Driving to Capitol Hill, I did a double take. Out of the corner of my eye I saw “The Catch,” an iconic image—for Bay Area sports fans in particular—towering above the entrance to the Newseum. Underscored by the word “ATHLETE,” I deduced they must be running an exhibit. Indeed, Athlete: Sports Illustrated Photography of Walter Iooss was running through December 31—that very day. What luck!
The work of Walter Iooss has graced the cover of SI more than any other photographer. “Athlete” promised to display familiar images such as "Air" Jordan dunking or Joe Namath in a poolside lounge chair “holding court” with reporters, beside some unfamiliar ones—children playing béisbol in Cuba, or champion surfer Kelly Slater, his board and those...Hawaiian waves. “Every picture tells a story, yes, but for certain photos in this collection Iooss has chosen to tell the story behind the picture.”
About three images into the exhibit, a breath-taking print of Tiger Woods at the tee caught my attention. I stood gazing at its distinctive lighting while my mom read the “back story.” In light of recent events, it was impossible not to gaze and stand in wonder. The silence around me was deafening, until my mom leaned over to me and said sardonically, “Don’t get too close to Tiger.” I had nothing to say. Silence resumed as my mom shifted her gaze to the image and I read the description:
The first time I followed Tiger Woods I wanted to recreate a picture Hy Peskin once took of Ben Hogan. I wanted to do it with an old-fashioned 4-by-5 Crown Graphic camera, which meant I had to get close. And getting close to Tiger is a problem. I was really on the edge of the rules. At one point, his caddie Steve Williams, came over and said “Excuse me, mate, have you covered a golf tournament before?” I’d covered about 15 majors, but I just said “Yes, sir.” From that point on, he and Tiger kept looking at because I was still too close.
About six months later, I shot Tiger for the cover of Sports Illustrated and finally met him. I mentioned how I’d covered him that day and said, “Did you notice me?” He said, “Every hole.”
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Iooss (pronounced Yose) said those words “…getting close to Tiger is a problem” in 2007. For those of us who did, his “transgressions” were disappointing. Although my friend Kevin thinks it comes down to two words: Who cares? I do. Golf does. Perhaps you disagree.
And from the other perspective, in no way was I surprised to read that Tiger saw Iooss at “every hole.” Tiger is renowned for his extreme attention to detail. He is the master of discipline. So when Tiger made his first public statement on Friday, February 19
I was surprised not by what I heard--no doubt it was scripted,rehearsed, even choreographed, but rather by what I did not hear. Woods assumed full responsibility for his selfish actions. He acknowledged the many people he has hurt, even his foundation. He apologized and articulated how much work he has to do. Yet, he never once said the word “love.” This man— driven by discipline, who notices everything from an unknown photographer to the tiniest undulation on the course, did not say “I love my wife” or “I love my children,” or even “I love golf.” I think that says a lot.
I believe however, there is hope for Tiger. If the sum of his other words are true, and if he chooses to channel his level of discipline to his personal life, my recommendation is that he read the words of M. Scott Peck, MD from “The Road Less Traveled.” In it, Peck defines "Love," and what it asks of us. It is an act of the will, it is not effortless, it leads to spiritual growth. Perhaps Tiger lost sight of this along the way.
Tiger, read on. Perhaps this will serve as your new "back story." I look forward to corresponding image.
Discipline, it has been suggested, is the means of human spiritual evolution. The force that provides the motive, the energy for this discipline, is Love.
In attempting to examine love one must be conscious that one is trying to define the mysterious and the inexplicable. In the face of the mystery of love misconception about it abound. Love is too large, too deep ever to be truly understood or measured or limited within the framework of words.
Nonetheless, the broad definition is thus: The will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth.
This is a teleological definition; the behavior is defined in terms of the goal it seems to serve – in this case, spiritual growth.
Often, what seems to be love is not love at all. One of the major distinguishing features seems to be the conscious or unconscious purpose in the mind of the lover or non-lover.
It may be noticed that, as defined, love is a strangely circular process. For the process of extending one’s self is an evolutionary process. When one has successfully extended one’s limits, one has then grown into a larger state of being. Thus the act of loving is an act of self-evolution even when the purpose of the act is someone else’s growth. It is through reaching through toward evolution that we evolve.
The unitary definition of love includes self-love with love for the other. Since I am human and you are human, to love humans means to love myself as well as you. To be dedicated to human spiritual development is to be dedicated to the race of which we are part, and this therefore means dedication to our own development as well as “theirs”.
Ultimately, self-love and love for others are indistinguishable, yet it is impossible to forsake our own spiritual development in favour of someone else’s.
The act of extending one’s limits implies effort. When we love someone, our love becomes demonstrable or real only through our exertion – through the fact that for that someone (or oneself) we take an extra step, or walk an extra mile. Love is not effortless. To the contrary, it is effortful.
By the use of the word “will” an attempt is made to transcend the distinction between desire and action. Desire is not necessarily translated into action. Will is desire of sufficient intensity that it is translated into action. The difference between the two is like the difference between “I would like to do it” and “I will do it." Everyone in our culture desires to some extent to be loving, yet many do not in fact love. Thus the desire to love is not itself love. Love is as love does. Love is an act of will – both an intention and an action. We choose to love. When we actually exert ourselves in the cause of spiritual growth, it is because we have chosen to do so. Then the choice to love has been made.
*Special thanks to Allison Howard for encouraging me to write about Tiger
Post a Comment