The High­lights Habit

The Highlights Habit

The High­lights Habit

Pol­i­tics or sports—we’re all here for the excit­ing moments.

Auburn v Creighton

As a watch­er of live sport­ing events, I plead guilty to pre­fer­ring the mir­a­cle fin­ish to the long slog that pre­cedes the mir­a­cle fin­ish.

I was remind­ed of my inex­cus­able inat­ten­tive­ness on Mon­day evening, when the Flori­da Gators played the Hous­ton Cougars in the NCAA men’s bas­ket­ball cham­pi­onship. To the aston­ish­ment of the many mil­lions who had been with the game from its outset—who had been hang­ing on every free throw and foul—the Gators emerged as the late, and high­ly unlike­ly, vic­tors over the Cougars. Along with the rest of the world, I watched the come­back, but unlike most oth­ers in the view­ing audi­ence, I only real­ly start­ed watch­ing once it became obvi­ous that it was a comeback—that is, in the game’s final min­utes. You might say that I am like the child who wish­es to con­sume the choco­late cake before fin­ish­ing the chick­en and broc­coli.  

I have no doubt that Monday’s incred­i­ble fin­ish would have been all the more impres­sive or heart­break­ing had it been expe­ri­enced in con­text of the com­plete game, but I con­fess that I am less than assid­u­ous when it comes to watch­ing the monot­o­nous, game-long back-and-forth of near­ly any ath­let­ic endeav­or. For me, to fol­low the ear­ly action in a game—from bas­ket­ball teams exchang­ing points in the sec­ond quar­ter or a foot­ball team orches­trat­ing a long dri­ve just after kickoff—is akin to lis­ten­ing to speech­es from the floor of the Sen­ate: Even when some­one oth­er than Cory Book­er is speak­ing and is doing so for less than a full day, I find the busi­ness of Con­gress to have a cer­tain tedious qual­i­ty. Wake me when the bill, if there is one, has passed.

In the case of Monday’s game, my apa­thy can be attrib­uted in part to my lack of root­ing inter­est in the cham­pi­onship par­tic­i­pants. If asked before the game to select my pre­ferred team, I would have cho­sen “none of the above.” I had no per­son­al con­nec­tion to either Flori­da or Hous­ton, and, not being a gam­bler, I was unable to cre­ate a pre­text for car­ing about one or the other—until that fab­u­lous fin­ish, that is. I would have root­ed for whichev­er team had been in the throes of a mad comeback—and, in this case, that meant Flori­da.

I suf­fer from this impa­tience even when fol­low­ing a game in which I might the­o­ret­i­cal­ly care about the out­come. As I have pre­vi­ous­ly described in this space, I have long fol­lowed the tra­vails of the floun­der­ing Cleve­land Browns, but it is a rare game that I watch from start to fin­ish. For years, my prac­tice has been to turn on Browns games for back­ground noise; like many jour­nal­ists, I have become accus­tomed to work­ing to the pleas­ant hum of some sort of live tele­vi­sion event. If, by the fourth quar­ter, the Browns are doing sur­pris­ing­ly well (or espe­cial­ly bad­ly), I can usu­al­ly rouse myself to focus on the bal­ance of the game, but that is all I need. Last sea­son, for exam­ple, I did not find it nec­es­sary to watch all of the ups and downs of the Browns’ enter­tain­ing­ly unre­li­able quar­ter­back Jameis Winston—his unpre­dictabil­i­ty from the two-minute warn­ing onward was more than suf­fi­cient for my pur­pos­es. 

I rec­og­nize that there is some­thing unseem­ly about the way in which I avail myself of the great con­clu­sion to a game with­out hav­ing invest­ed much time in the game itself. But isn’t there some­thing pro­found­ly Amer­i­can about only watch­ing the high­lights? My father used to say that the point of near­ly every book or movie could be sum­ma­rized in a few lines; the rest, how­ev­er poet­ic, was expo­si­tion. I grant that few would read, say, Chekhov or watch Rober­to Rossellini’s Jour­ney to Italy with such a util­i­tar­i­an mind­set, but his point seems rel­e­vant to sport­ing events: Aren’t we all just wait­ing for the thrill of vic­to­ry or agony of defeat—that is, the deci­sive and excit­ing con­clu­sion? 

Per­haps this explains why I am not alarmed but enlivened by the furi­ous activ­i­ty com­ing out of the White House. The pre­vi­ous inhab­i­tant of the West Wing sleep­i­ly presided over the sta­tus quo—a bor­der cri­sis, unfair trade arrange­ments, ram­pant wok­e­ness through­out civ­il society—but his replace­ment is a man bound and deter­mined to rapid­ly effec­tu­ate change. In sports terms, his admin­is­tra­tion is noth­ing but high­lights: the pur­suit of tar­iffs, the seek­ing of peace, the attempt to make ful­some use of exec­u­tive power—these things are all pur­sued as though the game clock is tick­ing down.

Some of the president’s actions are on the mark and oth­ers are mis­guid­ed or mis­tak­en. But the sum total of all this activ­i­ty is at least as excit­ing as that Florida–Houston game and for rough­ly the same rea­son: As Amer­i­cans, we have been lulled into watch­ing a long, slow, plod­ding game for most of our lives, but in the final peri­od, we have final­ly been giv­en some­thing worth watch­ing. 

Now if only the incom­pa­ra­ble Ian Eagle would cov­er trade wars rather than buzzer-beat­ers.

The post The High­lights Habit appeared first on The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive.