've seen one, you've seen them all, yet she bought Capades. Small shows still continued, but the biggest influence in the Sport of Figure Skating came about from TV when ABC took the risk of showing some competition.

This is when Button shined in commenting on the tricks, like that dangerous forward outside edge (axel), but his aesthetics were based on good positions like the attitude position in a layback spin. He served the uninitiated well. Unfortunately, he never got to do the Olys because of contractual problems but his influence certainly made Figure Skating the Gem in the Crown of the Olympics. Maybe we need another personality like him to bring back the glory days.
 
Last edited:

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
This is when Button shined in commenting on the tricks, like that dangerous forward outside edge (axel), but his aesthetics were based on good positions like the attitude position in a layback spin. He served the uninitiated well. Unfortunately, he never got to do the Olys because of contractual problems but his influence certainly made Figure Skating the Gem in the Crown of the Olympics. Maybe we need another personality like him to bring back the glory days.

I'm pretty sure in the early days when the olympics were on ABC he DID get to do the olympics... pretty sure he commentated during Hamilton's first Olympics, and four years later when he won. And I could be wrong but I think he was with Jim McKay when Hamill and Flemming won their titles. Again I could be wrong, I know NBC had 88 olys, but then it went to CBS for the 90s (where hamilton got to take over as the voice of skating in teh games)
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
I'm pretty sure in the early days when the olympics were on ABC he DID get to do the olympics... pretty sure he commentated during Hamilton's first Olympics, and four years later when he won. And I could be wrong but I think he was with Jim McKay when Hamill and Flemming won their titles. Again I could be wrong, I know NBC had 88 olys, but then it went to CBS for the 90s (where hamilton got to take over as the voice of skating in teh games)
I'm not sure if ABC ever did the Olympics. CBS and NBC kind of alternated. Can you check it out? It's a minor point since the discussion is more about Button's ability to enhance the sport for the general audience, and Heiss' view of the clueless public in 1960(?)
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
from wikipedia

Button provided commentary for CBS's broadcast of the 1960 Winter Olympics, launching a decades-long career in television broadcast journalism. Button again did commentary for CBS's broadcast of the 1961 United States Figure Skating Championships. Then, beginning in 1962, he worked as a figure skating analyst for ABC Sports, which had acquired the rights to the U.S. Championships as well as the 1962 World Figure Skating Championships. During ABC's coverage of figure skating events in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, Button became the sport's best-known analyst, well-known for his frank and often caustic appraisal of skaters' performances. He won an Emmy Award in 1981 for Outstanding Sports Personality – Analyst.[5] Although other U.S. television networks aired the Winter Olympics from the 1990s onward, Button still appeared on ABC's broadcasts of the U.S. and World Figure Skating Championships until ABC removed them from its broadcast schedule in 2008. Button's reputation and influence in the sport of figure skating therefore long outlasted his own competitive and performing career.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
I'm not sure if ABC ever did the Olympics. CBS and NBC kind of alternated. Can you check it out? It's a minor point since the discussion is more about Button's ability to enhance the sport for the general audience, and Heiss' view of the clueless public in 1960(?)


ABC did most of the Olympics for many years. I can guarantee they did the 1984 Olympics, because at the end of Torvill and Dean's phenomenal long program (all 6.0's in the second mark, I believe), Peggy Fleming said spontaneously, "We are so lucky to be here tonight!" They also did the 1988 Olympics. I believe they did '76 and '80 also, but I can't speak for earlier than that.
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
from wikipedia

Thanks forthe link Toni. I am sure Joesitz was not questioning Button's influence and was just raising an interesting point.
I can't remember the exact details either, but do remember Button interviewing Peggy, Janet, Dorothy, even Irina and many more after major competitions.

He was the voice of figure skating to Americans for decades and I think those of us who have followed skating for a long time are better off for his contributions.

One thing we can all agree on is that Button could be quirky, from his use of language to his undying praise of Sasha's back.

And why not, he knew what he was talking about and like Dorothy, Sahsa's beautiful back was special.

Skating is different than most "sports."
Button's colorful use of language enhanced and never tried to hide the marvelous difference that distinguishes figure skating from most other sports

I can't imagine having followed skating for so many years without Button. He is and will remain forever part of my lifelong love affair with skating.
 
Top