Who remembers that the first Olympic Games were open to individual athletes? That a Haitian, Constantin Henriquez, won a gold medal with the French rugby team at the 1900 Paris Olympics? Or that one could watch events such as tug-of-war, angling or even live pigeon shooting?
A stunning exhibition on the modern Olympic Games and their place in world history, 'Olympisme, une histoire du monde', which is open until September 8th at the Palais de la Porte-Dorée in Paris, sheds light on these forgotten aspects of this sporting event. It highlights both the athletic achievements and the darker side of the Olympics, while also questioning the future of such competitions in the midst of a climate crisis.
In this context, what can we now say about the outcome of the Paris Olympics which ended on Sunday? Historian Sandrine Lemaire, co-curator of the exhibition, gives her insights.
Mediapart: In the exhibition, you highlight how “major conflicts and geopolitical upheavals find a particular resonance” at the Olympic Games. How was this apparent in Paris?
Sandrine Lemaire: The Olympics are a mega-media event, all eyes were on Paris. Politically, it offered some respite for the outgoing government after a significant crisis in which protest votes, particularly from the far-right, challenged its legitimacy.
France's goal in hosting these Games was to demonstrate that it remains a great power. This diplomacy of recognition was not so straightforward given the security concerns. Indeed, it chose a complex option as, for the first time, the opening ceremony was not confined to a stadium, which increased the risks.
Looking at the history of the Olympics, security has become a critical issue since 1972, following the bloody attack on the Israeli team (which resulted in eleven deaths) when members of the Palestinian organisation Black September took hostages. Since then, the budget allocated to security has continually increased, going up further after the September 11th 2001 attacks in the United States, rising from 80 million dollars to 1.5 billion between the 1984 Los Angeles Games and the 2004 Games in Athens.
Enlargement : Illustration 1
For the International Olympic Committee, international crises, whether in Ukraine or Gaza, have been unavoidable. After the war of aggression against Ukraine, it was decided that Russian athletes could only compete under a neutral flag. Following the attack on October 7th and the subsequent war in Gaza, the Israeli delegation was under heavy protection. The Games are, therefore, typically a reflection of geopolitical issues.
However, one should note that there's been little discussion of political gestures by athletes. Although prohibited by the Olympic Charter, several such acts have been observed. Algerian judo competitor Messaoud Redouane Dris refused to fight against an Israeli opponent, Tohar Butbul. Officially, he missed his weigh-in weight by 400 grams and was disqualified, but no one believed this. Similarly, Afghan runner Kimia Yousofi wore a bib with the message “Education, sports, our rights” in English and displayed it in front of the cameras. Her gesture was praised, reminding us that the Olympic Games are an incredible media platform for raising awareness of various causes, be they political, environmental, or religious.
Finally, outside the competition, during the opening ceremony, the Algerian delegation threw red roses into the Seine as they passed the bridge from which supporters of the National Liberation Front were thrown in October 1961, in homage to them. These “stolen” gestures are either silenced or highlighted depending on whether they serve a diplomatic purpose.
During the early Olympic Games, it was possible to compete for a country without holding its nationality. Athletes participated as individuals.
Mediapart: You also point out in the exhibition how the Olympics have been exploited by dictatorial regimes, whether it be Nazi Germany in 1936 or Communist China in 2008. In what way is this very different from France?
S.L.: The Olympics are, of course, exploited by all host countries, not just dictatorships. This is what we show in the exhibition. For instance, during the Cold War, the United States, positioning itself as the leader of the free world, used the Olympic Games to advance its cause. Thanks to the archives, we found out that American athletes were tasked with persuading those from the Eastern bloc not to return home when the Olympics took place outside the Soviet bloc, encouraging them to defect by promising economic protection, employment, etc. The idea was to demonstrate the superiority of the free world over the communist system.
Enlargement : Illustration 2
We saw this at Melbourne in 1956, the year of the Soviet intervention in Hungary, when more than 80 athletes from the Eastern bloc decided not to return home. From the outset of the modern Games in 1896, the Olympics have seen confrontations between nations. Pierre de Coubertin [editor's note, the French creator of the modern Olympics] wanted the first Games to be held in Paris, but the King of Greece claimed it as [the Games'] birthplace and also wanted the opening ceremony to take place on April 6th, the anniversary of the start of the Greek War of Independence against the Ottomans.
Mediapart: And in 2024?
S.L.: As with all of them, “sport power” - and thus the exploitation of these Games - was evident from the opening ceremony. It was dominated by the theme of diversity, promoting the idea of an open France, which is obviously not the case if you look at the election results a few weeks earlier. There was also the desire to showcase France's greatness, but this is not unusual, as it happens at every Olympiad. Moreover, there was a more geopolitical objective to restore the prestige of the head of state and the government. However, this objective failed, because of the outcome of the parliamentary elections.
Mediapart: Isn’t there a paradox in wanting to host the world while fostering a certain chauvinism?
S.L.: Indeed, it is contradictory, but this paradox has been there from the start. The Olympics went hand in hand with the rise of nation states. The first parade of athletes behind their flag bearer took place in London in 1908 at the White City Stadium, built for the occasion. During the early Games, it was possible to compete for a country without holding its nationality. Athletes participated as individuals. Constantin Henriquez, who was Haitian, won the gold medal with the French rugby team.
During the interwar period, all the ceremonial surrounding the Olympic flag was established, reflecting the very contradiction you mention. On the one hand, there was the flag designed by Pierre de Coubertin, raised for the first time just after the First World War at the Antwerp Games in 1920. Set against a white background, the five interlaced rings represent all the continents united by Olympism, with the colours of the world’s flags. There was also the Olympic oath, a true code of honour for athletes.
On the other hand, promotional posters for the Games remained highly nationalistic, proudly displaying the flags of various countries, where the idea of the nation was prominent. The Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and Turks, all of whom were on the losing side of the Great War, were not invited. This period witnessed a rise in nationalism, and this was reflected in the Olympics as well. I had the opportunity to attend some events at the Paris Games, and while the hospitality extended to foreign visitors was remarkable, inside the competition venues there was a noticeable focus on one’s own flag, on one’s nation, and the medals table.
Mediapart: A German journalist from Die Tageszeitung even questioned where the sporting spirit was among the French public, accusing them of ignoring the achievements of foreign athletes...
S.L.: I’m not surprised. One of the reasons might be the decision to employ crowd warmers this year to energise the crowds. 'La Marseillaise' [editor's note, the French national anthem] was often sung. Naturally, from an outside perspective, this must seem very chauvinistic. On the French side, this support for the athletes has been praised. However, many foreign athletes also received encouragement from the crowd.
It's a fleeting interlude. As soon as the closing ceremony ends, the problems return.
Mediapart: The Paris Olympics seemed like a magical interlude after a political crisis marked by talk of “civil war” (from Emmanuel Macron himself). Is it typical of the Olympics to enable this kind of truce to exist?
S.L.: This is typical of any sporting competition. Providing bread and circuses to the people helps distract from everyday problems. The unique feature of the current Olympics is their organisation over a very short period, whereas in the past they could last several months. It’s an intense experience. You have competitions from morning till evening, with a wide variety of sports, allowing a broad range of enthusiasts to get involved. A rugby fan might not necessarily be interested in the Football World Cup, whereas at the Olympics, everyone can find something they enjoy and discover new disciplines. This is what makes the Olympics special and creates a sense of unity. But it’s clear that this is a fleeting interlude. As soon as the closing ceremony ends, the problems return. During this interlude, there are no questions asked about who's governing. The media also contribute to this feeling by focusing exclusively on this event.
Mediapart: In the era of climate catastrophe, what's the future for the Olympics?
S.L.: We address this question at the end of the exhibition: given the environmental, financial, economic, and societal impacts, can a single city continue to host the Olympics? There are fewer and fewer candidates. Today, we already know the names of the next two host cities, Los Angeles (2028) and Brisbane (2032), because there was no competitive selection due to a lack of rival bidders. Indeed, in all the cities where referendums were held to see if the population was willing to host the Games, the answer was no.
This was the case in the United States, Germany, and Australia. Clearly, the Olympics are not on the face of it welcomed by the public. Looking ahead, we might consider the inclusion of e-sports, hosted across multiple continents. In the exhibition, we explore whether audiences will be brought together virtually, and if the categories of male, female, Olympic, and Paralympic will still be relevant. The evolution of society will also shape the future of the Olympics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The original French version of this interview can be found here.
English version by Michael Streeter