tribution and would be a useful addition to the reading lists for senior undergradu-ates and postgraduate students.

Globalization scholarship, as with much academic scholarship, has gone throughseveral distinctive waves, or phases, itself in the past 25 years. Several books pub-lished in the past decade featuring sport and globalization or ‘global’ in the titlehave focused more generally on sport including Maguire (1999), Miller, Lawrence,McKay, & Rowe (2001), Bairner (2001), Van Bottenburg (2001), and the co-editedcollection by the two authors under review here, Giulianotti & Robertson (2007),first published as a special issue (Volume 7, Issue 2) of the journal Global Net-works. The book under review, is however, the first, to my knowledge, to take onesport and discuss it in terms of globalization. We know that sport, and here footballhas become more of an integral part of the economies of late capitalist modernity,and it has not always been so. The recognition that the global has to be local some-where, which is exemplified throughout this book, has improved research into glob-alization and sport since the 1990s because it has promoted detailed empirical casestudies of sport in specific social and cultural contexts.

ReferencesBairner, A. (2001). Sport, nationalism and globalization. European and North American per-

spectives. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Giulianotti, R. (1999). Football: A sociology of the global game. Cambridge: Polity Press.Giulianotti, R., & Robertson, R. (Eds.). (2007). Globalization and sport. Oxford: Blackwell.Maguire, J. (1999). Global sport. Cambridge: Polity Press.Miller, T., Lawrence, G., McKay, J., & Rowe, D. (2001). Globalization and sport. London:

Sage.Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization, social theory and global culture. London: Sage.Van Bottenburg, M. (2001). Global games. Urbana Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

John HorneSchool of Sport, Tourism and The Outdoors

University of Central LancashirePreston, UK

jdhorne@uclan.ac.uk� 2012, John Horne

124 Book reviews

Taylor and FrancisRLST_A_553365.sgm10.1080/02614367.2011.553365Leisure Studies0261-4367 (print)/1466-4496 (online)Original Article2011Taylor & Francis0000000002011Dr WillHaydockwhaydock@bournemouth.ac.ukEmbodied sporting practices: regulating and regulatory bodies, by Kath Wood-ward, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, 206 pp., £50.00 (hardback), ISBN978-0-230-21805-5

The stated aim of this book is to ‘make a contribution to the theoretical literature onbodies and embodiment using the empirical vehicle of sport’ (p. 1). Woodward’sfocus is on the various dichotomies that have characterised philosophies of the body:mind/body, subject/object, materialist/constructionist and so on. She argues persua-sively that these do not help us understand sport, and proposes ways of movingbeyond them.

Woodward moves chapter by chapter through the key issues that relate to under-standings of sport and the body, beginning by analysing how ‘the body’ is best under-stood. From there, the discussion moves on to what constitutes a sport and then,

combining the two discussions, how discourses relating to sport construct a particularidea of the healthy, responsible, gendered individual. Subsequent chapters cover a vari-ety of themes, investigating how individual perspectives and experiences can be incor-porated into theories of the body and how sport as a spectacle and spectators of sportare best understood. Finally, the possibility is discussed of change in dominant under-standings of sport and the body, considering how these are tested by the fluidity ofgender and the spectre of ‘cyborgification’, as in the specific case of Oscar Pistorius.

Woodward demonstrates an impressive grasp of theorists from a variety of disci-plines who have approached the philosophical issue of ‘the body’ from a number ofdifferent angles, such as Bourdieu, Butler, Braidotti, Deleuze, Foucault and Haraway,while discussions of Lacan and [Zcaron] i [zcaron]ek inform her discussion of spectatorship and‘real’ involvement in sport. Although the approach is stated to be theoretical, it isargued that ‘theory and methodology overlap’ (p. 8) and the focus seems to be rootedin what practical implications theory might have for researchers. The volume contrib-utes most during discussions of how the theoretical understandings that underpinphenomenological studies of sport can help researchers understand the structuralconstraints on lived bodily experiences such as gender and class. This is done inci-sively when discussing Loïc Wacquant’s ethnographic account of boxing. Woodwardunderstands phenomenology, moderated by a conception of ‘habitus’, to be a wayout of the various dualist impasses of mind/body, structure/agency and culturalrepresentation/lived experience.

The book is a useful survey of the theoretical literature on the body and how thishas been and might be related to sport. As noted, the analysis is strong when discuss-ing how these theoretical arguments might inform the practice of research. However,the arguments could sometimes be drawn out more clearly and forcefully. Althoughthe ‘version of materialism’ that the book comes down in favour of can be discerned,it can be difficult to trace this defining argument through the book. In some cases,individual chapters, though informative and interesting, also lack a clear thread. To

Z z

some extent this uncertainty is unavoidable, as part of the point of the analysis is toshow that there are no clear dividing lines between mind and body, materiality andconstruction, experience and representation. However, at times I yearned for ananswer – or perhaps simply a clearer statement that there is deliberately no answer.Sometimes this lack of clarity regarding the defining arguments of the book canobscure the attempt to break new theoretical ground, and make its contribution seemmore one of collation and synthesis.

The only other significant criticism that might be levelled at the work is that morecould be made of sport as an ‘empirical vehicle’ as is promised at the outset. Thepersuasive fundamental critique of the two poles of philosophical approaches to thebody, which advance either a complete separation or elision of mind and body, is thatthese do not reflect how sport is experienced for either participants or spectators.Instead, a modified phenomenology is posited as offering researchers the tools tobetter access and understand the lived experience of bodies as ‘situations’, followingde Beauvoir. This already powerful argument could be further strengthened if moreempirical evidence was marshalled to support the argument and to illustrate the keypoint that these theoretical discussions are intimately related to methodological prac-tice. This is done to great effect, for example, when Jayne Caudwell’s empiricalresearch on women’s football is cited to maintain that while traditional ideas of genderare still central to the dominant discourse surrounding women’s participation in sport,

125Leisure Studies

2 Book review

this participation can also form a site of resistance. More such examples could havemade the argument more persuasive and more engaging.

Overall, then, Embodied Sporting Practices might be considered a useful introduc-tory survey of the literature on sport and embodiment, and provides a wealth of refer-ences to theorists of the body (or those whose theories can productively be applied toquestions of the body), but its lack of thread may frustrate, and possibly confuse, lesspatient readers. Its application as an introduction may also be slightly hampered by thelack of a comprehensive and user-friendly index, for example, Donna Haraway islisted under ‘c’ for cyborgs and de Beauvoir under ‘f’ for feminist.

Despite these concerns, however, Woodward’s overall conclusions, when they arereached, are robust and persuasive. It seems sensible to argue that the mind/bodytension is better resolved by understanding there to be a ‘correspondence’ betweenrather than an ‘elision’. This allows for a nuanced awareness that while bodies arematerial and ‘earthbound’, understandings of them that are discursive are also impor-tant. Finally, it seems perfectly appropriate to suggest, as Woodward does, that amodified form of phenomenology that takes into account structures such as class,ethnicity and gender is the most suitable way to research embodiment in sport.

Will HaydockBournemouth University, UK

whaydock@bournemouth.ac.uk© 201 , Will Haydock

Taylor and FrancisRLST_A_543265.sgm10.1080/02614367.2010.543265Leisure Studies0261-4367 (print)/1466-4496 (online)Original Article2010Taylor & Francis0000000002010Dr RobertSnaper.snape@bolton.ac.ukThe meaning and purpose of leisure: Habermas and leisure at the end of themodernity, by Karl Spracklen, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, 175 pp.,£52.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-0-230-20525-3

This book offers a timely defence of leisure as a theoretical concept and of leisurestudies as a worthwhile intellectual and pedagogical activity. It aims to resolve thetheoretical conflicts between freedom and constraint that the author identifies as thecentral paradox of leisure and the basis of epistemological uncertainty in leisure stud-ies. In particular, postmodernism is argued to have led to an abandonment of theoryfor empirical or specialist investigation, thus weakening the coherence of leisure stud-ies as a subject field. It is argued, however, that the significance of postmodernism hasbeen overstated and that leisure studies can remain central to an understanding of civicsociety if a theoretical reconciliation of freedom and constraint in leisure can beeffected. This is the task the book sets out to undertake by drawing upon JurgenHarbermas’ theory of communicative and instrumental rationality to suggest newmeanings and purposes of leisure and leisure studies.

Its premise is that while there are post-modern ways of seeing the world, societyitself remains stubbornly modern. The opening chapters are devoted to an explicationof Habermas’ rejection of the post-modern turn on the grounds that modernity continuesto display a healthy degree of rationality in which truth, freedom and reason are valuedand sought. Even in late modernity, there is recognition of injustice and inequality, andcommunicative action allows individuals the freedom to think and act rationally andcollectively to address these concerns; indeed, progress is possible only where commu-nicative rationality is expressed through free interaction of ideas and debate. However,

126

2