Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. An Organ of Student Opinion at Victoria College, Wellington, N.Z. Vol. 1, No. 6 April 13, 1938

Sportsmanship?

Sportsmanship?

Dear "Salient."—"The British reputation for sportsmanship." whatever its own value may be, will certainly suffer if it has many supporters as hot-headed and illogical as your correspondent, U.G.H. Actually. I do not know why he dragged sportsmanship into the matter of the reported interview with Count von Luckner at all, unless he is one of those semi-articulate persons who use the loose term sportsmanship to cover any moral code which suits their Immediate purpose, which they wish to appear altruistic.

Your correspondent defines the essence of sportsmanship as respect for an antagonist. This depends not on sportsmanship but on the antagonist. For the essence of respect is that it should be entertained for something true and something as it is. Does U.G.H. respect a fine man, who happens to be an antagonist, because it is "the sporting thing to do"? But respect that accepts without attempting to criticise, either favourably or adversely, is no better than puerile hero-worship. Is it sacrilege to mention that Caesar has a wart on his nose, and is Caesar any the less a great man because his physical qualities are considered as well as his mental and military, achievements?

If U.G.H. thinks that the article in question purported to be an analysis, sober or drunk, of Count von Luckner's political theories, he is mistaken. It was what it set out to be—a truthful account, without the omissions which would in the eyes of U.G.H. make it "snorting."

If a foreign visitor can be insulted by the mere publication of a true description of himself, he should not be "distinguished." And If we are told that he spits and is untidy with his boots, well, did not Caesar have a wart on his nose?

All this being so. I would like to know why your correspondent U.G.H. presumes to rebuke an impartial observer for telling the truth, which U.G.H. labels "an unpleasant incident." and to anathematise him [unclear: or] his "politically one-sided mind.' "his immature political principles." "his vindictive childishness and appallingly bad taste"—figments of what must be a very unpleasant imagination?—J.E. (This letter has been abridged)