ABSTRACT
The debate about whether sport can count as art is often conducted at cross purposes. Naysayers insist that no sport is an artform, whereas proponents insist that certain sport performances count as artworks – but these are entirely consistent claims. Both sides make unwarranted assumptions: naysayers are purists about art (i.e., no transaesthetic purposes), whereas proponents are tokenists about artforms. Naysayers admit that figure skating may count as art, yet only in noncompetitive contexts. Their burden is to explain why a routine might count as art in a showcase but not at the Olympics. The debate is also inevitably framed in terms of whether sport can count as art, which neglects the equally viable question of whether art (e.g., competitive dance) might count as sport. The author concludes in favor of an appropriately qualified sport-as-art thesis.
