A short, perspective-rich history of sport in France

0

Hans Bolling
PhD in History, Independent scholar


David Owen
Aux Armes!: Sport and the French, an English perspective
77 pages, hardcover, ill
London: Forward Press 2024
ISBN 978-1-915237-39-2

What distinguishes French sport in relation to English? As far as I know, one major difference between English and French sport is that the English were at the forefront when I came to the invention and diffusion of modern sport, while the French played a leading role when it came to the creation of international sport organizations. The English did not take an active interest in establishing international sport associations. On the contrary, the English tended to be satisfied with their own national organizations, arguing that they could be responsible also for the leadership that various sports needed in order to function well at an international level. Instead, initiatives for purely international organizations came from other nations, not least from France (and to some extent Sweden), as has been pointed out clearly by Allen Guttmann: “While the French lagged behind the British in the invention and diffusion of modern sports, they were unquestionably the leaders when it came to the creation of international sports organizations.”

What distinguishes French sport research in relation to English? That is a more difficult question for me to answer as I do not read French and because of the dominant position of English within sport historical research. English-speakers thus have an advantage that you do not have to jealous of to see as a little unfair. But in short, my view is that the English sport research tends to be well-written and empirical while the French is more problematizing and theoretical. This may of course be due to selection; the French research has to take a detour through a translator in order to reach my reading list.

The big difference between the French and the English sport, and society at large, according to Owen, and he makes a good case for is, is the acceptance of governmental interference.

To many readers, these differences may appear to be of interest mostly to academics in their ivory towers, simply of little or no interest to a sports-interested public. However, the English journalist David Owen has taken an interest in differences between French and English sport and written a brief history of French sport, Aux Armes! Sport and the French, an English perspective and thus has a bit more to contribute to the relationship between French and English sport. It is all done in twenty chapters and less than 70 pages.

At the outset it must be stated that Owen confirms Guttmann’s observation of the French as eminent when it comes to the creation of international sport organizations and competitions. He directs a lot of attention, considering what a thin and airily set book he has written, to some of sport’s biggest events: the Tour de France, the Olympic Games and the Football World Cup, all phenomena created by French sports administrators.

The big difference between the French and the English sport, and society at large, according to Owen, and he makes a good case for is, is the acceptance of governmental interference. It is most interesting parts of the book and I want more of it when he discusses it in chapters called: “Deep State – France is a nation that tolerates Big Government in sport as elsewhere” and “The National Interest – 20th-cenetury governments of all political stripes sought to use sport for their own ends”. The book would have benefited from discussions of the relevance of social class and the choices of sports and maybe some neo-Marxist inspired interpretation of sport as an ideological state apparatus, i.e. finding some inspiration in French research into sport from sociological/historical perspective. It is hard to avoid asking if the result of the comparison would be different if the countries sporting life had been compared using another independent variable instead of nation, for example class.

Tour de France. (Photo by Rob Wingate on Unsplash)

With that said, I really enjoyed reading the book. Stories about the 1900 Paris Olympics and some of the more odd activities organized in conjunction with them and Suzanne Lenglen and the four male tennis-musketeers coincides with more contemporary stories about multi-ethnic sports teams and athletes. The reader learns about the differences between the English and the French and at the same time, the book tells an interesting if not complete history of sport in France. There are many worse way for persons interested in sport to spend their time than with this concise and easy-to-read book.

The most important difference between French and English sport has to do with the relationship between the state and sport. For more than a century the French state has sought to use sport in the interest of the nation, which clearly came into view in connection with the Olympic Games in Paris this summer. But the countries also are more similar than the English often like to admit; after all the English government had no qualms when it came to use the 2012 London Olympics for political gains. Something one should not be too surprised by, when taking into account that the distance between Paris and London still are considerably shorter than the distance between Brittany and Languedoc.

The chosen format, essays shorter than ordinary magazine articles, means that Owen has limited opportunity to add anything new for informed readers on those well explored subjects. That, however, does not have to be a problem. The book can instead serve as an appetizer. Since it is short and easily comprehensible a reader can with little effort find out if the subjects are of interest and then move on from Aux Armes! to more in-depth literature, and if French sport is not the readers cup of tea reading Aux Armes! did not cost much time and the reader can quickly move on, but in doing so being a more well-read person.

In the introduction to Richard Holt’s classical book about sport in France, Sport and society in modern France from 1981, we are told: “An exploratory French work on the sociology of sport published in 1964 complained of the almost complete absence of books dealing with sport from a sociological or historical perspective.” This was true to some extent even when Holt wrote his book, but today almost half a century later, the reality is completely different. Holt would no longer be able to write: “The histories of sport which have been written so far are not the work of historians but of popular journalists or important officials in the world of sport itself… From such works we learn little of direct relevance to the understanding of sport as a social phenomenon.” Even if David Owen’s Aux Armes! Sport and the French, an English perspective is written by a journalist it is written by a very well-informed journalist.

Copyright © Hans Bolling 2025

References

Allen Guttmann, “Sports”, in Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, vol. 5 (ed.) Peter N. Stearns. Detroit: Scribner, 2001.
Richard Holt, Sport and Society in Modern France. London: Macmillan, 1981.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.