Milshteyn, Oleg. (2001) Olympionics. Book 1 in the ‘Olympic saga: Olympionics, Priests and Pilgrims – a series of historical and sociological essays’. Moscow. Terra-sport, Olimpia Press. 774 pages.

This book is ”Dedicated to the Olympic Participants of the 20th century” and is written by the famous Russian sociologist and philosopher, Oleg Milshteyn. From the very beginning, one should notice that this book is a connection between the author’s feelings towards the rebirth of the Olympic Games and today’s attitude to the Olympics, with a great number of interviews with the participants of the Olympics as well as with the most influential people in modern sport.

The book starts with an ”interview”. But with whom is it? – A General of Tsarist Russia, Aleksey Butowski, one of the first members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and one of the founders of the organization whose goal was the revival of the Olympic Games of Antiquity. Reality does not allow us to do such a thing as interview someone who died in the last century, but this is where the author’s creativity becomes noticeable. He shows various details of the past in the form of a traditional question-answer interview, simply between a contemporary journalist and a person of another period. The 47 page ”interview” starts by presenting the author’s vision of the problems which concerns ”Olympism”. He does this with the help of his interlocutors such as Joao Avalange (Brazil), Willi Daume (Germany), Alexander de Merode (Belgium), Jacques Rogge (Belgium), Juan Antonio Samaranch (Spain), Borislav Ivkovic (Yugoslavia) and others.

The research about which the author writes, along with the ”interviews”, is very unusual. The historic facts should be interpreted very carefully so as to avoid judgments from today’s perspective. It is easy to judge and to instruct those who are not able to take part in discussion anymore. That is why the author is very careful while judging and he bases his judgments on the viewpoints of his interlocutors. It is also very difficult to be objective when the question concerns the philosophy and ideology of Olympism. That is why the origin and structure of the most influential non-governmental sport organization of the world, that is, the IOC, are unique – it was created as independent from the government (p. 79). I cannot help quoting the words which seem to be an exact description of the further ideological shape of the new organization: ”The thought that the idea of the world, the idea of internationalism (de Coubertin rarely used the term ”pacifism”), which were the bases for the development of modernism Olympism is not new. We should pay attention to the fact that shows that on top of the ideology of the Peace movement of the last century were the famous cultural, literary and scientific activists as well as the whole royal dynasties of Europe. This fact may have influenced Coubertin’s decision to turn to them with the request to support and help to revive such a peaceful act of the historic value as the Olympic Games” (p.80).
Apart from that, the author underlines the moral, ethic, religious, pedagogical and strategic factors which influenced de Coubertin’s strategic decision to turn to the European elite with the request to organize and to support the Olympic movement (p.80-82). Professor Oleg Milshteyn also answers the question why he started writing the book which concerns the problem of the Olympism, which origin is in the subjective perception of reality, and his attempt to its global understanding. The author exactly defines his goal, which is to show the meanings of modern sport and the Olympic movement, their development at the 20th century and their place and role in the modern world. As well, he discusses the role of man in sport: as a sportsman, as a participant of the Olympics, as a coach, as a sport activist, as a doctor, as a journalist, etc., all of the people who create the wonderful world of sport (p.119).

Research was conducted with 1467 Soviet participants of the Olympic Games and 100 interviews undertaken with individuals involved in the Olympics, representating other countries.

Many of the answers from people who have been creating the contemporary ideology of Olympism were a very important basis for the understanding of today’s development of the Olympic movement, and some parts of these answers, quoted below, show its main problems.

Juan Antonio Samaranch (Spain, former President of IOC): ”If I were to answer the question what is the difference between sport and Olympism, the answer would be very short – Olympism is sport plus culture. This is the definition of the Olympic movement…” (p.130).

Jacques Rogge (Belgium, IOC president): ”It seems to me that the world cannot develop under the epidemics such as AIDS, for example. If we don’t face the ecologic catastrophe and the world will be developing further, I am sure the Olympic Games will exist forever. It is very difficult to talk about eternity because in Ancient Greece the Games were organized at the limited time. It does not matter whether the Olympic Games will have five circles, five squares or five triangles and whether they will be called the Olympic, the Cosmic or the World Games. I believe in the future of the regular (but not short in terms of time) Games. They could be held once per five or three years, but not every year: the Games must have their personality as it was visible in the Greek drama. To be precise, they ought to have the unity of time and place which means the rejection of organizing of the Games in the same time and place in several countries. They must have the unity of actions with all the representatives of all important federations and the best sportsmen. They cannot be a regular event – they should be something special” (p.138).

Alexander de Merode (Belgium): ”When we see the great artists of the world scene, like Madonna for example, nobody is surprised that she earns so much money. When we talk about the sportsmen’s salaries we say: ”It’s a scandal! It’s impossible!” I don’t think so… On the contrary, it is more than possible. I will add even more: sportsmen could earn more or the same as the great artists do. But I cannot understand why sport is seen as a third kind of activity… I don’t think it can be so… I utter for the equality of rights between people either sportsmen or artists” (p.145-146).

Peter Tullberg (Finland): ”The Olympic Games today are the most attractive event in every part of the world for the journalists. Sport is the easiest way for the politicians’ road to success. Why did the USSR and Germany invest so much money into sport while other fields of social life suffered so much? Because here you get the name, you can support your flag and it attracts journalists – you are just selling your nation. This is as easy as prostitution” (p.167).

Nikos Filoretos (Greece): ”I think the Olympic Games’ greatest problem (I mean the problem that disturbs the Olympics) is doping. And commercialization. Apart from commercialization in the Olympic movement the basic problem is the Olympic education. The young people and the elderly sportsmen should be educated. The journalists should be educated as well. When I say ‘educated’ I do not mean they should know the history, although they ought to know the basic historic and philosophic terms of the philosophic movement, but first and foremost they should be educated towards the problems of the modern Olimpism such as the financial problems, sponsoring, commercialization, doping and many other problems. I stand by the view that they are not educated enough if we are talking about those problems. My own wish is that one day the Olympism become one of the subjects not only at universities, but at schools at all the levels education…” (p.173).

Concerns over the book include inaccurate translations of the interviews into Russian, where sometimes the sense of the statement or its grammatical structure, are lost (e.g. pp. 154, 155). The book also lacks a bibliography and references to the quotations which are presented. It is important to underline that the basic research material presented is based upon the dates which characterize the Soviet Olympic participants’ activity. The information about other Olympic participants from other countries is presented only in fragments.

No doubt the author has a right to present a historical-sociological chronical to express his opinions, but I wish he would now find time to finish the sequels to this book, called ”The Priests” (book two) and ”The Pilgrims” (book three), to provide additional reflection and understanding on the original.