- Email: [email protected]
Animal sports and popular culture: Problems of continuity
History Printed
o/European Ideas, Vol in Great Britam
I I. pp 501-508.
ANIMAL SPORTS
1989
0191-6599189 $3 00 + 0 04 5 1990 Pergamon Press plc
AND POPULAR CULTURE: OF CONTINUITY
PROBLEMS
R. STOKVIS*
1. INTRODUCTION The central thesis of this paper is that some recent illegal or deviant activities in the field of sports must be interpreted as continuations of popular pastimes which were repressed during the nineteenth century. Besides this the paper will demonstrate that the study of traditional popular culture does not need to be an objective in itself, but that knowledge of popular culture can be useful to understand present-day problems. An interesting aspect of traditional popular culture, defined as the forms and standards of behaviour of the common people during the period between the Renaissance and the rise of industrial societies, is a preference for animal sports,’ in which torturing the animals was part of the fun.2 In many studies of popular culture much attention has been paid to the struggles of people and organisations from the middle classes to repress and prohibit ‘cruel’ animal sports and other uncivilised pastimes.3 Less attention has been given to the possibilities that some prohibited activities had not completely disappeared, but were perpetuated illegally on a local level where they escaped notice. Discussing the origins of recent forms of organised dogfights, this paper is meant as an initial exploration of these possibilities. To support the central thesis, two conditions have to be met: (1) it must be shown that some ‘cruel’ animal sports and other uncivilised pastimes have never completely disappeared during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and (2) the increased publicity and visibility of these activities during the last ten years have to be explained. In order to discuss these specific issues it is necessary to have a general understanding of the relation between modern sports and traditional animal sports.
2. MODERN
SPORTS
AND TRADITIONAL
ANIMAL
SPORTS
From an ahistorical formal viewpoint modern sports may be seen as alternatives to ‘cruel’ animal sports. These latter kind of sports can be divided in three categories: (1) those sports in which animals fight and human beings act as organisers and spectators, such as dogfights, cockfights, bull, bear and badger baitings; (2) sports in which human beings compete together in ‘torturing’ animals such as cat hitting, goose or eel pulling; and (3) fights between human *Sociologisch Institut, Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
van Amsterdam,
Oude Hoogstraat
24, 1012 CE 501
502
R. Stokvis
beings and animals, of which bullfighting is the most well-known example. One may also include in this category ‘fighting the bear’ at fairs. The first and third categories may be classified as spectator sports and the second category as participant sports. With the exception of bullfighting, all these sports were defined illegal during the nineteenth century and gradually disappeared from public view. Somewhat later in the nineteenth century, modern sports became organised and gradually more and more people took part in these new kinds of pastimes, either actively as participants or passively as spectators. Modern sports are characterised by elements of competition, tension and sensation which can be compared with certain characteristics of animal sports. The most important difference is that misuse or maltreatment of animals are exceptions in modern sports. On account of the apparent similarities one may think that modern sports became alternatives to the ‘cruel’ animal sports which had been banned. Yet, a closer look at the development of modern sports shows that for a long time they could not have been alternative pastimes. A central characteristic of modern sports is their formal organisation and regulation on a national and international level. As long as contests in all kinds of activities were held between individuals or groups from the same locality or region the need for standard regulations did not arise. Members of the English aristocracy and gentry were the first to organise contests on a national level. This took place in sports such as cricket, golf and horse-racing. In the eighteenth century they had already formed associations to organise and regulate these activities. In other sports the same took place in the nineteenth century. Various forms of the activities that were organised and regulated had existed on a local level long before the eighteenth century. In most other countries different sporting activities were practised on a local level. Some of these activities were comparable with those in England, such as several kinds of primitive football for example whereas others were not. Just as the ‘cruel’ animal sports they were all part of the traditional popular culture. The genesis of modern sports was a part of the general process of modernisation. In England, from the end ofthe eighteenth century onwards, this process accelerated under the influence of the Industrial Revolution. England became the richest, most powerful and prestigious country in the world. Modern English sports were adopted in other countries by the members of those classes that acquired a central role in the processes of modernisation in their nations. In England as well as in the other countries younger members of the upper levels of society became the first modern sportsmen. From the last decade of the nineteenth century onwards, following the processes of modernisation, the milieux from which participants in sporting activities were recruited enlarged so much, that sports became one of the most important forms of modern popular culture. But in spite of the enormous growth in the number of participants in the Western world, not everyone became active in sports. Especially among members of the lower classes the number of participants remained relatively low for a long period of time. Only during the last years did participation in sports of people from these classes reach the level of the higher classes. Neither did the development of spectator sports closely follow the repression of ‘cruel’ animal sports. In England this repression culminated in 1835 in the Cruelty to Animals Act.4 Large numbers of spectators at soccer and rugby
Animal Sports and Popular Culture
so3
matches only began to appear during the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In Holland the timelag was even wider. Animal sports were repressed during the middle of the nineteenth century5 and big crowds at sportmatches only appeared after the First World War.6 A similar timelag can be seen in France.’ Very little is known about the pastimes of lower class youth during these timelags, but modern sport could not have been an alternative to their traditional pastimes. Even though the actions from the authorities and members of the clerical and intellectual middle classes to repress ‘cruel’ and rough pastimes may have been successful in the national centres of modernisation, it does not seem probable that theiractions reached the lower classes and the slower developing regions of their countries before a really large-scale interest in spectator sports had been aroused and participation in sports had increased. The fact that modern sports are popular throughout the Western world does not mean to say that ‘cruel’ animal sports have been completely prohibited and banned from the public view. The North American rodeo with forty million spectators a year is a relatively innocent example. The most well-known example of the lasting interest in these kinds of sports is the bullfights in certain countries of Southern Europe and Latin America. These events are not only organised for the inhabitants of these countries but also for a great number of tourists from states where animal sports are officially abhorred. These tourists do not naturally all belong to the lower classes. One may conclude that the revulsion against ‘cruel’ animal sports is not generally shared in the Western world.
3. ‘CRUEL’
ANIMAL SPORTS AND TRADITIONAL POPULAR CULTURE
Objections to maltreatment of animals have been known to exist since the time of the ancient Greeks. But from the seventeenth century onwards, these kinds of objections were shared by larger social groups. * Only gradually did the social influence of the people that wanted to abolish or repress these pastimes become strong enough to reach their goals. The revulsion many people feel nowadays when they think about animal sports should not interfere with the realisation that these sports used to be very popular. In England bull baiting was a very popular pastime. A bull on a cord that was connected to a pin in the ground had to fight against a number of agressive dogs. Bears, goats and badgers were also used instead of bulls. It was thought better for the quality of the meat that bulls and goats were baited before being slaughtered.9 This was not only a pastime for the common people, but also for members of the higher classes. In 1694 William III entertained Prince Ludwig von Baden with bear baiting, bull sport and cockfights. lo When the protests against animal sports succeeded in getting these sports prohibited, large-scale activities like bull and bear baitings disappeared. But small-scale events, like dog, rat and cockfights, that could be organised secretly, continued to be held for a long time. Even at present clandestine dog fights and badger baitings are being held.“~‘* Perhaps for a long time after the introduction of laws forbidding animal sports, the situation in England did not differ so much from that in Bali in 1958, when Clifford Geertz visited the island and studied the cockfights. Cockfights
504
R. Stokvis
had already become illegal under colonial rule and the Indonesian authorities maintained the law against such activities. Yet, these fights remained the favourite sport of the Balinese, even when from time to time the police raided a cockfight and punished the participants. To Geertz it was quite natural that cockfights, being part of ‘The Balinese Way of Life’, continued in spite of the law.13 In France people also used to be greatly interested in animal sports. In this country a popular form of baiting was held with donkeys. Spectators appreciated the peculiar ferocity of these animals when roused and the kicking power of their hind legs. Next to dogfights also wolf-fights were organised.r4 However, unlike England and Holland, no influential Protestant middle class existed in France that could support initiatives to abolish animal sports. In spite of all kinds of protests, bullfights became a fully commercialised spectator sport in the South. Laws against some animal sports were introduced, but in the North of France cockfighting remained a public pastime with spectators from different social classes until after the Second World War. It became even formally organised and regulated like a modern sport. I5 Only after the 1960’s it lost its supporters and at present lives on in the pubs of small traditional mining communities and industrial suburbsI In Holland many different forms of animal sports continued to exist during the nineteenth century. In a chapter on animal teasing games in his book on popular pastimes; the Dutch scholar Jan ter Gouw summarised 16 of these activities. Several of these were still known in Holland in 1871 when he wrote about the subject. One of these was cat hitting. A cat was put in a cask. This cask was connected with a line that was stretched between two poles. By turns participants in the game had to throw a club at the cask. The winner was the one who broke the cask. The howling of the cat was part of the funI In many European countries cats used to be the most favourite animals to torture.” The degree in which these kinds of pastimes were part of the ‘Dutch way of life’ may be judged from the ‘Eel Revolt’ in 1886. This revolt which took place in a lower class neighbourhood started, when the Amsterdam police tried to stop an illegal eel pulling match on one of the canals. The participating crews in this pastime had to row under a line with a living eel connected to it. A member of each crew had to pull the slippery animal off the line. The revolt, which started when the police cut the line, lasted three days. The army had to assist the police and in the end 26 people were counted dead and many more wounded.19 In 1986 a case against goose pulling was brought before a Dutch lawcourt. The goose would be killed before the pulling started. As no disturbance of the public order was expected the judge allowed the pastime.*O The activities of well-to-do townsmen and educated country clergymen to repress ‘cruel’ animal sports can be interpreted in terms of class and status struggles. They opposed the hunting privileges of the aristocracy and their attitudes towards animals. The fighting spirit and courage that aristocrats found in animal sports meant senseless violence to the members of the middle classes. The repression of the animal sports of the lower classes was part of the general efforts of members of the middle classes to civilise the lower orders. More general changes were also involved. With urbanisation and industrialisation the dependence on animals in general diminished for an increasing number of
Animal Sports and Popular Culture
505
people. Some animals became pets to be cared for. Affection and sympathy towards animals increased.2’ The continuing interest in bullfighting and to a lesser degree in cockfighting, dogfighting and badger baiting shows that in spite of all the developments in the opposite direction, many people are still interested in animal sports. One may expect this interest to be mostly developed with those people that have been marginally involved in the processes of urbanisation and industrialisation and the accompanying civilising efforts of members of the middle classes. It is not suprising to read that at present in the American rural South dogfighting and cockfighting on eighteenth-century models take place surreptitiously but with an enthusiastic following” and that Swiss mountain farmers regularly organise cowfights. In general one can conclude that the process of civilisation in Western societies should be studied as a very differentiated process. The intensity ofthe changes in behavioural standards and the accompanying affections varies in the different categories of the population. The state enforces those behavioural standards that have been sanctioned by laws. The majority of the people who do not share these behavioural standards may be kept from surpassing the laws because of possible sanctions against them. Their interest in illegal activities remains latent. But it is always possible that some people prefer taking the risk of sanctions to abandoning the activities they like.
4. PRESENT-DAY
DOG
FIGHTS
IN HOLLAND
The students of phenomena which alarm the authorities and the general public always have to make a distinction between the causes ofthe alarm and the causes of the phenomenon itself. One could make a two-by-two table in which significant and insignificant phenomena are crossed with the alarm or absence of alarm about them. Dogfights might be classified among the insignificant phenomena that cause much alarm. Pit Bull Terriers have been imported since 1979.24 In 1988, about 10,000 dogs belonging to this type of breed are living in Holland, this amounts to 0.5% ofthe Dutch dog population. 25Experts estimate the yearly number of fights to be a few hundred.26 More significant is the yearly number of 17,000 people who are bitten by dogs and treated in hospitals. The number of cases in which Pit Bulls are involved varies in different parts of the country. The average is about 5%, but in a few larger communities this percentage is substantially higher.27 The facts that Pit Bulls are specially bred to tight, recently have been introduced in Holland and are inclined to bite more than most other breeds directs the attention specially to them. The scale of the alarm is not only seen from the large amount of publicity in newspapers and weekly magazines, but also from the fact that a governmental committee was established to give advice on the agressive behaviour of dogs. The first impetus to establish a committee arose from alarms about dog fights. Later the task of the committee was extended to affairs concerning the general problem of agressive dogs.2* Taking the history of animal sports and their repression into account, it is
R. Stokvis
506
possible to understand the origins of the recent interest in dogfights as well as the alarm they cause. It was not until the 1980’s that clandestine dogfights were heard of in Holland. Here the interest in these fights coincided with an increasing popularity of other American and English sports and sporting customs such as darts, snooker, betting on horses and illegal gambling. The Pit Bull Terriers that nowadays are used for dogfights in Holland originally came from the United States. In this country as well as in England these fights were never completely repressed. The American dogs were bred specially for fighting using English Staffordshire terriers, a breed that is descended from the original English fighting dogs. They are a little bigger than their English forebears. The terminology that is used in Holland in connection with these dogs and their fighting is almost completely English. It is borrowed from American literature on the subject (Nrc-Hbl. 29-7-‘88). One of the most famous breeders of Pit Bulls in Holland is an American Vietnam veteran.29 During the 1980’s, due to the drug trade and illegal gambling, a large, internationally orientated underworld established itself in Holland. Within this world the latent interest in ‘cruel’ animal sports would become manifest. People of social groups in which the dislike of violence and the maltreatment of animals was not strongly internalised found dogfights an enjoyable pastime. The custom of betting on the fights enhances their attractivity. Foreigners and Dutchmen who were experienced in clandestine dog fights could cater for the demand of this pastime. Knowing the repression of ‘cruel’ animal sports from not so very long ago, one can understand the reasons for the ample attention that is given to rumours about dogfights. On one side the interest in this subject is based upon the moral indignation of those social groups that dislike animal sports. To them dogfights attack the moral standards ofthe civilised society they are trying to maintain. But on the other side these fights and the rumours about them do appeal to the latent interest in animal sports of all those people that have not internalised these moral standards so strongly. This situation makes dogfights an ideal topic for journalists. They can catch the attention of very different groups by writing articles on the subject. Of course the same applies to sociologists.
CONCLUSIONS Knowledge of the manifest interest in ‘cruel’ animal sports in the recent past throughout large sections of the population offers interesting perspectives for several aspects of traditional and modern popular culture. This paper has explored how repressed animal sports may have continued to exist illegally and secretly and how one of these sports, dogfights, has recently attracted the attention of the general public in Holland. This line of inquiry may be extended. Traditional popular culture is not only characterised by a preference for ‘cruel’ animal sports, but also by two other traits that have met with the disapproval of the intellectual and religious middle classes and the state: betting and fighting. The same line of inquiry could be followed if one were to write a paper on either of these activities.
507
Animal Sports and Popular Culture
Spectators of nearly all the Dutch traditional sporting pastimes used to place bets and the participants competed for money prizes. As to this Ter Gouw generalises by writing that for 99,999 out of 100,000 people getting money was the biggest pastime. 3oThis custom of betting and competing for money was also repressed during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Not only by the state but also, with the introduction of amateur rules, by voluntary sporting organisations.-” Yet, these customs never completely disappeared and during the 1970’s and 1980’s their revival could have been observed. The tendency to light is a very general trait of traditional popular cultures. During all kinds of occasions, such as markets, fairs or weddings where many people used to gather, people would start lights sooner or later.32 Nearly everywhere in Europe groups of young men and boys from neighbouring villages used to fight against each other from time to time.%36. During the twentieth century this custom had become restricted to lower class gangs in big cities, and, which was less noticed, to groups of supporters from soccerclubs of neighbouring villages. The present-day phenomenon of soccer hooliganism could be better understood if it were to be interpreted as a revival under modern circumstances of the traditional tendency of groups of youngsters to fight each other The work of Dunning and his colleagues on soccer hooliganism demonstrates the fruitfulness of this approach.37 In this paper the ‘seamy’ side of popular culture is stressed. Knowledge of the pleasure people used to find in the maltreatment of animals and in betting and fighting may help to see the relativity of some problematic tendencies of modern popular culture. The commercial organisation of modern popular culture traces back to customs of betting and competing for money prizes which were characteristics of many traditional popular pastimes. The cruelty and violence children nowadays are confronted with on television, could have been seen in earlier centuries but then in reality, as part of their daily lives. Ruud Stokvis Sociological
Institut, Amsterdam
NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
K. Thomas, Man and the Natural World (London: Allen Lane, 1983), pp. 143-144. R. Darnton, The Great Cat Massacre (New York: Basic Books, 1984), p.90. P. Bailey, Leisure and Class in Victorian England (London: Routledge, 1978). R.W. Malcolmson, Popular Recreations in English Society 1700-1850 (Cambridge CUP, 1973, 1981), p. 130. J. Ter Gouw, De Volksvermaken. Ver. ‘Vrienden van het Amsterdam-bock’, n.p., n.y. (Amsterdam, 1871), p. 79. C. Miermans, Voetbal in Nederland (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1955), p. 166. R. Holt, Sport and Society in Modern France (London: Macmillan, 1981), pp. 76, 127. K. Thomas, op. cir., p. 154. Ibid., p. 93. R.W. Malcolmson, op. cit., p. 118. ToepoeIs hondenencyclopedie, 7th edn., n.y. (Amsterdam: Becht). R.W. Malcolmson, op. cit., p. 135.
508
R. Stokvis
13. C. Geertz, Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight. In The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), p. 414. 14. R. Holt, op. cit., p. 127. 15. Ibid., p. 108ff. 16. Ibid., p. 121. 17. J. Ter Gouw, op. cit., p. 350. 18. R. Darnton, op. cit., p. 90. 19. H. Brugmans, Geschiedenis van Amsterdam. Dee1 6 (Utrecht/Antwerpen: Het Spectrum, 1973), p. 161. 20. Raad Van State, Uitspraak van 22 December 1986, nr. R03. 85. 1347, p. 1. 21. K. Thomas, op. cit., pp. 181-191. 22. R.D. Mandell, Sport, a Cultural History (New York: Col. U.P., 1984), p. 179. 23. G. Brands, De baas wil bloed zien. In Kok (December 1987), pp. 70-73. 24. I. Harms and J. Koelewijn, De pitbullterrier, oersterke underdog. In Bijvoegsef Vrij Nederlund, No. 39 (26 September 87), p. 17. 25. Commissie van Advies Agressief Gedrag bij Honden. Agressief gedrag bij honden. Den Haag (September 1988), p. 11. 26, Platform (July/August 1988), Min v. Landbouw en Visserij, ‘s Gravenhage, p. 22. 27. Commissie, p. 12. 28. Platform, p. 17. 29. I. Harms and J. Koelewijn, op. cit., p. 21. 30. J. Ter Gouw, op. cit., p. 614. 31. R. Stokvis, Strijd over Sport. Van Loghum Sluterus (Deventer 1979). 32. J. Ter Gouw, op. cit., pp. 21, 76, 465. 33. P. Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (New York: Harper, 1978), p. 187. 34. R. Holt, op. cit., pp. 132ff. 35. K. Dobrowolski, Peasant Traditional Culture. In T. Shanin, Peasants und Peasant Societies (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971, 1979), p. 294. 36. E. Weber, Peasants into Frenchmen (London: Chatto 8~ Windus, 1977), p. 384. 37. E. Dunning, P. Murphy and J. Williams, The Roots of Football Hooliganism (London: Routledge, 1988) p. 201.
o/European Ideas, Vol in Great Britam
I I. pp 501-508.
ANIMAL SPORTS
1989
0191-6599189 $3 00 + 0 04 5 1990 Pergamon Press plc
AND POPULAR CULTURE: OF CONTINUITY
PROBLEMS
R. STOKVIS*
1. INTRODUCTION The central thesis of this paper is that some recent illegal or deviant activities in the field of sports must be interpreted as continuations of popular pastimes which were repressed during the nineteenth century. Besides this the paper will demonstrate that the study of traditional popular culture does not need to be an objective in itself, but that knowledge of popular culture can be useful to understand present-day problems. An interesting aspect of traditional popular culture, defined as the forms and standards of behaviour of the common people during the period between the Renaissance and the rise of industrial societies, is a preference for animal sports,’ in which torturing the animals was part of the fun.2 In many studies of popular culture much attention has been paid to the struggles of people and organisations from the middle classes to repress and prohibit ‘cruel’ animal sports and other uncivilised pastimes.3 Less attention has been given to the possibilities that some prohibited activities had not completely disappeared, but were perpetuated illegally on a local level where they escaped notice. Discussing the origins of recent forms of organised dogfights, this paper is meant as an initial exploration of these possibilities. To support the central thesis, two conditions have to be met: (1) it must be shown that some ‘cruel’ animal sports and other uncivilised pastimes have never completely disappeared during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and (2) the increased publicity and visibility of these activities during the last ten years have to be explained. In order to discuss these specific issues it is necessary to have a general understanding of the relation between modern sports and traditional animal sports.
2. MODERN
SPORTS
AND TRADITIONAL
ANIMAL
SPORTS
From an ahistorical formal viewpoint modern sports may be seen as alternatives to ‘cruel’ animal sports. These latter kind of sports can be divided in three categories: (1) those sports in which animals fight and human beings act as organisers and spectators, such as dogfights, cockfights, bull, bear and badger baitings; (2) sports in which human beings compete together in ‘torturing’ animals such as cat hitting, goose or eel pulling; and (3) fights between human *Sociologisch Institut, Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
van Amsterdam,
Oude Hoogstraat
24, 1012 CE 501
502
R. Stokvis
beings and animals, of which bullfighting is the most well-known example. One may also include in this category ‘fighting the bear’ at fairs. The first and third categories may be classified as spectator sports and the second category as participant sports. With the exception of bullfighting, all these sports were defined illegal during the nineteenth century and gradually disappeared from public view. Somewhat later in the nineteenth century, modern sports became organised and gradually more and more people took part in these new kinds of pastimes, either actively as participants or passively as spectators. Modern sports are characterised by elements of competition, tension and sensation which can be compared with certain characteristics of animal sports. The most important difference is that misuse or maltreatment of animals are exceptions in modern sports. On account of the apparent similarities one may think that modern sports became alternatives to the ‘cruel’ animal sports which had been banned. Yet, a closer look at the development of modern sports shows that for a long time they could not have been alternative pastimes. A central characteristic of modern sports is their formal organisation and regulation on a national and international level. As long as contests in all kinds of activities were held between individuals or groups from the same locality or region the need for standard regulations did not arise. Members of the English aristocracy and gentry were the first to organise contests on a national level. This took place in sports such as cricket, golf and horse-racing. In the eighteenth century they had already formed associations to organise and regulate these activities. In other sports the same took place in the nineteenth century. Various forms of the activities that were organised and regulated had existed on a local level long before the eighteenth century. In most other countries different sporting activities were practised on a local level. Some of these activities were comparable with those in England, such as several kinds of primitive football for example whereas others were not. Just as the ‘cruel’ animal sports they were all part of the traditional popular culture. The genesis of modern sports was a part of the general process of modernisation. In England, from the end ofthe eighteenth century onwards, this process accelerated under the influence of the Industrial Revolution. England became the richest, most powerful and prestigious country in the world. Modern English sports were adopted in other countries by the members of those classes that acquired a central role in the processes of modernisation in their nations. In England as well as in the other countries younger members of the upper levels of society became the first modern sportsmen. From the last decade of the nineteenth century onwards, following the processes of modernisation, the milieux from which participants in sporting activities were recruited enlarged so much, that sports became one of the most important forms of modern popular culture. But in spite of the enormous growth in the number of participants in the Western world, not everyone became active in sports. Especially among members of the lower classes the number of participants remained relatively low for a long period of time. Only during the last years did participation in sports of people from these classes reach the level of the higher classes. Neither did the development of spectator sports closely follow the repression of ‘cruel’ animal sports. In England this repression culminated in 1835 in the Cruelty to Animals Act.4 Large numbers of spectators at soccer and rugby
Animal Sports and Popular Culture
so3
matches only began to appear during the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In Holland the timelag was even wider. Animal sports were repressed during the middle of the nineteenth century5 and big crowds at sportmatches only appeared after the First World War.6 A similar timelag can be seen in France.’ Very little is known about the pastimes of lower class youth during these timelags, but modern sport could not have been an alternative to their traditional pastimes. Even though the actions from the authorities and members of the clerical and intellectual middle classes to repress ‘cruel’ and rough pastimes may have been successful in the national centres of modernisation, it does not seem probable that theiractions reached the lower classes and the slower developing regions of their countries before a really large-scale interest in spectator sports had been aroused and participation in sports had increased. The fact that modern sports are popular throughout the Western world does not mean to say that ‘cruel’ animal sports have been completely prohibited and banned from the public view. The North American rodeo with forty million spectators a year is a relatively innocent example. The most well-known example of the lasting interest in these kinds of sports is the bullfights in certain countries of Southern Europe and Latin America. These events are not only organised for the inhabitants of these countries but also for a great number of tourists from states where animal sports are officially abhorred. These tourists do not naturally all belong to the lower classes. One may conclude that the revulsion against ‘cruel’ animal sports is not generally shared in the Western world.
3. ‘CRUEL’
ANIMAL SPORTS AND TRADITIONAL POPULAR CULTURE
Objections to maltreatment of animals have been known to exist since the time of the ancient Greeks. But from the seventeenth century onwards, these kinds of objections were shared by larger social groups. * Only gradually did the social influence of the people that wanted to abolish or repress these pastimes become strong enough to reach their goals. The revulsion many people feel nowadays when they think about animal sports should not interfere with the realisation that these sports used to be very popular. In England bull baiting was a very popular pastime. A bull on a cord that was connected to a pin in the ground had to fight against a number of agressive dogs. Bears, goats and badgers were also used instead of bulls. It was thought better for the quality of the meat that bulls and goats were baited before being slaughtered.9 This was not only a pastime for the common people, but also for members of the higher classes. In 1694 William III entertained Prince Ludwig von Baden with bear baiting, bull sport and cockfights. lo When the protests against animal sports succeeded in getting these sports prohibited, large-scale activities like bull and bear baitings disappeared. But small-scale events, like dog, rat and cockfights, that could be organised secretly, continued to be held for a long time. Even at present clandestine dog fights and badger baitings are being held.“~‘* Perhaps for a long time after the introduction of laws forbidding animal sports, the situation in England did not differ so much from that in Bali in 1958, when Clifford Geertz visited the island and studied the cockfights. Cockfights
504
R. Stokvis
had already become illegal under colonial rule and the Indonesian authorities maintained the law against such activities. Yet, these fights remained the favourite sport of the Balinese, even when from time to time the police raided a cockfight and punished the participants. To Geertz it was quite natural that cockfights, being part of ‘The Balinese Way of Life’, continued in spite of the law.13 In France people also used to be greatly interested in animal sports. In this country a popular form of baiting was held with donkeys. Spectators appreciated the peculiar ferocity of these animals when roused and the kicking power of their hind legs. Next to dogfights also wolf-fights were organised.r4 However, unlike England and Holland, no influential Protestant middle class existed in France that could support initiatives to abolish animal sports. In spite of all kinds of protests, bullfights became a fully commercialised spectator sport in the South. Laws against some animal sports were introduced, but in the North of France cockfighting remained a public pastime with spectators from different social classes until after the Second World War. It became even formally organised and regulated like a modern sport. I5 Only after the 1960’s it lost its supporters and at present lives on in the pubs of small traditional mining communities and industrial suburbsI In Holland many different forms of animal sports continued to exist during the nineteenth century. In a chapter on animal teasing games in his book on popular pastimes; the Dutch scholar Jan ter Gouw summarised 16 of these activities. Several of these were still known in Holland in 1871 when he wrote about the subject. One of these was cat hitting. A cat was put in a cask. This cask was connected with a line that was stretched between two poles. By turns participants in the game had to throw a club at the cask. The winner was the one who broke the cask. The howling of the cat was part of the funI In many European countries cats used to be the most favourite animals to torture.” The degree in which these kinds of pastimes were part of the ‘Dutch way of life’ may be judged from the ‘Eel Revolt’ in 1886. This revolt which took place in a lower class neighbourhood started, when the Amsterdam police tried to stop an illegal eel pulling match on one of the canals. The participating crews in this pastime had to row under a line with a living eel connected to it. A member of each crew had to pull the slippery animal off the line. The revolt, which started when the police cut the line, lasted three days. The army had to assist the police and in the end 26 people were counted dead and many more wounded.19 In 1986 a case against goose pulling was brought before a Dutch lawcourt. The goose would be killed before the pulling started. As no disturbance of the public order was expected the judge allowed the pastime.*O The activities of well-to-do townsmen and educated country clergymen to repress ‘cruel’ animal sports can be interpreted in terms of class and status struggles. They opposed the hunting privileges of the aristocracy and their attitudes towards animals. The fighting spirit and courage that aristocrats found in animal sports meant senseless violence to the members of the middle classes. The repression of the animal sports of the lower classes was part of the general efforts of members of the middle classes to civilise the lower orders. More general changes were also involved. With urbanisation and industrialisation the dependence on animals in general diminished for an increasing number of
Animal Sports and Popular Culture
505
people. Some animals became pets to be cared for. Affection and sympathy towards animals increased.2’ The continuing interest in bullfighting and to a lesser degree in cockfighting, dogfighting and badger baiting shows that in spite of all the developments in the opposite direction, many people are still interested in animal sports. One may expect this interest to be mostly developed with those people that have been marginally involved in the processes of urbanisation and industrialisation and the accompanying civilising efforts of members of the middle classes. It is not suprising to read that at present in the American rural South dogfighting and cockfighting on eighteenth-century models take place surreptitiously but with an enthusiastic following” and that Swiss mountain farmers regularly organise cowfights. In general one can conclude that the process of civilisation in Western societies should be studied as a very differentiated process. The intensity ofthe changes in behavioural standards and the accompanying affections varies in the different categories of the population. The state enforces those behavioural standards that have been sanctioned by laws. The majority of the people who do not share these behavioural standards may be kept from surpassing the laws because of possible sanctions against them. Their interest in illegal activities remains latent. But it is always possible that some people prefer taking the risk of sanctions to abandoning the activities they like.
4. PRESENT-DAY
DOG
FIGHTS
IN HOLLAND
The students of phenomena which alarm the authorities and the general public always have to make a distinction between the causes ofthe alarm and the causes of the phenomenon itself. One could make a two-by-two table in which significant and insignificant phenomena are crossed with the alarm or absence of alarm about them. Dogfights might be classified among the insignificant phenomena that cause much alarm. Pit Bull Terriers have been imported since 1979.24 In 1988, about 10,000 dogs belonging to this type of breed are living in Holland, this amounts to 0.5% ofthe Dutch dog population. 25Experts estimate the yearly number of fights to be a few hundred.26 More significant is the yearly number of 17,000 people who are bitten by dogs and treated in hospitals. The number of cases in which Pit Bulls are involved varies in different parts of the country. The average is about 5%, but in a few larger communities this percentage is substantially higher.27 The facts that Pit Bulls are specially bred to tight, recently have been introduced in Holland and are inclined to bite more than most other breeds directs the attention specially to them. The scale of the alarm is not only seen from the large amount of publicity in newspapers and weekly magazines, but also from the fact that a governmental committee was established to give advice on the agressive behaviour of dogs. The first impetus to establish a committee arose from alarms about dog fights. Later the task of the committee was extended to affairs concerning the general problem of agressive dogs.2* Taking the history of animal sports and their repression into account, it is
R. Stokvis
506
possible to understand the origins of the recent interest in dogfights as well as the alarm they cause. It was not until the 1980’s that clandestine dogfights were heard of in Holland. Here the interest in these fights coincided with an increasing popularity of other American and English sports and sporting customs such as darts, snooker, betting on horses and illegal gambling. The Pit Bull Terriers that nowadays are used for dogfights in Holland originally came from the United States. In this country as well as in England these fights were never completely repressed. The American dogs were bred specially for fighting using English Staffordshire terriers, a breed that is descended from the original English fighting dogs. They are a little bigger than their English forebears. The terminology that is used in Holland in connection with these dogs and their fighting is almost completely English. It is borrowed from American literature on the subject (Nrc-Hbl. 29-7-‘88). One of the most famous breeders of Pit Bulls in Holland is an American Vietnam veteran.29 During the 1980’s, due to the drug trade and illegal gambling, a large, internationally orientated underworld established itself in Holland. Within this world the latent interest in ‘cruel’ animal sports would become manifest. People of social groups in which the dislike of violence and the maltreatment of animals was not strongly internalised found dogfights an enjoyable pastime. The custom of betting on the fights enhances their attractivity. Foreigners and Dutchmen who were experienced in clandestine dog fights could cater for the demand of this pastime. Knowing the repression of ‘cruel’ animal sports from not so very long ago, one can understand the reasons for the ample attention that is given to rumours about dogfights. On one side the interest in this subject is based upon the moral indignation of those social groups that dislike animal sports. To them dogfights attack the moral standards ofthe civilised society they are trying to maintain. But on the other side these fights and the rumours about them do appeal to the latent interest in animal sports of all those people that have not internalised these moral standards so strongly. This situation makes dogfights an ideal topic for journalists. They can catch the attention of very different groups by writing articles on the subject. Of course the same applies to sociologists.
CONCLUSIONS Knowledge of the manifest interest in ‘cruel’ animal sports in the recent past throughout large sections of the population offers interesting perspectives for several aspects of traditional and modern popular culture. This paper has explored how repressed animal sports may have continued to exist illegally and secretly and how one of these sports, dogfights, has recently attracted the attention of the general public in Holland. This line of inquiry may be extended. Traditional popular culture is not only characterised by a preference for ‘cruel’ animal sports, but also by two other traits that have met with the disapproval of the intellectual and religious middle classes and the state: betting and fighting. The same line of inquiry could be followed if one were to write a paper on either of these activities.
507
Animal Sports and Popular Culture
Spectators of nearly all the Dutch traditional sporting pastimes used to place bets and the participants competed for money prizes. As to this Ter Gouw generalises by writing that for 99,999 out of 100,000 people getting money was the biggest pastime. 3oThis custom of betting and competing for money was also repressed during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Not only by the state but also, with the introduction of amateur rules, by voluntary sporting organisations.-” Yet, these customs never completely disappeared and during the 1970’s and 1980’s their revival could have been observed. The tendency to light is a very general trait of traditional popular cultures. During all kinds of occasions, such as markets, fairs or weddings where many people used to gather, people would start lights sooner or later.32 Nearly everywhere in Europe groups of young men and boys from neighbouring villages used to fight against each other from time to time.%36. During the twentieth century this custom had become restricted to lower class gangs in big cities, and, which was less noticed, to groups of supporters from soccerclubs of neighbouring villages. The present-day phenomenon of soccer hooliganism could be better understood if it were to be interpreted as a revival under modern circumstances of the traditional tendency of groups of youngsters to fight each other The work of Dunning and his colleagues on soccer hooliganism demonstrates the fruitfulness of this approach.37 In this paper the ‘seamy’ side of popular culture is stressed. Knowledge of the pleasure people used to find in the maltreatment of animals and in betting and fighting may help to see the relativity of some problematic tendencies of modern popular culture. The commercial organisation of modern popular culture traces back to customs of betting and competing for money prizes which were characteristics of many traditional popular pastimes. The cruelty and violence children nowadays are confronted with on television, could have been seen in earlier centuries but then in reality, as part of their daily lives. Ruud Stokvis Sociological
Institut, Amsterdam
NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
K. Thomas, Man and the Natural World (London: Allen Lane, 1983), pp. 143-144. R. Darnton, The Great Cat Massacre (New York: Basic Books, 1984), p.90. P. Bailey, Leisure and Class in Victorian England (London: Routledge, 1978). R.W. Malcolmson, Popular Recreations in English Society 1700-1850 (Cambridge CUP, 1973, 1981), p. 130. J. Ter Gouw, De Volksvermaken. Ver. ‘Vrienden van het Amsterdam-bock’, n.p., n.y. (Amsterdam, 1871), p. 79. C. Miermans, Voetbal in Nederland (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1955), p. 166. R. Holt, Sport and Society in Modern France (London: Macmillan, 1981), pp. 76, 127. K. Thomas, op. cir., p. 154. Ibid., p. 93. R.W. Malcolmson, op. cit., p. 118. ToepoeIs hondenencyclopedie, 7th edn., n.y. (Amsterdam: Becht). R.W. Malcolmson, op. cit., p. 135.
508
R. Stokvis
13. C. Geertz, Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight. In The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), p. 414. 14. R. Holt, op. cit., p. 127. 15. Ibid., p. 108ff. 16. Ibid., p. 121. 17. J. Ter Gouw, op. cit., p. 350. 18. R. Darnton, op. cit., p. 90. 19. H. Brugmans, Geschiedenis van Amsterdam. Dee1 6 (Utrecht/Antwerpen: Het Spectrum, 1973), p. 161. 20. Raad Van State, Uitspraak van 22 December 1986, nr. R03. 85. 1347, p. 1. 21. K. Thomas, op. cit., pp. 181-191. 22. R.D. Mandell, Sport, a Cultural History (New York: Col. U.P., 1984), p. 179. 23. G. Brands, De baas wil bloed zien. In Kok (December 1987), pp. 70-73. 24. I. Harms and J. Koelewijn, De pitbullterrier, oersterke underdog. In Bijvoegsef Vrij Nederlund, No. 39 (26 September 87), p. 17. 25. Commissie van Advies Agressief Gedrag bij Honden. Agressief gedrag bij honden. Den Haag (September 1988), p. 11. 26, Platform (July/August 1988), Min v. Landbouw en Visserij, ‘s Gravenhage, p. 22. 27. Commissie, p. 12. 28. Platform, p. 17. 29. I. Harms and J. Koelewijn, op. cit., p. 21. 30. J. Ter Gouw, op. cit., p. 614. 31. R. Stokvis, Strijd over Sport. Van Loghum Sluterus (Deventer 1979). 32. J. Ter Gouw, op. cit., pp. 21, 76, 465. 33. P. Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (New York: Harper, 1978), p. 187. 34. R. Holt, op. cit., pp. 132ff. 35. K. Dobrowolski, Peasant Traditional Culture. In T. Shanin, Peasants und Peasant Societies (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971, 1979), p. 294. 36. E. Weber, Peasants into Frenchmen (London: Chatto 8~ Windus, 1977), p. 384. 37. E. Dunning, P. Murphy and J. Williams, The Roots of Football Hooliganism (London: Routledge, 1988) p. 201.