A Roundabout Route

The Telegraph is reporting that “The Olympic torch has arrived at the O2 Arena after chaotic scenes during its tour of London as more than 35 protesters were arrested.” The public debate is about whether those individuals, several of whom are notable sportsmen and women, should have boycotted the relay taking the Olympic flame through London. The question of whether it is preferable, in the light of the recent oppression of protests in Tibet, to boycott the events surrounding the Olympiad or to engage with the Chinese authorities is not one I propose to answer here. However, I recall that even at the time the games were awarded to Beijing it was suggested that the need to make a success of them would be a powerful incentive for the Chinese government to adapt its internal policies in the direction favoured by world opinion. That particular argument cannot, I think, be very convincingly sustained now.

What I find difficult to understand is why the utility of a relay taking the Olympic torch so far out of its way is universally accepted. If one accepts that it is necessary to kindle the flame at Olympia in Greece, why cannot it make its way to China as directly as possible? The flame ceremony itself was, I believe, originated for the Berlin Olympiad of 1936, which hardly seems an auspicious origin. I cannot remember if much was made of the relay taking it to the host city before the Los Angeles Olympiad of 1984, when the distinction of carrying the torch for portions of the relay was for the first time sold off to generate income. I am sure that nothing so crass is happening here: it’s hard to imagine that Steve Redgrave or Tim Henham paid for the privilege of carrying the torch. However, there’s little doubt in my mind that the reason for all this to-ing and fro-ing with the Olympic flame is to stretch out media coverage in advance of the games themselves as much as possible. Even this little platform is to some extent part of that, I suppose.