On Golf

I have always thought that one of the most striking aspects of a poor country like Colombia a foreign visitor could easily appreciate is the fact that social differences are extremely evident. You can see it in the transportation means. You can see it in the people that lives in flat places with all proper public services (clean water, electricity) and in the ones that have to live in risky hills without elementary living conditions. You see it in the nice neighborhoods that are not very far away from other neighborhoods where houses are older and smaller.

In this line, many other comparisons could be drawn. Social differences, as expected, affect many things, from education and living conditions to trends and ways of expression, passing through entertainment habits. For instance, even if poor and rich people might like to have fun every weekend (most likely, this means dancing while getting drunk), they do it in different ways and with different means. Naturally, the causes and repercussions of those weekend habits depend on your place in society. That's how, for instance, whereas for a rich person having fun is just only another aspect of his/her social life, for a poor person the possibility of having fun during weekends could be the only reason to maintain a crappy, not-so-well paid job.

The above --rather obvious and biased-- preamble on social differences is only to justify my aversion towards golf. Yes, I hate what golf (and people that play golf) could represent in a poor country like Colombia. Of course that comes from my social prejudices. Let me elaborate. In a country like Colombia only extremely rich people play golf (of course, as usual, there are those who hang out with rich people but are far from rich). Why is that? Well, that's because most golf courts are placed in exclusive social clubs. Clubs that the 98% of the population can not afford. Clubs that make sure that only the right people become a member. So, I find it fair to say that golf is the only sport that represents social exclusion in Colombia (this might possibly apply to other countries). Both rich and non rich people play soccer: they're fields everywhere (both good and not so good). Other sports, to a lesser degree, traverse the whole structure of the society.

I think of golf because recently a young Colombian golfer won some PGA tournament (something that in the golf world is supposed to be good). Nothing wrong with that: winning has its merits, so this guy could go back home (surely not in Colombia) and enjoy his money. What really pisses me off is that, preserving the low self-esteem we have as a country, this lame golf victory was the national event last week. This golf thing was top news to the most annoying level. It was very sad to see such a coverage, since --as already argued-- the 98% of Colombian population don't know nor care about what a birdie or a putt are. It was also weird to see a non poor, winning Colombian sportsman, but that some sort of corollary, given that the sport in question is golf.

I find the situation absurd. It's like if I appear in media because I publish a paper or finish my PhD. Indeed, pretty much as the golfer represents social exclusion in sports, when it comes to education I do represent social exclusion, considering that most Colombian people don't get university degrees (let alone PhDs) or have the possibility of living abroad. For the young golfer and myself life circumstances have place us in rather comfortable places. Places that most of my fellow Colombians would not even dream about. Both of us are lucky enough to put our talent and sacrifice on something we enjoy. Granted, in our society a sportsman has obviously more media appeal than a researcher, and in that point the comparison is unfair. But it is about time that media (and most importantly, ourselves) give the right proportions when portraying things, including arguably important golf victories.