Serena Williams and the Politics of Hate(rs)

SerenaWilliams and the Politics of Hate(rs) byDavid J. Leonard | NewBlackMan
Followinga first-round victory in the Brisbane International tournament, Serena Williamsexpressed her sentiments about tennis, sport, and her labor of unlove.   "I mean, I don't love tennis today, but I'm here, andI can't live without it … so I'm still here and I don't want to go anywhere anytime soon," she explained. "It's not that I've fallen out of love; I'veactually never liked sports, and I never understood how I became an athlete. Idon't like working out; I don't like anything that has to do with workingphysically."  Williams comments,not surprisingly, elicited widespread commentary, most of which used herconfession as a source of criticism and demonization.

In "Woeis Serena: Tennis star says she doesn't love tennis," Chris Chase criticizesWilliams as narcissistic and otherwise incapable of being self-reflective andself-critical.  While acknowledgingher candor, he uses that candor as a source of condemnation:


From one view,her candor could be seen as refreshing. Here's a top athlete discussing thedelicate balance of passion and obligation and fear of the unknown. She'srevealing herself to the press, something she rarely has in the past. Then youstep back and realize Serena has the least self-awareness of any great athleteof the past decade. Two years later, she can't bring herself toacknowledge that she was wrong to threaten a lineswoman at the U.S. Open.She'll likely never admit her actions in last year's U.S. Open final crossedthe line. Unless she gained some insight in the past four months, these quotesare selfish nonsense.


Chase, unwilling to limit the criticisms to the quote, rehashes andrecycles those previous incidences that in his mind provide context forunderstanding Serena's dislike of tennis. In other words, just as she violated the rules of tennis, just as shehas been unable to apologize for her past missed deeds, and just as she hasn'tbeen able to acknowledge her own faults, these comments are construed asevidence of her deficiencies as a person and athlete.  Chase goes on to argue:
 Nobody is surprised Serena doesn'tlike tennis. Like Andre Agassi before her, she seemsto only love the winning  and iswilling to put up with what it takes to get there. The grind doesn't interesther much. These aren't new insights into her soul. The underlying tone isn'tthat Serena is a reluctant sports hero, it's that she's able to be so muchbetter than the rest of the tour without caring about the game like they do.Her "I don't love tennis" quote isn't a revelation, it's aself-congratulatory declaration. It's as if she's saying, "Just imaginewhat I could do if I cared."
Pete Bodo, with "More instructively and disturbingly are the commentsthat are found alongside many of the articles.  Here are a few examples

ScarCity: It shows what an idiot she really is. Because if it weren't forsport, she'd be sitting on her increasingly fat bum, watching the shoppingchannel, buying cheap junk, because she became too fat to leave the house!....(and I have no doubt her expensive "Tastes" are as bad as anyoneelse's poor tastes).........She's vile !  DanielaCG : No amount of shopping ortrying to act feminine could change the fact that she looks like a beast!
etweinberg : How ungrateful can one person be? I would do anything tohave that kind of natural talent in a professional sport. Are we supposed tofeel sorry for her? "Awww, Serena....you don't like your job that you getpaid millions of dollars to do. Poor, poor girl....."  Consideringthe way the economy is right now, with all the social unrest because ofit.....pretty bad timing, I'd say.
Chris.Klarner: She playsbecause she's built like a man and can over power the other woman playing.She's a fat piece of trash and proved it with her comment.
Mslewis: The fact that Serena does not like tennis has notbeen much of a secret for a very long time. She has been out of shape andlistless for years now and the only reason she wins matches is because she'sbigger and hits harder than most of the women.  When she is ahead shelooks   totally bored and goesthrough the motions, but when her opponent shows some spark and beats upon her, Serena just gives in.  (See: U.S. Open 2011 final)
I believeSerena hangs around because her "acting" career hasn't worked out norhas her "designing" career, so what else will keep her in thespotlight . . . tennis.  Either that or she has run out of money becauseshe and Venus support her large family of hangers on and she needs to continueto play for the money she gets from exhibitions, endorsements, etc.
Her fathersaid years ago that he hoped Serena and Venus would retire before they turned30.  Guess that hasn't worked out the way he thought. Whatever!  Cry me a river.
What is striking about the comments and several of the commentaries aswell, is the demonization of Serena Williams.  Focusing on her body (reinforced by the many pictures thatsexualize Williams), her attitude, and her shortcomings as a player, the responsespathologize Williams.  "TheWilliams sisters have been criticized for lacking 'commitment' by refusing toconform to the Spartan training regime of professional tennis, restrictingtheir playing schedules, having too many 'off-court interests' in acting,music, product endorsements, fashion and interior design, and their Jehovah'sWitness religion" (McKay and Johnson). Her comments here are merely positioned as evidence for the longstandingcriticism.
The subtext is even more instructive with so much focus on herbody.  For many, Williams is awasted talent, as someone whose laziness, lack of work ethnic, limited dedication,and absent focus has precluded her from reaching her greatness.  The ample discussion about her body asevidence of her lack of commitment illustrates the profound ways that thesecomments are used to authenticate the narrative of Serena Williams as failure.  This is nothing new as tenniscommentators and fans alike have long criticized her as fat, out-of-shape, andotherwise lack commitment to be great. "The Williams sisters alsohave been subjected to the carping critical gaze that both structures and is akey discursive theme of 'pornographic eroticism'," writes James McKay and HelenJohnson.  Similarly, Delia Douglas argues, a "particularversion of blackness" is advanced within the representations of the Williamssisters.  We see the "essentialistlogic of racial difference, which has long sought to mark the black body asinherently different from other bodies.  Characterizations of their styleof play rely on 'a very ancient grammar' of black physicality to explain theirathletic success"
What also guides these comments is the ways in whichWilliams has been celebrated as evidence of the American Dream - because oftennis she was able to secure tremendous wealth and success, otherwiseunavailable to her.  The anger andcondemnation embodies this belief that without sports Serena Williams would beworking at McDonalds or some other minimum wage job.  Guided by narratives of race and class, Williams is thusreimagined as ungrateful, as disrespectful to what the game "has givenher."  In many respects, thisexplains the very different reaction to the similar comments from AndreAgassi.  Agassi, as white male, isseen to have had many options in life to secure the American Dream, whereasWilliams is render incapable of success outside the realm of sport promptingthis sort of demonization.   
McKay and Johnson offer important analysis in thisregard, noting how the long history of demonization is very much connected to anarrative of the American Dream
They have been constructed within a 'ghetto-to-glory' narrative: ajournalist referred to their ascent as a 'fairy tale, that astonishingnarrative of the ''ghetto Cinderellas'' ' (Adams, 2005), one described Venus asa former 'teenage curio from a Los Angeles ghetto' (Muscat, 2007), and anotherstated that, 'Only in America would Venus have risen from her cradle of crackdealers and grunge courts to contest the women's singles final at Wimbledon'(Mott, 2000). Patton (2001, p. 122) refers to these sorts of narratives as 'anAfricanized version of the Horatio Alger story in which athletics provides aroute out of the ghetto'.
The reactionary discourse and the outrage that hassurrounded Serena's recent comments is a testament to the ways in which theWilliams sisters have been imagined "an Africanized version ofthe Horatio Alger story in which athletics provides a route out of theghetto'."  Her purported refusal toaccept and be grateful for the fantasy narrative is the source of outrage.  Her refusal to substantiate thenarrative of sport as great equalizer compels the demonization.   
Clearly the outrage directed at Serena Williamsreflects a systemic erasure of the labor of athletes.  Whether in reference to collegiate or professional athletes,dominant narratives ubiquitously erase the labor and the conditions of laborunder which athletes work.  Byimagining sport as game, fun, and hobby, the hard work, the dedication, the sacrifice,the pain, and exploitation are all rendered invisible.  "Thetruth is, sports is labor, most of it invisible. (Even the visible labor --weightlifting, workouts, wearisome travel -- is mostly invisible to thepublic.)," writes SteveRushin.  "When a guy is sittingon a stool, staring into space in a state of semi-dress, he is almost alwaysworking. This is the kind of work done by a starting pitcher on game day, whennobody goes near him, or by a writer jackknifed over his keyboard, nibbling histhumbnail to a nubbin."  The deniedwork of athletes is exacerbated by race and gender given the ways in whichwhite supremacy and patriarchy leaves the work of black women invisible.
Theinvisibility and erasure is quite evident with both the shock and outrage overSerena Williams' recent confession. Whereas others see tennis as sport, game, activity, hobby, Serena makesclear that tennis is labor; it is handwork; it is injury; in many regards it isan assault on her subjectivity. Tennis, a job, ain't nothing but work.  In reminding people that tennis is ajob, a tough one that she doesn't like and has never liked, Williams powerfullychallenges those who see her identity as determined by her profession. 
***
David J. Leonard is Associate Professor in the Department of CriticalCulture, Gender and Race Studies at Washington State University, Pullman. Hehas written on sport, video games, film, and social movements, appearing inboth popular and academic mediums. His work explores the political economy ofpopular culture, examining the interplay between racism, state violence, andpopular representations through contextual, textual, and subtextualanalysis.  Leonard's latest book After Artest: Race and the Assault on Blackness will bepublished by SUNY Press in May of 2012.