Mike Tyson had so much potential

[nveleven]

There's an overriding narrative in boxing concerning its disciplinary logic that's continually t****d out and perpetuated because it justifies the existence of the sport on a social level even though under closer scrutiny it doesn't quite match up to its claims.

There is a percentage of wayward youths that boxing keeps from the streets and instills discipline and work ethic into but its rarely ones like Tyson. He's more of an exception than the rule. Kids with his life history rarely have the emotional and mental makeup to subsume themselves to the routine and long term consistent dedication that boxing demands. Even on a logistical level they often lack the support network that makes an amateur career possible.

He was plucked from a correction centre into the boxing equivalent of a convent run by a man who made the Spartans look self indulgent. That in itself is an exceptional circumstance without which its extremely doubtful there would ever have been a Mike Tyson - Professional boxer. The quote attributed to Aristotle gets to the point of what I'm saying, "Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man". The seeds of Tyson's downfall were sown long before he reached the Catskills. The death of D'Amato ushered in the inevitable.

Remember Tyson was still landing in hot water when the old man was alive, enough to have his trainer put a gun to his head (though Tyson and Atlas' accounts differ). Cus used favours and payoffs to make the problems go away. And he isn't without fault himself. D'Amato wasn't interested in making a well rounded man, his mission was to mould the perfect fighter. A merciless megalomaniac. That Cus himself was a resentful paranoiac didn't help matters.

He rarely receives critism for his part and it's mostly to do with the Cus & The Kid story fitting into the (il)logic of white paternalism. That of the 'white saviour' or what one Black academic has termed the 'adopt a ***** narrative', this trope that America's 'race problem' can be solved if only enough whites would 'rescue' individual Blacks from the corrosive influence 'of their own kind' and teach them the mores of 'white civility'. Its deeply offensive but so pervasive that it often goes unnoticed. And its a story that the Western world is still anourmed by, think Sandra Bullock's The Blind Side, a tale white America loved so much she received an Oscar for. On this side of the pond think the entire career of Frank Bruno and the love lavished on him by whites but not so much Britain's Afro-Carribean community.

It's a little odd to speak of Tyson as an underachiever but he surely was. It's remarkable and testiment to the things that Cus and his team did right that Tyson achieved what he did. As Weltschmerz points out though it wasn't solely Tyson's mental makeup that hindered him. I recently heard one trainer refer to Tyson as "one of the best six round fighters that ever lived". It pains me to admit it but in retrospect that's probably not too wide of the mark.

Agree with some of that, but replace Cus with Muhammad Ali, and the story is still just as romantic to Americans (perhaps even more so). So it's not entirely a white savior thing. But that muddies up your line of reasoning, so I'm sure you'll choose to ignore it.
Most casuals had zero idea about Cus. So let's not act like that's how Mike became a phenom. He produced exactly what every casual sports fan wants (knockouts, home runs, slam dunks, hole-in-ones, etc...). If Tyson's wins were all unanimous decisions, he'd be long since forgotten. On top of that, he was also intellectually curious. He'd quote Nietzche in interviews, Maya Angelou visited him in prison, and the like. Because of his "adopt a ******" narrative? Not even close. People love an underdog story. Tyson was an underdog from day one.
That said, The 80s did have some weird fetish w whites adopting blacks (Webster, Diff'rent Strokes, etc...), so I don't doubt that that plays well to a niche audience.
Blind Side was written for evangelical ******s. And the Oscars are just an excuse for Hollywood to jack themselves off on Americans' face each year, so let's not act like it actually means anything. Bullock won an Oscar for best actor, the film itself didn't win ****. Sounds to me like it was more Hollywood giving a tenured actress an award they felt like she was 'due' than white amerikkka standing up in applause for a white savior narrative.

[TheBoxingXpert]

If Tyson had not gone to jail or touched drugs or had emotional problems, the only guys I see beating him prime-vs-prime are Lewis and Vitali.

[- Ram Raid -]

Agree with some of that, but replace Cus with Muhammad Ali, and the story is still just as romantic to Americans (perhaps even more so). So it's not entirely a white savior thing. But that muddies up your line of reasoning, so I'm sure you'll choose to ignore it.

Ali's now a beloved figure so you could inject him into most stories and it would improve its feel of romanticism. I wouldn't say that makes the initial point less valid. With that said the hypothetical exercise only works with the later Ali. The detoothed, depoliticised Ali. The safe peaceful follower of traditional Islam. Replace Cus with Ali the incendiary Nation of Islam minister, the man that refused to fight for his country, the separatist that believed white people were devils, in other words Ali when he was the most hated sportsman in American history, then for the emotion it would engender you may have well as replaced Cus with Louis Farrakhan.

Most casuals had zero idea about Cus. So let's not act like that's how Mike became a phenom. He produced exactly what every casual sports fan wants (knockouts, home runs, slam dunks, hole-in-ones, etc...). If Tyson's wins were all unanimous decisions, he'd be long since forgotten. On top of that, he was also intellectually curious. He'd quote Nietzche in interviews, Maya Angelou visited him in prison, and the like. Because of his "adopt a ******" narrative? Not even close. People love an underdog story. Tyson was an underdog from day one.

My point about Cus wasn't primarily tied to Tyson's popularity. It was to point out that Cus' hand in Tyson's psychological makeup, whilst it made him the fighter that he was, also contributed to his inevitable downfall and that that was rarely criticised (until recently) partly due to his positioning as a 'white saviour' figure.

Whilst I agree wholeheartedly with your first point I wouldn't read Tyson's popularity amongst the mainstream as being down to his intellectual curiosity or underdog status. The viewing public found Tyson electrifying because he was an all conquering vanquisher. The freakishly powerful, virile Black body of wayward ****** youth had been harnessed for the worlds entertainment. Until it was 'uncaged' (not uncoincidentally the title of a documentary on Tyson) until he broke his tethers so to speak and was then seen as an animalistic brute. People tuned in out of a mixture of fetishistic fascination and repulsion. Whilst I understand your point I'd suggest it was only a minority on a global scale that viewed Tyson as an underdog and identified with him as such.

That said, The 80s did have some weird fetish w whites adopting blacks (Webster, Diff'rent Strokes, etc...), so I don't doubt that that plays well to a niche audience. Blind Side was written for evangelical ******s. And the Oscars are just an excuse for Hollywood to jack themselves off on Americans' face each year, so let's not act like it actually means anything. Bullock won an Oscar for best actor, the film itself didn't win ****. Sounds to me like it was more Hollywood giving a tenured actress an award they felt like she was 'due' than white amerikkka standing up in applause for a white savior narrative.

Hollywood is something of a mainstream cultural baramoter though. After all they largely make money by telling people stories they're comfortable hearing, a selling back of values if you like. On the scale of film vs Bullock sticking around long enough though, I do agree with you.

[nveleven]

Ali's now a beloved figure so you could inject him into most stories and it would improve its feel of romanticism. I wouldn't say that makes the initial point less valid. With that said the hypothetical exercise only works with the later Ali. The detoothed, depoliticised Ali. The safe peaceful follower of traditional Islam. Replace Cus with Ali the incendiary Nation of Islam minister, the man that refused to fight for his country, the separatist that believed white people were devils, in other words Ali when he was the most hated sportsman in American history, then for the emotion it would engender you may have well as replaced Cus with Louis Farrakhan.



My point about Cus wasn't primarily tied to Tyson's popularity. It was to point out that Cus' hand in Tyson's psychological makeup, whilst it made him the fighter that he was, also contributed to his inevitable downfall and that that was rarely criticised (until recently) partly due to his positioning as a 'white saviour' figure.

Whilst I agree wholeheartedly with your first point I wouldn't read Tyson's popularity amongst the mainstream as being down to his intellectual curiosity or underdog status. The viewing public found Tyson electrifying because he was an all conquering vanquisher. The freakishly powerful, virile Black body of wayward ****** youth had been harnessed for the worlds entertainment. Until it was 'uncaged' (not uncoincidentally the title of a documentary on Tyson) until he broke his tethers so to speak and was then seen as an animalistic brute. People tuned in out of a mixture of fetishistic fascination and repulsion. Whilst I understand your point I'd suggest it was only a minority on a global scale that viewed Tyson as an underdog and identified with him as such.




Hollywood is something of a mainstream cultural baramoter though. After all they largely make money by telling people stories they're comfortable hearing, a selling back of values if you like. On the scale of film vs Bullock sticking around long enough though, I do agree with you.

Interesting. Gave me some stuff to sit and think about further.