So, what did everyone think of the Oscars this year?
Loved Hugh Jackman, loved the return to a more intimate, relaxed, approach – size, as I’ve said on this blog before, is not everything! – and LOVED the way all the acting nominees got a personal affirmation from a previous winner. How great to have that peer recognition!
But it got me thinking about the concept of competition and prizes as a mark of validation. Does the winning of a prize make someone a better artist? Is it necessary to have that validation to feel good about oneself? How do we, as viewers of competitions, feed into that energy? Do we value people because of what they win?
I don’t follow sports but I do barrack for friends who are shortlisted for literary prizes, get a thrill when Aussies win Oscars, watch the occasional equestrian event. And in some environments I can be intensely competitive – just watch me in a computer class; pick the geek not wanting to show her age…
But of course, when we stand out of the way enough to let the truly amazing and brilliant through, it’s not really coming from us at all. The value we bring to the things we do comes from two things: our capacity to get our egos out of the way so great ideas can come through; and our willingness to put in whatever’s needed to polish the gem so it sparkles.
Perhaps competition is simply a recognition of that capacity to stand aside; and the commitment to the work. And I can live with that.
Thought I still don’t get football and cricket 
Posted by Graham Storrs on February 25, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Janette,
I’ve got to say, I don’t get any of it. I don’t like sports, I never watch the oscars – or any prize show, and I never know or care who got a Booker or whatever. I didn’t even go to my own degree ceremony. I was just not interested.
Of course, it’s nice if people you know get an accolade – not just because it will help them get noticed and sell their stuff, but also because they will be pleased about it.
I have entered one or two competitions lately, but only where the prize is a larger cash amount than ‘winning’ in the ’sell-your-story-to-a-magazine’ lottery and where the odds look better.
If I ever get a Hugo, I’ll almost certainly be more pleased for my publisher and agent than I will be for myself.
I’d say it was a low testosterone thing, only women seem just as competitive as men. (Or is it that you only notice the competitive ones?)
Posted by janettedalgliesh on February 25, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Yeah, I do find most sports a complete mystery. I kinda get the thrill of participating – I used to ski and I’ve ridden horses – but I don’t understand team sports at all. And I especially don’t understand why people get so excited when a team they support wins. Truly folks, when Australia wins the cricket, only about a dozen guys can actually justify get excited – sitting on the couch yelling does not constitute participation!!!
Phew, rant over. I needed that. Yeah, I know it’s a tribal thing and perhaps THAT’S the missing gene in my makeup. I have tried, honest, but it just ain’t there.
And no Graham, it’s not a testosterone thing. I once shared a lift at the Telstra Dome (when it was Colonial Stadium) with some Very Devoted Collingwood Fans – three salt of the earth old women dressed head to toe in Collingwood gear, badges and stickers. One got the idea my husband had something to do with the Other Team and he was genuinely afraid. Hilarious!!! But also scary…