#2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

Cross-National Cultural Diffusion: The Global Spread of Cricket

Jason Kaufman Orlando Patterson Harvard University Harvard University

This article explores the dynamics of cross-national cultural diffusion through the study of a case in which a symbolically powerful cultural practice, the traditionally English sport of cricket, successfully diffused to most but not all countries with close cultural ties to England. Neither network ties, nor national values, nor climatic conditions account for this disparity. Our explanation hinges instead on two key factors: first, the degree to which elites chose either to appropriate the game and deter others from participating or actively to promote it throughout the population for hegemonic purposes; and second, the degree to which the game was “popularized” by cultural entrepreneurs looking to get and keep spectators and athletes interested in the sport. Both outcomes relate to the nature of status hierarchies in these different societies, as well as the agency of elites and entrepreneurs in shaping the cultural valence of the game. The theoretical significance of this project is thus the observation that the diffusion of cultural practices can be promoted or discouraged by intermediaries with the power to shape the cultural meaning and institutional accessibility of such practices.

hy do some foreign practices take root between adopters and adoptees, as well as the Wwhile others either arrive dead in the environmental contexts that modulate such inter- water or take hold only to wither and die? actions. But as Strang and Soule (1998:276) Modern diffusion studies have focused prima- note, “[S]tructural opportunities for meaning- rily on the structural aspects of diffusion, or ful contact cannot tell us what sorts of practices the existence of tangible points of contact are likely to diffuse,” whereas an “analysis of the cultural bases of diffusion speaks more direct- ly to what spreads, replacing a theory of con- nections with a theory of connecting.” Direct all correspondence to Jason Kaufman, Department of Sociology, 648 William James Hall, According to this more culturally minded Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138 (jkauf- approach, diffusing practices are most likely to [email protected]), or to Orlando Patterson, be adopted when they are first made congruent Department of Sociology, 520 William James Hall, with local cultural frames or understandings, and Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138 are thus “rendered salient, familiar and com- ([email protected]). The authors thank Joel Ngugi pelling” (Strang and Soule 1998:276; see also and Michael Nguyen for their extraordinary efforts as research assistants. Cynthia Rockwell and Mary Gottdiener 1985; Rogers 1995). In other cases, Quigley provided invaluable clerical assistance. The however, more than just “congruence” is need- staff at the National Library of Canada was both ed for successful adoption; institutional sup- helpful and accommodating. Andy Markovits pro- port, repeated exposure, and/or active instruction vided information and inspiration for our own endeav- in the new practice are required for it to “take or into “American exceptionalism” and the sociology hold” in new settings. The original cultural pro- of sport. Peter Moskos helped with baseball history. file of that practice is often transformed in the The authors also thank Jerry A. Jacobs and the edi- torial staff at ASR, as well as Michèle Lamont, Frank process (e.g., Appadurai 1996; Bhabha 1994; Dobbin, Chris Winship, and the members of the Guillén 2001; Watson 2002). Sometimes, more- Culture Brown-Bag group at Harvard for their crit- over, it is the very difference in social, cultur- ical feedback on earlier drafts of this manuscript. al, and political power between change agents

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2005, VOL. 70 (February:82–110) #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–83 and adopters that accounts for successful long- Although there is now a rich body of important term diffusion. findings about this process, several major prob- One case that encompasses all of these fac- lems and gaps still exist. tors is the cross-national diffusion of cricket. One major failing of the diffusion literature Cricket originated in England as an informal is the tendency to overlook cases where inno- rural game, though it quickly emerged into a vations are transmitted but eventually rejected, highly competitive sport. Over time, cricket as well as cases where adoption might have evolved into an English national pastime, along been expected but did not occur. Palloni (2001: with soccer, rugby, and horse racing (Allen 73–75) highlights two aspects of this problem 1990). Cricket began diffusing to other countries in his important recent review of the field. First, when British soldiers and settlers brought it he notes the common failure to try and account with them to the various colonies of the empire, for the persistence of diffused practices in their and today, most Commonwealth countries sup- new surroundings—how and why, in other port active cricket cultures, though not all. words, do diffused practices become part of the The case of Canada is particularly striking in lived experience of those who have adopted this regard. Cricket was popular in Canada and them? Second, he notes the obverse: that after the United States in the mid-nineteenth centu- the initial adoption of an innovation, mecha- ry—in fact, the first official international crick- nisms might arise that undermine its retention. et match in the world took place between Palloni (2001:73) adds that, “Despite the fact American and Canadian “elevens” in 1844 that this is a key part of a diffusion process, it (Boller 1994a:23). The game’s popularity rivaled is rarely mentioned and almost never explicit- that of baseball until the late nineteenth centu- ly modeled or studied.” The problem, we sus- ry, after which interest declined sharply. The pect, is that many diffusion studies track cultural game languished in both countries until quite practices that are not commonly rejected, such recently, when new immigrants from the as the adoption of new, time-tested medical or Caribbean and South Asia began arriving in agricultural practices. Strang and Soule (1998: North America in significant numbers 268) observe, for example, that there is “a strong (Gunaratnam 1993; Steen 1999). This pattern of selection bias in diffusion research, where inves- adoption-then-rejection poses important sub- tigators choose ultimately popular [i.e., widely stantive and theoretical issues regarding the diffused] practices as appropriate candidates cross-national diffusion of cultural practices. for study.” Issues such as the persistence and Given Canada’s—and to a lesser degree, rejection of diffused practices are thus generally America’s—demographic, cultural, and overlooked in the literature. sociopolitical connections to Britain, the game’s Another shortcoming of diffusion studies is unexpected demise there is puzzling, especial- highlighted by Wejnert (2002:299–302), who ly in contrast to its successful diffusion in far less notes a tendency in the literature to ignore the “British” parts of the Commonwealth. At the role of characteristics unique to the practice or same time, this disjuncture also seems at odds thing being diffused. Specific features of the with several important perspectives in the soci- innovation being adopted, such as its potential ological study of diffusion. for replication and change, play an important but often overlooked role in the ultimate success or SITUATING CRICKET IN failure of diffusion. By confining their studies to simple physical objects or cultural routines DIFFUSION THEORY that are diffused at the micro-social level, dif- There is widespread agreement that diffusion is fusion scholars have tended to create advanced the transmission, adoption, and eventual accul- formal models that overlook real-world obsta- turation of an innovation by a recipient popu- cles to diffusion—those posed by the nature, lation (Coleman, Katz, and Menzel 1966; complexity, continuity, and potential mutabili- Rogers 1995; Wejnert 2002; cf. Palloni 2001). ty of the innovations themselves. Wejnert (2002) Most sociological studies of the diffusion also notes the often overlooked distinction process aim to identify the mechanisms by between innovations that are diffused at the which an innovation spreads as well as the rate macro- and micro-social levels. Those involv- at which it does so in a given population. ing large collective actors such as countries and #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

84—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW industries likely have different consequences ure, an internally complex cultural entity with and diffusion mechanisms than those that powerful symbolic and political consequences involve mainly individuals or firms. (Appadurai 1996; Beckles and Stoddart 1995; The dominant “relational” approach to dif- Bourdieu 1978; Maguire 1999; Malcolm 2001; fusion research in sociology has improved our Miller et al. 2001; Nandy 2000; Patterson 1995; knowledge of the role of social networks in the Stoddart 1988). It involves cross-national dif- transmission of information and ideas (e.g. fusion among large collective entities engaging Buskens and Yamaguchi 1999), but it tends to broad arrays of both practitioners and spectators. underspecify the role of social structural factors It illustrates both the successful diffusion of a such as class, status, and power in the adoption politically potent national cultural practice and or rejection of innovations. In this light, Burt the potential for such diffusion to be discontin- (1987), Marsden and Podolny (1990), and Van ued midstream. Finally, the case of cricket high- den Bulte and Lilien (2001) have revised lights the roles of social structure and “cultural Coleman, Katz, and Menzel’s (1966) classic power” in the diffusion process. study of the adoption of a new antibiotic drug We first dispense with several common expla- among a community of Midwestern doctors, nations of the diffusion of cricket, each of which but diffusion research has otherwise largely hinges on one or another argument about nation- neglected these topics. It is significant, note al culture. Instead, we demonstrate the need to Mizruchi and Fein (1999), that sociologists have consider four aspects of the adopting countries’ widely overlooked the role of power in social systems that appear to mitigate the poten- DiMaggio and Powell’s (1983) celebrated study tial diffusion of a cultural practice from a “dom- of the diffusion of organizational forms. inant” power to its “subordinates”: social Inequality, in particular, seems to be a neglect- stratification, secondary education, entrepre- ed subject in the diffusion literature. Rogers neurship/network-building, and indexical (1995:7) makes a distinction between nationalism, or the frame of reference in which homophilous and heterophilous diffusion citizens measure their own national accom- processes—that is, those in which the change plishments. Of the four, social stratification agents and adopters either share or do not share seems to have had the most widespread (i.e., comparable social positions—but fails to generalizable) impact on the global diffusion of explore the ramifications of the latter situation cricket, though this occurred at least partially in detail. As we will see in the case of cricket, through indirect effects related to the other status differences and the attendant mechanisms three. Before explaining any of this in more of distancing and inclusion can be decisive vari- detail, however, we will enumerate our study ables in explaining the adoption of cross-nation- population, evaluate evidence relating to the ally diffused cultural practices. It will be shown popularity of cricket and other sports in various that a top-down, or vertically heterophilous, countries, and outline the criteria by which we process of diffusion best explains diffusionary measure national sports cultures. success in some cases. Some sociologists who work within the insti- CRICKET’S UNIVERSE: tutional framework of diffusion studies have, THE STUDY POPULATION happily, attempted to address these concerns (see, e.g., Clemens and Cook 1999; Cole 1989; As noted earlier, our primary concern here is the Dobbin and Sutton 1998; Guillén 1994; Lillrank transmission of a complex innovation between 1995; Meyer and Hannan 1979; Molotch, very complex collective units.1 This presents Freudenberg, and Paulsen 2000; Patterson 1994; formidable problems of verification, made more Strang 1990; Strang and Meyer, 1993; Starr 1989). While we applaud the temporal and causal acuity of these studies, we think there are 1 Admittedly, one shortcoming of this particular further insights to be gained from case studies case study is that it pertains primarily to male athletes that explore the cultural and structural com- and sports fans in the countries in question. plexities of the diffusion process in broad socio- Nonetheless, we have no reason to expect that our historical terms. findings would be different were we to study a sport The case study presented here will focus on or other “national” cultural practice with greater a Western social practice that is, by any meas- cross-gender appeal. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–85 difficult by the fact that there are limited data Moreover, the game was deliberately “export- sources on sports during our period of focus— ed” to the British colonies as part of British the mid-nineteenth through early twentieth cen- colonial policy. According to one historian of turies. Were our objectives similar to those of the game, Brian Stoddart (1988: 658), “Cricket most current sociological studies of diffusion— was considered the main vehicle for transfer- estimating the rate and efficiency of diffusion ring the appropriate British moral code from given several different types of network struc- the messengers of empire to the local popu- ture—such data problems would be insur- lations.” mountable. Our task, happily, is different and International cricket has long since been dom- makes far fewer quantitative demands on the inated by ten core constituencies, each of which available historical data. We are concerned, is officially recognized by the International instead, with uncovering those covariates that Cricket Council (ICC) as “qualified to play explain ultimately successful or unsuccessful official Test matches.” The ICC was founded in cases of diffusion among the population of soci- England in 1909 and originally comprised just eties exposed to the game of cricket. It will thus three member countries: England, Australia, be enough for us to define, first, the population and South Africa. (South Africa was expelled of British-influenced societies that were exposed from the Commonwealth, and thus the ICC, in to and that initially played the game (the popu- 1961 but was reappointed to the ICC as a “full lation of potential long-term adoptees); and sec- member” nation in 1991.) In 1926, India, New ond, the success or failure of adoption in each Zealand, and a conglomeration of British case within that population, including cases Caribbean islands (the West Indies) were added where discontinuation followed successful adop- to the ICC’s membership, allowing them to tion. Please note that the focus of our inquiry is compete in global competition at the highest on the early period when cricket was first being level. The remaining four full-member nations institutionalized in England and spread through- are Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and out its colonies (i.e., the 19th and early 20th cen- Zimbabwe. These ten countries thus make up turies). Much happened in the cricket world what one might view as those parts of the world after World War II (when many of these colonies in which cricket has in fact attained the status gained independence) that we cannot account of “hegemonic sports culture.” Note the con- for here. Wherever possible, we try to account spicuous absence of Canada, itself a major for late-twentieth-century manifestations of the game, but our empirical focus is on the earlier Commonwealth country. The United States is period in which the game was either successfully excluded as well. These twelve nations—the or unsuccessfully transplanted to the various world’s ten major cricketing countries plus the British settlements considered here. United States and Canada—constitute the pri- One reason the global diffusion of cricket mary set of cases analyzed here (see Table 1). is of particular sociological interest is that it All of the foregoing reaffirms that the glob- is so strongly associated with a specific coun- al diffusion of cricket is more than just a case try of origin. Cricket was first played in of a popular sporting activity being adopted by England, and since its earliest years, global dif- societies around the world. Cricket has never fusion of the game has been controlled by been an Olympic sport, and its main interna- Englishmen and their cricket clubs. C.L.R. tional body, the ICC, was originally an James (1963:164), the great West Indian social appendage of the British colonial state. Until analyst, once wrote, for example, “Cricket 1965, in fact, it was the express policy of the was one of the most complete products of that ICC to admit only Commonwealth countries as previous age to which a man like Dickens members—the International Cricket Council always looked back with such nostalgia. .|.|. It was actually named the Imperial Cricket is the only contribution of the English educa- Council until 1965, further evidence of its dis- tional system of the nineteenth century to the tinct ties to the British colonial system. At the general education of Western civilization.” same time, it is rather ironic that so many coun- Similarly, J. A. Mangan (1986: 153), author of tries with painful colonial histories—India and The Games Ethic and Imperialism, wrote, the West Indies, for example—dominate the “Cricket was the umbilical cord of Empire sport today. We will explore in detail all of the linking the mother country with her children.” questions raised so far, but first, we must out- #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

86—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Table 1. The Study Population in Brief

Potential Adopter Key Period of “Successful” “Failed” Nations “Popularization” Adopters Adopters References Australia 1850s–70s **** Cashman 1998a; Mandle 1973; Pollard 1987 British Caribbean 1830s–60s **** Beckles 1998a, 1998b; James 1963; (West Indies) Stoddart 1998a; Canada 1860s–90s **** Boller 1994b; Hall and McCulloch 1895; Metcalfe 1987 England 17th–18th centuries **** Allen 1990; Brookes 1978; Dunning and Sheard 1979; Mandle 1973; Sandiford 1998a India (including 1880s–1900s **** Appadurai 1996; Bose 1990; Cashman Bangladesh & 1980, 1998b; Nandy 2000 Pakistan) New Zealand 1860s–90s **** Ryan 1998; Reese 1927 South Africa 1860s–80s **** Merritt and Nauright 1998; Stoddart 1998b Sri Lanka 1880s–90s **** Cashman 1998b; Perera 1998, 1999 United States 1860s–90s **** Boller 1994b; Kirsch 1989, 1991; Mrozek 1983 Zimbabwe 1890s–1900s **** Stoddart 1998b; Winch 1983 line more specifically how we determine “suc- Nevertheless, measuring comparative levels cessful” diffusion. of “emotional attachment” to sport is extreme- ly difficult. Should emotional attachment be HEGEMONIC SPORTS CULTURE: measured relative to those who are self-report- ed sports fans? Or should we more properly DEFINITION AND APPLICATION consider what percentage of the total population By what criteria do we designate some countries is committed to, or at least interested in, a given as “cricket-playing countries” and others as sport? There is no clear answer to this question, merely countries where cricket is played, or not nor do Markovits and Hellerman attempt to played at all? In trying to define what exactly provide one. They argue for a more qualitative, constitutes a national sports culture we borrow impressionistic approach: Are the local sports Markovits and Hellerman’s (2001) concept of pages filled with soccer news? Do patrons at “hegemonic sports culture.” In their timely bars and cafes talk soccer with any frequency? monograph, Offside: Soccer and American Does one see soccer stars endorsing major prod- Exceptionalism, Markovits and Hellerman ask ucts on TV and in print media? How is soccer why soccer (i.e., “football” in international parl- represented in the media relative to other sports? ance) is not more popular in the United States. To give but two brief examples, we searched Americans play soccer, field an increasingly the sports pages of one major Canadian and competitive World Cup squad, and have sup- one major Australian newspaper (both with free ported professional soccer leagues of varying Internet editions) for the day July 17, 2002. The success, but, argue Markovits and Hellerman, Sydney Morning Herald, a major daily news- soccer is still not a national pastime in America. paper from Sydney, Australia, contained an By this they mean that there is not a large audi- entire section devoted to cricket news ence for soccer among American sports fans. (www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket). On this par- Soccer matches are not major events in America, ticular day, it included 10 articles on cricket, players are not idolized, and the sport is not a spanning the range from “Wanted: Australian common topic of conversation as are football, all-rounder” (i.e., a player who can pitch, field, baseball, and basketball. In other words, a hege- and bat equally well) to news of the birth of monic sports culture is one that “dominates a cricketeer Adam Hollioake’s son. This is exact- country’s emotional attachments” (Markovits ly the kind of minutiae that constitutes a hege- and Hellerman 2001:10). monic sports culture. Fans are interested not #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–87

Figure 1. Average Percentage of Sports Stories about Cricket in Select National Newspapers Note: Online editions: October 15, 2003; January 6, April 15, July 5, 2004 only in the latest standings and scores but in the United States and Canada in detail. We do not future prospects of leading teams and even the attempt to deal with the case of contemporary daily ups and downs of players’lives. In contrast, Zimbabwe owing to the vast disruptions expe- the Toronto Globe and Mail (www.globeand- rienced in its political and economic systems of mail.ca), one of Canada’s leading daily news- late. We suspect that expressing an interest in papers, did not post a single article about cricket anything as “British” as cricket in contemporary on this day at the height of the warm-weather Zimbabwe could in fact be quite dangerous. season in Canada. If this is any testament to the This was not the case in earlier decades, how- local salience of cricket, Canadians regard it as ever, as evidenced by Zimbabwe’s admission a marginal practice indeed. into the top tier of “test match” cricket. Note, Figure 1 illustrates a more systematic com- too, that England has the next lowest number of parison of cricket coverage in the sports pages cricket stories—an average of only about 8 per- of online newspapers from 12 relevant countries cent of the sports coverage on these particular at four points in time (one day in each season days, though 17 percent of the sports coverage of the year).2 Of the 12 articles surveyed, the was dedicated to cricket in the one “summer” United States, Canada, and Zimbabwe con- edition we investigated. (There was no such tained the fewest articles on cricket. Shortly, summer “bounce” in the Canadian and we will recount the history of cricket in the American newspapers that we examined.) Naturally, these percentages reflect not only local interest in cricket but also the prevalence of newsworthy events in other local sports. Our 2 Actual newspapers searched were the Evening Standard (London, England—January) and the Times concern here is not on the exact distribution of Online (London, England—October, April, and July); coverage, however, but on the popularity of the Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney, Australia); the cricket more generally. From what we found in Mail and Guardian (Johannesburg, South Africa); the Times of India (Delhi, India); the New Zealand Herald (Auckland, NZ); the Jamaica Observer (Kingston, Daily News (Colombo, Sri Lanka); the Standard Jamaica); The Independent (Dhaka, Bangladesh); (Harare, Zimbabwe); the Globe and Mail (Toronto, the News International (Islamabad, Pakistan); the Canada); and USA Today (United States). #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

88—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW these newspapers, we can tentatively conclude ous in the American paper: the number of base- that cricket has become a “hegemonic sports ball references quickly begins outnumbering culture” in much but not all of the cricket references in the 1880s. Nevertheless, Commonwealth. Our endeavor is to explain this some readers might be surprised to learn that variance in the diffusion of the sport. cricket had a significant following in the United Nonetheless, because much of the variance on States in the 1850s and 1860s. Some readers the dependent variable comes from the negative may also be surprised to learn that baseball is cases of Canada and the United States, it only actually, and long has been, quite popular in seems fair to ask once again: Is cricket really that Canada (Barney 1992). Not only did Canada unpopular in these countries? For a better per- host two major-league baseball teams (until spective on the popularity of the sport over 2005), but also baseball diamonds are a com- time, we consulted electronic indices to two mon sight in most Canadian suburbs (Barney major newspapers: the New York Times for the 1989; Boller 1994b; Bouchier and Barney United States and the Globe and Mail for 1988). “The game has been played, in one form Canada.3 Using a keyword search, we docu- or another, throughout the country since the mented how many pages of newsprint includ- early 19th century,” writes sport historian ed the word “cricket” each year. To provide a William Humber (1995:1). Though Canadian reference point for articles about cricket, we interest in baseball may well have peaked with also did a comparable search for articles includ- the success of the Toronto Blue Jays in the late ing the word “baseball.” This allows us not only 1980s and early 1990s, it seems fair to say that to track the relative popularity of the two sports baseball is significantly more popular in Canada but also to control for variance in the amount of than cricket. newsprint devoted to general sports reporting in each newspaper over time. It is possible, if not TRADITIONAL EXPLANATIONS OF THE likely, that at least some of the articles bearing reference to these words are not actually about FAILURE OF CRICKET IN CANADA AND the sports in question—American cricket clubs THE UNITED STATES sometimes held tennis and golf tournaments on In trying to explain the virtual absence of pop- their grounds in the early twentieth century, for ular interest in cricket in the US and Canada, we example—thus inflating somewhat the number encountered several common arguments. The of “hits” counted per year. We were unable to most obvious, having to do with climate, is access and analyze every article bearing one of tempting but ultimately unsatisfactory. True, these two words, so we opted instead merely to Canadians are fanatical about ice hockey, a count them all and discount discrepancies as decidedly cold-weather sport; and true, most random error. The data presented below is thus of the leading cricket-playing nations do not not perfect evidence of the changing populari- suffer particularly cold winters. On the other ty of cricket and baseball in the United States hand, Canadians enjoy a wide variety of warm- and Canada, but it at least offers a proxy meas- weather sports, including not only baseball but ure of the prevalence of news coverage of the also field hockey, football, and lacrosse. sport in two major national newspapers over Furthermore, England, where the game was time (see Figures 2 and 3). invented, is hardly a “warm” country itself. As shown here, baseball and cricket were Indeed, the game is played there only in the about equally represented in the Canadian sports summer season, which is subject to more rain pages until 1900 and generally kept apace until than many parts of Canada. Nor has cricket sur- 1935, after which a large disparity appears in vived in the more temperate parts of the United favor of baseball. The divergence is more obvi- States or Canada. Weather, obviously, is not the answer. Some historians of cricket in the United States 3 The New York Times index is supplied by have suggested that the sport is not more pop- Chadwyck-Healey and available at http://histo- ular among Americans because it is inconsistent rynews.chadwyck.com. The Globe and Mail index is with their cultural worldview (Adelman 1986; supplied by Proquest and was accessed through a site Kirsch 1989, 1991). Cricket is a long, slow, license purchased by the National Library of Canada. tightly regimented game, they argue, whereas #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–89

Figure 2. Canadian Sports Reporting: The Globe and Mail, 1870–2000

Figure 3. American Sports Reporting: The New York Times, 1850–1950

Americans are always in a hurry and anxious for England think our game of baseball too fast. results. According to nineteenth-century sports- Each game, however, just suits the people of the writer Henry Chadwick (1868:52, quoted in two nations.” True, cricket matches are gener- Kirsch 1991:12), for example, “We fast people ally longer than baseball games; nevertheless, of America, call cricket slow and tedious; while time itself does not appear to be a sufficient the leisurely, take-your-time-my-boy people of explanation. While international test matches #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

90—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW can last up to five days, many local matches are why didn’t Dr. Naismith merely foist cricket only one day in duration. In Australia, for exam- on these “ungentlemanly” young Americans? ple, an abbreviated “limited overs” version of Such explanations echo, in homely terms, the cricket is popular with television audiences “cultural understanding” argument of diffusion (Cashman 1998a). Anthropologist Arjun scholars. We discount such explanations as over- Appadurai (1996: 101) even argues that, ly simplistic and, in some cases, patently biased. “Cricket is perfectly suited for television, with This brings us to another popular explanation its many pauses, its spatial concentration of of “Americo-Canadian Exceptionalism”— action, and its extended format. .|.|. It is the Anglophobia. This perspective focuses on perfect television sport.” Moreover, when played Canadians and Americans’ (presumably nega- by amateurs, among whom wickets fall quick- tive) disposition toward England and the ly, the game easily adapts to a spirited afternoon English. True, a significant minority of “knock” no longer than amateur soccer or base- Canadians claim French, not English heritage, ball games. Note, too, that such perceptions are and a large percentage of Canada’s Anglo-pop- as much an effect of the differential status of ulation also trace their heritage back to Scotland sports as a cause thereof: Americans’pejorative and Ireland—all possible reasons for Canadian descriptions of cricket are a product, as well as antipathy toward a cultural practice as English a cause of, the sport’s wider failure to reach as cricket. On the other hand, one can easily “hegemonic” status in the United States. refute such arguments with reference to other Similarly, cricket has been described by some cricket-playing countries: Australia was popu- as a sport that requires too much submission lated by many people of Scottish and Irish her- (i.e., orderly behavior) for Americans. Neither itage, for example, and a large portion of its spitting nor swearing are officially condoned on Anglo-population can actually blame the cru- the cricket field, for example, and disagree- elties of the English penal system for sending ment with match officials is strictly forbidden.4 their ancestors to Australia in the first place. The Nonetheless, while some might criticize white population of South Africa, another crick- Americans for their ungainly habits, this would eting nation, is also comprised of rival English hardly appear to constitute a satisfactory soci- and Dutch, as well as indigenous African, peo- ological explanation, particularly when ples. Why would Canadians be any more resist- Americans are so attracted to other sports that ant to an English cultural practice like cricket make similar demands of players, such as ten- than their counterparts in these other former nis and golf. And, even if this is true of colonies? Why, moreover, would Canadians be Americans, it still leaves the question of more hostile to English culture than the descen- Canadian habits unaccounted for. Given the fre- dants of peoples cruelly subjugated by the quency with which one hears Canadians English in places like Jamaica, Barbados, India, described as modest, well-mannered, and com- Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka? Finally, munity-minded people (e.g., Frye 1971; Lipset why would Americans be so enamored with 1996), one would expect cricket to be wildly tennis and golf, both sports with British ori- popular in the Dominion. In fact, a Canadian, gins, but not cricket?5 While we will argue that James Naismith, invented basketball (in nationalism did play a significant role in Massachusetts, USA) with these very charac- American and Canadian attitudes toward crick- teristics in mind: “If men will not be gentle- et, we do not accept so facile an explanation as manly in their play,” he said in introducing the their contempt for all things British. Cricket game to its first players (Wise 1989:124), “it is our place to encourage them to games that may be played by gentlemen in a manly way, and show them that science is superior to brute force 5 It should be noted, moreover, that the popular with a disregard for the feelings of others.” So North American sports of baseball and football have direct ties to the English games of “rounders” and rugby respectively (Dunning and Sheard 1979: 7). In the nineteenth century, two other British “public 4 We are told by an anonymous reviewer familiar school” sports, rowing and track and field, were with English cricket, however, that “county” cricket directly incorporated into American collegiate life as is rife with swearing and disputes with officials. well (Smith 1988). #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–91 was widely perceived by American and British culture. In fact, a large part of Canadian Canadian audiences to be a British “affecta- national identity is focused around their very tion” for reasons particular to the game’s history distaste for Americans and American cultural in their respective countries. Explaining how this hegemony (Frye 1971). Why would Canadians came to be is a major part of this project. replace English cricket with a sport from a One related thesis about the decline of country to which they are so poorly disposed? American and Canadian interest focuses on We take seriously the need to explain the rise of changes in the rate of English immigration to baseball and decline of cricket in two countries both countries (e.g., Metcalfe 1987). It is true that with distinctive cultural ties to cricket’s moth- many early adherents of the game were British erland, England. We turn first, however, to the immigrants, civil servants, and military person- initial invention and diffusion of cricket in the nel, particularly in Canada, where British troops British Empire. were garrisoned until 1867. In the United States, moreover, some cricket clubs, such as the famous ANALYSIS—NETWORK-BUILDING AND St. George Club of New York, were largely peo- CLASS COMPETITION IN THE GLOBAL pled by British residents. Such ethno-national DIFFUSION OF SPORT social clubs were exceedingly popular in the United States in the late nineteenth century THE INVENTION OF CRICKET (Kaufman 2002). Nonetheless, there is clear evi- AND ITS ORIGINAL TRANSMISSION dence that many “native-born” Americans and THROUGHOUT THE BRITISH EMPIRE Canadians participated in cricket alongside their British-born counterparts in the late nineteenth Despite its stodgy reputation in America, crick- century. Consider, for example, the following et was not originally an aristocratic game. In its observation made in the 1895 book, Sixty Years earliest incarnation cricket was, in fact, an agrar- of Canadian Cricket (Patteson quoted in Hall and ian pastime for modest farmers and craftsmen. McCulloch 1895:258): “The so-called American Though historical precedents exist as far back as eleven in 1859 contained [only] one native-born the twelfth century, English cricket is common- American. .|.|. In 1860 the number of Americans ly thought to have come into its own in the sev- had slightly increased. And now, in 1894, all enteenth century (Allen 1990: 16–17; also are native Americans ‘bar one.’” Furthermore, Brookes 1978; James 1963:164). According to many of today’s dominant cricketing countries most historical accounts, it was gambling that have scarcely any population of direct British truly inspired enthusiasm for cricket among descent, and in the cases of Australia and New England’s upper classes (e.g., Allen 1990; James Zealand, one must still grapple with the question 1963; Sandiford 1994). Country gentlemen found of how a British sport like cricket survived and that they could field highly competitive teams by flourished in the face of declining immigration hiring skilled “players” (i.e., professionals) to flows and the declining influence of British cul- work on their estates, thus inaugurating a long tra- ture and identity on their own national cultures. dition of collaboration between “gentlemen and In other words, we must go beyond the question players,” in which elites and commoners played of cricket’s transmission to the foregoing coun- cricket side-by-side (Warner 1950). tries and ask how and why the sport was actu- At the same time, English elites encouraged ally adopted by locals and reconstructed as a their colonial subjects to play cricket because of persistent national pastime (the final, accultur- the game’s professed ability to discipline and 6 ation phase of cultural diffusion). civilize men, English and native alike. The lit- One final “common” explanation of the fail- erature on colonial cricket is rather explicit in ure of cricket in British North America is the ris- ing popularity of baseball, an American sport with similar origins and style of play. There is 6 Again, we regret the fact that women are not an some truth to this argument, at least to the extent especially relevant part of this case study. The ques- that the rise of baseball and the decline of crick- tion of English colonial attitudes toward the moral et do seem temporally related. Why this is so is “improvement” of women is certainly a topic worth hard to explain, however. Few Canadians would further consideration, though it is far beyond the willingly admit that they prefer American to purview of this particular study. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

92—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW this regard. After touring India and Burma with [British] educators encouraged cricket participa- an amateur team from Oxford University, author tion among their students in the profound convic- Cecil Headlam (1903:168–69) commented, tion that it produced better citizens as well as “[C]ricket unites, as in India, the rulers and the scholars. .|.|. [They] argued that organized sports could bring order and discipline to aggressive ruled. It also provides a moral training, an edu- groups of rich, spoilt and rebellious brats. .|.|. The cation in pluck, and nerve, and self-restraint, far public schools established the cricketing cult from more valuable to the character of the ordinary about 1830 onwards. By 1860 it was an essential native than the mere learning by heart of a play feature of their curriculum. (Sandiford 1998a:14) of Shakespeare.” Interestingly, Indian cricket So central did cricket become to British elite was originally supported by British and Indian education that by the mid-nineteenth century, elites alike. Britons like Lord Harris, governor headmasters began hiring professional crick- of Bombay from 1890–95, sponsored tourna- eters to coach their boys to victory over rival ments between Indian and English teams. schools. Similarly, cricket-playing was endorsed and The creation of distinctly British secondary encouraged by local elites as “an aristocratic schools throughout the colonies of the British game which upheld traditional notions of social Empire also helped expose indigenous popula- hierarchy and patronage” (Cashman 1979:197; tions to the game. In Jamaica, for example, the also Bose 1990). Thus, it was a win-win situa- educational system strongly promoted cricket in tion for everyone concerned: cricket reaffirmed the secondary schools where, because of the the authority of English and Indian elites over merit principle in admissions, a substantial their respective constituencies while providing minority of darker lads of working-class back- a forum for social interaction between them. ground could be found. The same was true in the The same was true elsewhere in the colonies. Asian Subcontinent, where promising young Cricket was promoted as an English sport for lads from low-status households were some- both Englishmen and natives. In 1868, a famous times sent to English-style boarding schools all-Aborigine squad of Australian cricketers and thus introduced to cricket. The importance toured England. Parsi teams from India came in of these schools in the cultivation of national 1886 and 1888. Even in South Africa, non- cricket cultures is particularly evident in places whites were encouraged to play cricket, though where the educational system followed a dif- on rigidly segregated terms (Merrett and ferent model. As Sandiford (1998b:4) points Nauright 1998:55–57). The British colonies in out, cricket languished in Anglo-African the Caribbean are particularly well known for colonies like Kenya, Nigeria, and Uganda, their legacy of interracial play (Beckles 1998a, where, in the nineteenth century, “European 1998b; Beckles and Stoddart 1995; Cozier 1978; communities remained only minute fractions James 1963; Sandiford 1998c). “From as early of the overall population and where the Victorian as the 1860s the secondary schools and church- public school ethos never really took root.” es in Barbados deliberately began to use crick- British-run secondary schools there were more et as a socializing and civilizing agent,” writes committed to religious education than to com- historian Keith Sandiford (1998c:1–2). “In those petition and sport. This attitude was likely a days the schools were dominated by headmas- result of the fact that British colonization began ters who had come from Victorian Britain in these countries rather late, by which time the steeped in the public school ethos which then goals of imperialism had become somewhat placed great store in team sports.” more modest.7 The virtual absence of a dedi- Indeed, the popularity of cricket in England cated white settler population contributed to a itself owes much to its secondary education garrison mentality in which the English sought system. Cricket was regarded as an important right of passage for young British males, par- ticularly those schooled in the elite “public 7 Note, however, that English colonial policy in schools” erected to train the future aristocrats places like India did not originally embrace the angli- of the empire (Mangan 1986; Penn 1999; canization of their native populations either—this Sandiford 1994; Stoddart and Sandiford 1998; was an innovation of the mid-nineteenth century in Williams 2001). India (Cashman 1998b:118). #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–93 to mollify, rather than civilize, their central and lower-class players without compromising African subjects. Similarly, the British did not the social segregation prevalent in English encourage indigenous participation in cricket society more generally. Gentlemen and play- in the Far East (Stoddart 1998b:136–37). ers were allocated separate changing rooms Several unique features of the game itself and entrances to the field of play; and separate appear to have facilitated its cross-national accommodations were arranged for team trav- adoption and acculturation in many parts of the el; team captains were exclusively drawn from Commonwealth. That cricket requires no phys- the amateur (i.e., high-status) ranks; and “pro- ical contact between players explains in part its fessionals were expected, independently of rel- diffusion to mixed-race and deeply class-divid- ativities of age and skill, to call amateurs, ‘Sir,’ ed colonies where “contact” sports like rugby and, particularly when young, to perform and soccer/football were either ignored, prac- menial duties around the ground” (Dunning ticed only among whites, or played along strict- and Sheard 1979:181). Stacking was even more ly segregated lines (meaning that white teams important in multiracial British colonies, such only played white teams, and so forth [Stoddart as Jamaica, Barbados, and India, where 1988]). Interracial play was permissible as “natives” were generally expected to special- long as it did not involve close contact, as with ize in bowling, thus leaving captaining, umpir- cricket. The formal attire of official cricket ing, and batting to their colonial overseers. matches also helped smooth the way for inte- Malcolm (2001) has shown that this pattern grated play—even in the searing heat of India was not only transferred to the colonies but per- and the Caribbean, players were expected to sists to this day in British cricket clubs where, wear white or cream flannel trousers and long- as late as 1990, 70 percent of the bowlers were sleeved white shirts. It is significant, too, that of West Indian and other colonial ancestry. even the most minor of games required two Until fairly recently, even the most superlative umpires dressed in authoritative white over- nonwhite players were barred from captaining coats and that a cardinal principle of the game their clubs or national teams (Coakley 1998). was that the umpires’ decisions were always Nonetheless, enthusiasm for and participa- final. (The umpires were also invariably mem- tion in cricket became a national pastime in bers of the elite class in interclass games.) every former major colony of the British These arrangements effectively curtailed any Empire except Canada and the United States. rabble-rousing or arguments that would In the cricketing colonies, elite enthusiasm for demean the “masters” or undermine the per- the game was transferred to the population at vasive atmosphere of noblesse oblige in the large. In the United States and Canada, on the colonial milieu. Thus, even in England, non- other hand, cricket remained largely a sport for whites were permitted to play on local crick- country club members and elite boarding et teams. In fact, one of the most famous school students (Kirsch 1989, 1991; Lester batsmen in all of English cricket history is a 1951; Melville 1998; Metcalfe 1987; Redmond man known by the name of Ranjitsinhji, a 1979). In other words, cricket culture had been native of India who originally learned the game transmitted to, and adopted by, some portion at Rajkumar College and later played at the of the American and Canadian populations, University of Cambridge before going on to but it failed to persist or develop as a popular become an English sports celebrity (Williams pastime in both cases. Understanding variance 2001:22–32). in the global diffusion of cricket thus requires Another important feature of the game that further investigation of the acculturation facilitated interracial play was “stacking,” or process, or the way the meaning and cultural “positional segregation,” within teams. From significance of the game was transformed in its earliest period in Britain, we find stacking the process of diffusion. As mentioned earli- along class lines in cricket: bowling and wick- er, we do not find explanations based on et-keeping were performed by low-status “national values” or “cultural resonance” use- “players” while the roles of star batsmen and ful in this regard. Instead, we look carefully at captain were mainly reserved for high-status the social systems of each country, as well as “gentlemen.” The practice of stacking thus actual histories of the game (and related games) allowed elite Englishmen to recruit nonwhite in them. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

94—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

ADOPTION FOLLOWED BY FAILED ioned pastime for antiquarians and Anglophiles. ACCULTURATION: ELITE VERSUS POPULAR An 1895 account of Canadian cricket remarks, SPORTS IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES for example, that in Nova Scotia, “the same players were continually engaged in fighting The most distinctive feature of the history of out the same contests year after year, save only cricket in both the United States and Canada is varied by the introducing of some fresh regiment its elevation to a pastime for elites only. In or ship” (Wallace quoted in Hall and McCulloch Canada, for example, cricket “gained a firm 1895:124). “Cricket clubs of any size in Nova foothold among upper-class Canadians who Scotia were few and far between,” adds Wallace. were to perpetuate the game through the private “It needed, therefore, all the efforts of lovers of schools. Cricket’s longevity and persistence the game to keep up the necessary interest.” were directly related to its position within the Another 1895 commentator adds, “Only two highest levels of Canadian society” (Metcalfe or three comparatively small schools act as 1987:8). Thus, one key to the rise and fall of feeders to the ranks, always too rapidly deplet- Canadian cricket was the changing role of the ed by the cares of life, by anno domini, and game in Canada’s elite universities and sec- perchance, obesity” (Patteson quoted in Hall ondary schools. “Founded though they were by and McCulloch 1895:257–58). Sandiford British public school alumni along British pub- (1994:148) concludes, “[D]uring the last quar- lic school lines, the Canadian colleges refused ter of the century, the game became associated to perpetuate the elitism of their prototypes or more and more with an older and more old- to preserve their outmoded curricula” fashioned Anglo-Saxon elite.” (Sandiford 1994:148; also Dunae 1981). By the The central feature of the Canadian story is end of the nineteenth century, only the most thus the isolation of cricket as a class-specific elite boarding schools retained cricket, and even pastime. The clubby “Britishness” of Canadian they began to encourage indigenous sports like elites may be one reason for this split, but the hockey, lacrosse, and football in its stead key causal factor remains the exclusivity of the (Mangan 1986:142–67). In the words of Donald sport, not its association with Britain per se. In King, Secretary to the Canadian Cricket looking at Canadian sports history of the late Association (quoted in Sayen 1956:98), “[S]ome nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, one of our private schools play the game and feature sees substantial evidence that cricket was an it as part of their normal curriculum, but the pri- increasingly insular pastime, practiced only by vate school here is in the minority and when the those with the time and money to join exclusive boys leave they often go and live in an area in clubs. Contributors to an 1895 volume, Sixty which there is no cricket or perhaps the lure of Years of Canadian Cricket (Hall and golf or tennis proves stronger than enthusiasm McCulloch, eds.), refer frequently to the gen- for cricket when school days are over.” Canadian tlemanly, amateurish nature of the Canadian boarding schools “kept alive the cult of athleti- game, as compared to its quasi-professional cism,” writes Sandiford (1994: 149), “but saw English variant. In addition, Canadian sports his- fit to promote a different brand of games. The torian Richard Gruneau (1983:108–9) notes behavior of the late-Victorian colleges in Canada that elite sports teams in Canada actually began differed markedly from that of their counterparts avoiding competition with non-elite teams in the in [for example] India and the West Indies.” mid-to-late nineteenth century. Gruneau (1983:109) hypothesizes that “as the Canadian THE DISMAL FATE OF CRICKET IN CANADA. class structure began to elaborate, and as mer- Translating these observations into sociological itocratic liberal values began to develop wide- theory about diffusion failure requires some spread support, members of the dominant class conjecture but is ultimately rather straightfor- apparently became unable to tolerate the possi- ward: As fewer Canadian elite schools devoted bility of defeat at the hands of those they con- time to training young men in the finer points sidered to be their social inferiors. They also of cricket, the quantity and quality of play may have become progressively more alarmed declined. Without fresh infusions of talent or at the prospect that commercialism in sport widespread networks of league play, the game could very easily get out of hand under such gradually took on the air of a marginal, old-fash- conditions and vulgarize traditional upper-class #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–95 views of ‘the nobility of play.’” Cricket had ious abilities and backgrounds. Noting that become for them something precious, part of American educators were increasingly inter- their heritage, an elite pastime more akin to ested in finding healthy leisure pursuits for stu- ancestor worship than play. In England, by con- dents, Spalding donated equipment and trophies trast, cricket remained something spirited and to groups like the Public School Athletic League boisterous, as well as highly competitive, thus (Levine 1985:110–12).8 Spalding is even cred- facilitating the incorporation of low-status ited with inventing the now widely discredited “players” into the game. “Cooperstown myth,” by which the origins of baseball were explained in a compelling story of its humble but ingenious small-town roots COUNTERFACTUAL: THE RISE OF BASEBALL IN (see Spalding [1911] 1992). THE UNITED STATES. This last observation points Note too that A. G. Spalding worked hard to to a second facet of cricket’s ultimate rejection in North America: its failure to cultivate mass curry the interest of elites, as well as the mass- appeal through frequent matches in which large es, in baseball. Upon returning from an 1889 crowds, intense rivalries, and spirited fans might “world tour” in which Spalding traveled with a bring the sport to the attention of major portions hand-picked squad of professionals to Australia, of the population. The history of American base- Sri Lanka [then Ceylon], Egypt, Italy, France, ball provides a telling comparison with that of and the British Isles, Spalding had his team cricket in both the United States and Canada. greeted by a grand parade in New York City and Though baseball and cricket both began as rel- then hosted a 300-person banquet attended by atively informal leisure games in the United “Teddy Roosevelt, Mark Twain, local politi- States, baseball was later blessed by a cadre of cians, baseball officials, Yale undergraduates, brilliant entrepreneurs determined to make it the and ‘popular members of the New York Stock “nation’s pastime.” One such person was A. G. Exchange,’” among others (Levine 1985:107). Spalding, star player, manager, league organiz- Spalding’s biographer, Peter Levine (1985:108) er, and sports manufacturer. To call Spalding an describes the tour’s final, April 19th, stop in impresario or a marketing genius would be a bit Chicago in terms worth repeating: “As the of an understatement. He engaged in every part Chicago Tribune described it, ‘the streets were of the game, from promoting star players and thronged’ with a crowd that ‘represented all intercity rivalries to squelching nascent efforts classes. Businessmen were in it, toughs and at labor organization among players (Levine sports .|.|. also a great many ladies. And they 1985). went fairly crazy.’” The parade was concluded In addition to cricket, baseball had other “over expensive cigars and fine brandy at a rivals for people’s time and money in the United reception attended by Chicago’s elite. .|.|.” Thus, States—crew regattas were major business for Spalding made sure that the sport appealed to some time, for example, as were bicycle races, everyone, elites notwithstanding. He offered track meets, and college football games (Smith them a distinctive, exclusive niche from which 1988). Spalding helped secure baseball’s place to enjoy the game. in American national culture through a two- At the same time, Spalding contributed to part strategy: On the one hand, he promoted the emerging American consensus that cricket the highest possible level of play with the widest was an effeminate game for men too precious possible audience by creating and managing a to play baseball. In his best-selling 1911 book, system of professional league play throughout America’s National Game, Spalding boasts North America. On the other hand, he built a ([1911] 1992:7), “I have declared that Cricket manufacturing and marketing empire devoted to is a genteel game. It is. Our British Cricketer, selling youngsters the accoutrements of the having finished his day’s labor at noon, may don game—the Spalding name still stands prominent in the world of sporting goods. In the late 1870s, after a successful career as player and manag- 8 PSAL was founded in New York City in 1900 er, Spalding published an official rulebook for with the support of Andrew Carnegie, John D. the game and also licensed official merchandise Rockefeller, and J. Pierpont Morgan. It soon spread for play. Spalding also produced bats and balls to other cities around the United States (Levine 1985: of different sizes and shapes for players of var- 110–12). #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

96—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW his negligee shirt, his white trousers, his gor- ate facilities for “the Baseball Nine.” In fact, geous hosiery and his canvas shoes, and sally beginning in the 1860s and 70s, baseball became forth to the field of sport, with his sweetheart an intensely popular sport at the nation’s most on one arm and his Cricket bat under the other, prestigious colleges. America’s first recorded knowing that he may engage in his national intercollegiate game took place in 1859 between pastime without soiling his linen or neglecting Amherst and Williams. Bowdoin, Middlebury, his lady. .|.|. Not so the American Ball Player. Dartmouth, Brown, Trinity, Hamilton, He may be a veritable Beau Brummel in social Princeton, and Kenyon all had organized teams life. He may be the Swellest Swell of the Smart by 1862. “By the end of the 1870s, a group of Set in Swelldom; but when he dons his Base eastern colleges, consisting of Amherst, Brown, Ball suit, he says good-bye to society, doffs his Dartmouth, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale, were gentility, and becomes—just a Ball Player! He playing regular home and away series of games” knows that his business now is to play ball, and (Smith 1988:59). College teams also regularly that first of all he is expected to attend to busi- played professional teams, and play was ness. .|.|. Cricket is a gentle pastime. Base Ball extremely competitive; so much so that the col- is War! Cricket is an Athletic Sociable [sic], leges began offering “financial incentives” to played and applauded in a conventional, deco- especially talented players (Smith 1988:62–66). rous and English manner. Base Ball is an The incipient professionalization of college Athletic Turmoil, played and applauded in an athletics presented America’s elite college pres- unconventional, enthusiastic and American idents with something of a conundrum, anoth- manner.” er key to understanding the trajectories of cricket Naturally, Spalding was mischaracterizing and baseball in the United States and Canada. the nature of English cricket, and English soci- Baseball’s popularity grew through the result of ety more generally. The English aristocracy had excessive promotion, intense competition, and long prided itself on the rough and tumble sports a do-anything-for-victory mentality among practiced at its most elite boarding schools. The coaches and players. Aspiring athletes at relevant point is that Spalding, and many like America’s elite colleges were clearly attracted him, were contributing to the development of a by the glamour and notoriety of the game. (Posh specifically North American perception of crick- summer jobs playing exhibition baseball at et. Indeed, this stereotype of elite British soci- resort hotels and other financial “perks” for ety likely attracted some American and playing were probably also attractions.) At the Canadian men to the game—Canadian crick- same time, college masters and alumni object- eters increasingly focused on cultivating a gen- ed strongly to this development; they preferred tlemanly ideal of elegant, amateur play. As for a sports ethic closer to Spalding’s stereotype of the United States, an 1875 description of life at English cricket—leisurely, good-natured, and Harvard College (Vaille and Clark 1875:421) safe. College presidents had previously tried to says the following of the Harvard Cricket Club, ban excessively violent sports to no avail— founded in 1862: “Though never very popular American-style tackle football was first devel- with the athletes of the College, it has always oped at Harvard College, where it was found supporters enough to keep it in a moder- repeatedly and unsuccessfully banned by the ately vigorous existence.” Thus, the emerging president. American college presidents respond- image of cricket as an ultra-elite pastime both ed to the emergence of pay-for-play with equal repelled and attracted followers. reproach. Even the notion of hiring professional, At the same time, however, many of the full-time coaches for college teams was origi- wealthy sons of American and Canadian soci- nally considered anathema by college boards ety eschewed cricket for baseball, perhaps, in (Mrozek 1983; Smith 1988; Townsend 1996). part, because of late-nineteenth-century rheto- American college masters eventually ric about the manliness of American culture. The managed to minimize financial incentives for 1875 Harvard Book does not include reference student-athletes, but the wider “professionali- to a college baseball team, for example, but the zation” of certain sports continued nonetheless. 1887–88 Annual Report (Harvard College 1889: Crew, football, baseball, and track and field 29) proudly reports a gift of $25,000 from Mr. attracted enormous audiences, particularly when Henry Reginald Astor Carey to build appropri- rival schools, such as Harvard and Yale, had #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–97 their annual meetings. Winning teams often American cricket players increasingly retreated received valuable cash prizes. Competition to small, elite clubs, and competition with rival became increasingly defined around key dates “elevens” was quickly restricted to a small and rivalries. Thanksgiving Day became a focal coterie of suitable teams (Kirsch 1989:221–22). point of the college football season, for exam- Over time, the sport’s snooty image took a toll ple, and competitive schools could bring in tens on the popularity of cricket among Americans of thousands of dollars at the gate. Major crew at large, an image that elites sought to cultivate. regattas and track meets could also bring in In contrast to the robust English tradition of crowds of 10,000 or more (Smith 1988:30–34). “gentlemen and players,” American cricket clubs By this time, therefore, any college athlete still strictly forbade professionals from play, even if devoted to cricket would had to have asked him- it meant bitter defeat at the hands of traveling self why he was willing to forego the glory and English and Australian teams. Melville (1998: gammon of the era’s more popular sports— 77; also 120–22) notes that, “As the old-line especially baseball, which essentially requires [American] competitive cricket clubs went into the same skill-set as cricket. decline, their roles were assumed by cricket Whereas football, crew, and track and field organizations dedicated to providing an envi- all remained more or less confined to the col- ronment of more socially selective participation legiate arena, baseball supported a number of upon strictly amateur lines.” A 1907 New York professional leagues in addition to the college Times story (“Cricket”) quips, “Once more the teams. An 1888 New York Times story (“The game of cricket has been shown to be a lan- Game Was Stopped”) reports a crowd of 40,000 guishing exotic in New York.” It noted, “A vis- spectators at a professional baseball game out- iting team of Englishmen have worked their side of Philadelphia; so many, in fact, that the will upon the local cricketers. .|.|. In the West, game was “called” after a mob of unseated fans New York is supposed to be the seat and centre surged onto the field at the end of the first of Anglomania. But the West ought to be soft- inning. Pro-am baseball games were also a com- ened when it sees how very badly New York mon occurrence, which surely contributed to the plays the Anglican national game. Cricketally sport’s popularity on college campuses. [sic] speaking, Philadelphia is the American baseball, in sum, increasingly Anglomaniacal town.” Indeed, with the excep- resembled English cricket: a sport in which tion of a few New England college teams, crick- elites and commoners shared a passion for the et thrived only in Philadelphia by the end of the game, one in which gambling, professionalism, nineteenth century. As early as 1884, a New and a willingness to do anything to win were York Times story (“Philadelphia Cricketers”) fundamental. joked, “Residents of American cities where cricket is not played, except by a few homesick CRICKET IN THE UNITED STATES. The place of Englishmen, assert that it is played in cricket in late-nineteenth-century American Philadelphia because cricket is the slowest of society could hardly be more different: Though games and Philadelphia the slowest of cities.” cricket was originally popularized in the United Regardless of the Philadelphians’ supposed States by working-class immigrants from the motives, it is true that a handful of Philadelphia- British Isles, it later became a sport practiced by based teams provided the bulk of American only a select few Americans (Melville 1998: training and participation in the sport during the 16–17, 25). Note, moreover, that while the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. increasing popularity of baseball did present a One finds little evidence, furthermore, that the formidable challenge to American cricket, the Philadelphians were concerned about the over- two games existed comfortably side-by-side all decline of interest in American cricket; in throughout the 1850s and 60s. It was not fact, they appear to have encouraged it. They uncommon, in fact, for cricket and baseball confined the game to prestigious country clubs teams to challenge one another to matches in like the Merion and Belmont Cricket Clubs, their rival’s sport (Melville 1998:67). In truth, founded in 1865 and 1874 respectively. Sports it was American elites’ exclusivist attitude historian George Kirsch (1991:15) sums up the toward cricket that led to the sport’s decline Philadelphia scene, and the American milieu among the population at large. As in Canada, more generally, by saying, #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

98—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

“The upper-class ‘Proper Philadelphians’who the Philadelphians created a network “dense” patronized the sport after the Civil War did not enough to sustain a local cricket culture; they wish to convert the masses. They preferred stayed above the “threshold” at which interest their leisurely game because they were ama- in collective pursuits risks extinction teur sportsmen who had plenty of time for (Granovetter and Soong 1983). Haverford recreation. They supported the English game until the early twentieth century, when tennis College, the University of Pennsylvania, and and golf became more popular amusements for Princeton University dominated the late-nine- the upper class. Elite Boston cricketers and teenth-century game largely because of their working-class English immigrants also kept the proximity to the “cricket nurseries” of game going into the 1900s. But by the eve of Philadelphia (Lester 1951), and the former the First World War very few were still alive remains a central hub of American cricket to this who could recall the days when cricket had a day—Haverford not only pays a professional chance to become America’s national pastime.” cricketer to instruct its current “elevens” but also Approximately120 cricket clubs are said to maintains a special library collection devoted to 9 have existed in the Philadelphia area at one the history of the sport. Elsewhere in the coun- time or another, at least ten of which still exist try (and in Canada), elite clubs failed to create today. One might hypothesize that cricket viable leagues and thus faltered. The absence of thrived there in part because of the nature of elite a strong cricket culture in the notably stratified Philadelphian society in the late nineteenth cen- American South also makes sense in light of this tury. Says E. Digby Baltzell, a sociologist who explanation. The rural focus of late-nineteenth- has studied the American elite in detail, “[T]he century Southern elites seems to have predis- flowering of New England was the product of posed them against team sports of any kind. an aristocratic social structure led by men with Southern leisure activities were generally more deep roots in the governing class of the socie- grounded in agrarian pastimes like hunting, ty, going back to the glacial age; Philadelphia’s fishing, and riding. Only much later, following Golden Age, on the other hand, was the prod- the rise of large state universities in the South, uct of a heterogeneous and democratic social did team sports like football, basketball, and structure whose leadership elites came largely baseball become mainstays of sporting culture from elsewhere and from all classes within the for Southern elites and non-elites alike. city” (Baltzell [1979] 1996:54). By our think- Nonetheless, even with the exception of ing, then, social mobility in Philadelphia might Philadelphia, it would appear that the popular- have prompted its “old-money” elite to look ity of cricket in both the United States and for ways to segregate themselves from the city’s Canada suffered primarily from the exclusion- nouveau riche and upwardly mobile popula- ism of its elite practitioners. North American tions. Boston Brahmins had no such cause for cricket prevailed, though weakly, in places where status anxiety, given their long-standing domi- status anxiety was high among wealthy families nance of the city’s cultural and urban affairs, and where these families established and main- though they did establish other forms of elite tained multiple dense networks of rival cricket cultural institution in their midst (DiMaggio clubs. In both Canada and the United States, an 1982). Nor were social mobility and status anx- egalitarian ethos encouraged economic elites iety unique to Philadelphia at this time. Thus, to cultivate exclusive status-based activities we think that there is a more salient explanation with which to maintain their superior position of the Philadelphia-phenomenon in American in the social system. Cricket was not an cricket, one that mirrors the success of American inevitable response to this status anxiety, but it baseball at the national level. was one viable option. Cricket seems to have survived in Philadelphia primarily because there was a crit- ical mass of clubs ready to field competitive 9 The C. C. Morris Cricket Library at Haverford teams. Thus, though comparable numbers of College is an especially useful repository of infor- elite men in other cities may have been inter- mation about the past and present of American crick- ested in cricket, they failed to build (elite) crick- et. Online information, including a historical map of et leagues that would sustain (elite) interest in Philadelphia cricket clubs, can be found at the game over time. Put in more formal terms, http://www.haverford.edu/library/cricket. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–99

At the same time, however, even elite tastes caste blacks to lighter skinned “browns” and began changing in the early twentieth century. whites. “I haven’t the slightest doubt that the Increasingly, America’s wealthiest families clash of race, caste and class did not retard but “placed maximum importance on the pleasur- stimulated West Indian cricket,” writes James ing of the individual sportsman taken as a con- (1963:72). Thus we see that the specific crite- sumer, albeit a wealthy one, and on gratification ria of social stratification are less important as a suitable goal in his life” (Mrozek 1983: than the existence of a cohesive vertical hier- 106). Country clubs, though still popular, archy in the receiver nation. Racial, socioeco- increasingly built their reputations on the qual- nomic, and/or ethno-religious differences could ity of their clubhouses, tennis tournaments, and provide the basis of stratification with the same golf courses. According to the sporting news of result: elites’ decision either to actively pro- the day, even long-standing cricket clubs began mote or at least passively to permit the accul- hosting tennis and golf tournaments on their turation of cricket among lower social strata. grounds. Cricket was languishing. There are three mechanisms underlying this The obvious irony here is that elitism spelled process in the case of cricket: First, colonial the death of a once-popular pastime in two elites, comfortable in their place atop the social countries known for their exceptional egalitar- hierarchy, had little reason to discourage those ianism. Thus we ask: Why would elites in other beneath them from playing a game that paid countries not have done the same? How did symbolic homage to British cultural and polit- cricket become so popular in these societies? ical hegemony; in fact, elites tended to regard Answering these questions requires that we look cricket as a good means of “civilizing” natives back at the cases in which cricket was success- in their own image. Given a rigid social system, fully adopted and espoused by wide segments furthermore, emulation of those at the top had of the population, places like Australia, New benefits for those at the upper-middle and lower- Zealand, India, South Africa, and the West middle rungs, particularly among nonwhites Indies. Despite their vast social and political dif- seeking “entry” into a white-dominant world. ferences, what do all these countries have in With opportunities for upward mobility so common beside their British colonial roots? severely limited, moreover, cricket provided those of the lower castes some means of sym- bolic competence—that is, by competing against ADOPTION AND SUCCESSFUL ACCULTURATION: those of other castes, races, and classes, low- CRICKET ELSEWHERE IN THE COMMONWEALTH caste cricketers could assert themselves in ways It would appear that, in part, it was the very lack not permitted in ordinary society (Malcolm of a rigid social system that encouraged elitist 2001). attitudes toward cricket in the United States Thus cricket was attractive to all major stra- and Canada. Cricket became a marker of high ta in these colonial societies. Even in Australia social status, and the game was thus not pro- and New Zealand, where class mobility was moted among the population at large. relatively more common, yearning for status in Conversely, rigid social stratification systems in the eyes of England created opportunities for other British colonial societies appear to have “liberation cricket.” Having been settled large- nurtured segregated but inclusive cricket cul- ly by working-class British immigrants, many tures. In India, for example, love for the game of them “transported” to Australia as criminals, was spread through the organization of match- the Antipodes have long had a sense of cultur- es between rival ethno-religious groups, each of al inferiority to England. British culture thus had which welcomed talented players from within an elevated status for Australians and New their communities regardless of rank (Bose Zealanders of all classes. Understanding the 1990). C. L. R. James’s autobiographical Australian and New Zealand cases nonetheless accounts of Trinidadian cricket culture support requires a bit of extra background information, similar conclusions. In Trinidad, as in Jamaica to which we now turn. and Barbados, blacks and whites sometimes played cricket together (though not as equals). AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND. Though con- Individual cricket clubs were established at each temporary Australia and New Zealand are egal- rung of the social hierarchy, from the lowest- itarian, socially mobile societies much like the #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

100—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

United States and Canada, matters were sig- 40–42). In this way, Australian cricket resem- nificantly different in the nineteenth century, the bled the stratified game in other British key years in the global diffusion of cricket. colonies, such as India and the Caribbean. The Socioeconomically, early Australian society key to the widespread popularity of cricket in was stratified into three classes: an upper-crust Australia was, again, the decision of its wealth- of absentee (mostly English) landlords; a mid- iest citizens to “share” the game with those of dle class of émigré soldiers, artisans, and pro- lower strata. Competitiveness trumped exclu- fessionals; and a lower class of emancipated sivity in the minds of Australia’s socioeco- prisoners, their offspring, and the vast hordes nomic elite, in other words, much as it had of freemen tending sheep and sharecropping on done in eighteenth-century England. Having other people’s land (Clark 1995; Hughes 1986; issued a challenge of one thousand pounds to Stone and Garden 1978). The key point about any team in Australia that could beat it, the late-nineteenth-century Australia for our con- prestigious Melbourne Cricket Club signed a cerns is that its wealthiest citizens did not contract with a professional English cricketer attempt to build strong institutional barriers to bolster its competitiveness with rival clubs. between themselves and the rest of society. The MCC also hired a groundskeeper to eject This may be the result of the elite’s relative nonmembers from club grounds. Both prac- sense of security atop the Australian status tices resembled the English cricket tradition in hierarchy, though we suspect that it stems more full flower—assiduously maintaining status- directly from the fact that Australia was still a group distinctions while facilitating whatever relatively new settlement at the time. Its rich- integration was necessary to maintain the high- est citizens had yet to accumulate wealth or est possible level of play (Pollard 1987:46–47; exclusive social networks comparable to those Dunning and Sheard 1979:181). This compet- in the eastern United States and Canada. The itiveness also helped cultivate large audiences separate classes desperately needed one anoth- for the game: Match organizers for the MCC er in the struggle to settle this vast, isolated con- insisted that “spectators would not attend crick- tinent. In the continent’s burgeoning cities, for et unless the best players were on view.” example, where Australian cricket truly thrived, (Pollard 1987:143). They were clearly inter- the mercantile elite actively embraced the work- ested in popularizing the game among the ing classes, both socially and politically widest possible audience. In only a few (Connell and Irving 1980). The presence of instances, such as distant Tasmania (original- many British military men, moreover, coupled ly known as Van Dieman’s Land), did anything with the colony’s distance from England, made like the American and Canadian elites-only English pastimes particularly valuable to attitude manifest itself. Pollard (1987: 37) Australians, particularly those activities that refers, tellingly, to the fact that Tasmanian did not require fancy concert halls or awareness cricket did not thrive owing to “the strange of the latest fads and fashions. Thus, Australia’s reluctance of the strong, prestigious clubs in various social strata cooperated in a nation- Hobart and Launceston to hire professional wide effort to cultivate British ideals and social players to coach and strengthen their teams.” practices, cricket foremost among them (Clark Over time, Australian cricket remained a 1995; Hughes 1986). The Sydney Gazette, national pastime despite the democratization according to one account (Pollard 1987:10), of its social, political, and economic systems. In stated in 1832 that “cricket was now the pre- the late nineteenth century, teams were often vailing amusement of the colony and that no stratified by class and ethnic background, while gentleman could expect to ‘dangle at a lady’s a spirit of inclusive competition prevailed apron strings’unless he could boast of his crick- nonetheless (Cashman 1984). The widespread et prowess.” role of publicans in promoting Australian crick- Nonetheless, urban elites did establish some et personifies its popular nature: “[P]ublicans fairly exclusive cricket clubs in Australia—the quickly realised that the promotion of cricket Melbourne Cricket Club was founded in 1838 stimulated their business,” notes one historian on such grounds, thus prompting the formation (Pollard 1987:10). Creation of neighborhood in 1839 of a rival middle-class club, the and trade-based cricket clubs was, moreover, a Melbourne Union Cricket Club (Pollard 1987: source of tremendous pride for urban boosters #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–101 in cities like Sydney and Melbourne (Cashman English and Australian immigrants provided 1998a; Pollard 1987). Sydney, in particular, ready instruction and talent. Interprovincial play struggled to distance itself from its origins as an was also quite popular—when an annual match English penal colony. Excellence at cricket was first arranged between the neighboring appeared early on as a way for locals to make provinces of Canterbury and Otago, “it was a statement about “the character of colonial agreed that the teams should wear the great society and the nature of the imperial relation- English university colours,” Canterbury in ship.” “Thrashing the mother-land” was an indi- Oxford’s dark blue, Otago in the light blue of rect expression of “the love-hate relationship of Cambridge (Reese 1927:36). The creation of a youthful colonial society attempting to define several annual prizes—the Plunket Shield for its identity and a greater sense of nationhood” best “major” team (generally those from major (Cashman 1998a:36, 39; see also Mandle cities) and the Hawke Cup for best “minor asso- 1973:525–26). Hence, a long Australo-English ciation,” as well as the Heathcote Williams rivalry began early on, and it is still a source of Shield for best secondary school team—helped tremendous interest to Australian sports fans, create the kinds of well-anticipated sports rival- particularly given their long-standing domi- ries vital to the creation of a “hegemonic sports nance over increasingly weak English teams. culture.” More important still is the fact that intra- and Promotion of the game in minor population inter-provincial leagues were actively promot- centers through the Hawke Cup competition ed early on in Australia, thus stimulating the cre- was clearly important to the long-term survival ation of adequate playing grounds and of the game in New Zealand. Emphasis among competitive teams throughout the country.10 New Zealand cricketers was not on the social Cricket evolved along similar lines in New status generated by membership in elite clubs Zealand. Though New Zealand was never home but on the prestige gained by winning. This was to any English penal colonies, its wealthier cit- so much the case that a visiting Australian star, izens shared with those of Australia the sense Warwick Armstrong, reportedly advised that that they needed to prove themselves in the eyes the “various [Kiwi] associations are too inclined of the British. New Zealand cricket has its to pick the coach who can help his province to win matches. What is really wanted is the coach longest and strongest legacy of play in the who can impart knowledge and keenness to the province of Canterbury, “the most English of boy” (quoted in Reese 1927:76). In sum, New New Zealand provinces” and one founded upon Zealand, like Australia, followed a somewhat economic principles designed to perpetuate the different path to “hegemonic” cricket than rigid social order of the English countryside British colonies in which a minority white elite (minus the truly poor). Here, class stratification dominated a majority colored population. and inclusive Anglophilia promoted cricket as Cricket helped Antipodean elites cultivate their a healthy pastime for all, excepting the native 11 Englishness, but the size and isolation of their Maoris (Ryan 1998). Christchurch was home European settlements limited the extent to which to both exclusive and “open” clubs. Elite schools they could be truly exclusive. Everyone involved began early on to train young men in the game, in the game aspired to gentility but none was and the hiring of professional coaches from excluded on the grounds of wealth or social England was also common beginning in the standing. “Proper conduct, rather more than 1890s (Reese 1927:41, 49). A steady stream of heredity, was the mark of an amateur gentle- man,” comments one history of Australian crick- et (Pollard 1987:65). 10 Interestingly, rugby was first promoted in Australia as a way for local cricketers to keep in THE ASIAN SUBCONTINENT. Interestingly, it shape over the winter months (Hickie 1993). 11 It is not clear to us why white New Zealanders was not originally the intent of the British to did not work to promote the game among Maoris in popularize cricket in the subcontinent of Asia. the same way that Australians did among the British soldiers are said to have played the game Aborigines. It may be related to the Maoris’ fierce in India as early as 1721, but it was not until the resistance to white settlement in the early years of the mid-nineteenth century that Indians actually colony, but we were not able to confirm this. began to play. Then, too, it was primarily the #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

102—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

“middle-man” Parsi population that first culti- among the public at large (Appadurai 1996; vated the game. The Parsis were an ancient Bose 1990). The widespread incorporation of immigrant community in India known for their Indians into the British civil service system in wealth and success at business. “It was no acci- India also exposed many indigenous men to the dent that the first community [in India] to take game. By 1947, when India became independ- up the game were the Parsis,” comments one his- ent, cricket was a national passion, if not yet the torian (Cashman 1979:190–91). They were “a national passion. Jawaharlal Nehru, first prime wealthy entrepreneurial group who acted as cul- minister of India, further encouraged partici- tural brokers between the British and Indian pation in the sport, himself having been edu- society. .|.|. In the tradition of colonial elites, the cated at Harrow in England. In Bombay, where Parsis took up the game of cricket, along with cricket has, perhaps, its longest history on the other imperial customs, partly to demonstrate subcontinent, and where the Indian television their fitness for the role of collaboration.” Parsi and film industries are centered, star cricketers success at the game also prompted India’s elite are given all the adulation and fame of their Hindu and Muslim populations to take an active Bollywood counterparts (Cashman 1998b:130). interest in it (Bose 1990:32). Televised matches in indigenous languages have From the start, indigenous participation in also helped build and maintain a wide fan base, Indian cricket was centered around elites: as has the transference of regional political ten- Princes would build ornate cricket grounds and sions onto the wicket—international test match- invite guests to watch them play. The princes es between India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and would rarely even bowl or field the ball, rely- Sri Lanka are, today, rabidly nationalistic events ing on hired players to provide them easily hit replete with hooliganism, jingoism, and some- balls. This provided valuable opportunities for times outright violence (Appardurai 1996; Indians of lower social strata to get involved in Nandy 2000). the game. Audiences, too, were carefully seg- regated; Europeans from Indians, commoners THE WEST INDIES. The historic status hierar- from elite, men from women, and so on chies that nurtured passion for cricket in Indian (Cashman 1998b:126–67; Cashman 1980). “So society have a close parallel in the West Indies, cricket prospered,” comments Bose (1990:36), where the game is equally popular today. “not because the different communities mixed Though originally cultivated by and for white but because they did not. Competition, not co- elites in the British Caribbean, high-status blacks operation, was the spur.” Thus, elite members and Indians were provided some training in the of India’s vastly segregated social system game early on, thus leading to the eventual for- embraced the game as a way of distinguishing mation of cricket clubs for nonwhites. Clubs themselves vis-à-vis the British and one anoth- were rigidly stratified on color and class lines. er. Important for our purposes is the fact that tal- Nonetheless, the status hierarchy was suffi- ented nonelites were encouraged to play the ciently rigid that space could be created for game. The relative security of elites within their interaction and competition among them—just own communities, as well as their competi- so long as it remained on the field. Beating a tiveness with elites in rival ethno-religious team from an adjacent status position was a communities, allowed for this kind of segre- feat worthy of respect, and though it did not ulti- gated-integration. mately change the social order, it did at least pro- “By the 1930s,” writes Cashman (1998b: vide an outlet for status emulation and 123), “there were many cricketing princes, play- achievement. The possibility of being recruit- ers and patrons, who lavished great sums of ed to play professionally in England was further money and energy to secure the top prizes in incentive for talented athletes from poor fami- cricket, control of the game and captaincy of the lies to devote time and energy to the game. side. .|.|. Cricket prominence provided the Because the symbolic stakes were high, more- princes with more clout in the Chamber of over, large audiences would often turn out to Princes and enhanced their status with the watch and successful players would receive British.” Rivalry between Indian and English great acclaim. “Supporters of the respective sides developed from this, which subsequently sides had invested considerable amounts of helped cultivate further talent and interest emotional capital in the outcome,” notes #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–103

Stoddart (1998a:84), a development that later ally encouraged segregated play among middle- extended to international matches with some- class blacks and Asians. “Because the ideolo- times violent consequences (Patterson 1995). gy of respectability was crucial for the Thus we see another case where the relative aspirations of middle-class blacks,” they not stability of the status hierarchy within a socie- only aspired to play the game well but also pro- ty promoted a segregated but inclusive cricket- vided an example for less “respectable” blacks ing culture, one that gained valuable momentum (Stoddart 1998b:56). Again, the relative stabil- from the muted tension of competition among ity of the status hierarchy in these societies status groups. Unique to the West Indies is the allowed for the diffusion of the game from the nature of their international “test” match status: top-down. Blacks were excluded from white rather than play as separate national teams, the cricket clubs, as well as the national teams, but “Windies” have traditionally comprised top they learned to play and to watch the game players from throughout the Caribbean. The nonetheless. In the ensuing years, politics have contemporary game in the Caribbean is thus been the greatest barrier to “hegemonic” crick- less oriented around national pride than around et in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Opposition racial and ethno-Caribbean solidarity (Beckles to apartheid limited South African participa- 1998b). tion in international test matches for a good part of the twentieth century, and the political turmoil in contemporary Zimbabwe may mean SOUTHERN AFRICA. The case of South African the permanent demise of cricket there. and Zimbabwean cricket is a bit more compli- Though the particulars motivating cricket cated and follows lines distinct from, though adoption thus varied from one British colony to comparable to, those already described. The another, the development and perpetuation of a large presence of British military personnel hegemonic cricket culture required in each case provided a ready pool of talent for the game in that members of high-status groups remained southern Africa, but its diffusion to indigenous interested not only in cultivating their own crick- and Afrikaner populations was somewhat errat- et skills but also in sharing the game with those ic. Some Afrikaners openly played cricket before of lower orders. This did not occur in the United the onset of the Boer War, and they gladly joined States or Canada. the British in a white unity movement during the Apartheid era, but the early twentieth century was a less active period for Afrikaner crick- DISCUSSION eters in the aftermath of the war. British whites, CRICKET AND SOCIOLOGICAL MODELS OF meanwhile, staked the very reputation of their CULTURAL DIFFUSION settlements on the game. The small size of the Anglo-white population in South Africa meant Our analysis suggests an important extension of that class distinctions among them were muted; current diffusion theory. It is widely accepted cricket became a focal point of colonial life. among scholars in the field that diffusion is Indeed, British South Africans and Rhodesians most likely to succeed where change agents were in some ways more “British” than the and adoptees share the same culture and social British (Winch 1983). In colonial Rhodesia, for category (especially the same socioeconomic example, one memoirist noted, “Where previ- status). Thus Rogers (1995:7) asserts as “an ously one had to be a member of the la-di-da obvious principle of human communication that class to get a job in the Civil Service, now you the transfer of ideas occurs most frequently had to beat the hide off a ball,” meaning that between two individuals who are similar or prowess at cricket was sufficient means of homopholous,” this being “the degree to which attaining status and respect in the British com- two or more individuals who interact are simi- munity (G. H. Tanser quoted in Winch 1983). lar in certain attributes such as beliefs, educa- Vitally important to the long-term success of tion, social class, and the like. .|.|.” Rogers cricket in southern Africa is the fact that the contrasts this with situations where relations British allowed nonwhites to play the game are heterophilous (i.e., the social position of there. Before the early 1900s, when govern- the change agent is different from that of the ment-sponsored race policies began their long adopters) and notes that this can present a major descent toward apartheid, British settlers actu- obstacle to successful diffusion. The ideal sit- #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

104—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW uation in the initial adoption phase, he argues, this happened to cricket in Canada and the is thus one in which change agents and poten- United States, as we have seen. tial adopters “would be homophilous on all Naturally, the nature of social stratification in other variables (education and social status, for these Commonwealth countries is not sufficient example) even though they are heterophilous to explain the success or failure of cricket in regarding the innovation” (Rogers 1995, 7; for each country; nor does it fully explain the failed similar views see Strang and Meyer 1993; cases of Canada and the United States. Our ear- Wejnert 2002). lier discussion of the rising popularity of base- We are inclined to agree that homophilous ball in the United States offers several keys to diffusion is indeed true in many, perhaps most, refining our explanation. Baseball was aggres- cases, especially those involving the intra-soci- sively promoted throughout the United States by etal transfer of simple innovations among indi- league-owners, sporting goods manufacturers, viduals. Our study, however, indicates that there and “star” players. Inter-urban play helped pro- is an important class of diffusion processes in mote widespread audiences. Youths were which just the opposite might occur—i.e., cases encouraged to play in and out of school, and the in which a distinctly heterophilous relationship necessary equipment and playing grounds were between change agents and would-be change- made widely available. Similar efforts were adopters promotes diffusion. In the case of made for football and basketball in the United cricket, it is precisely the stable status-inequal- States, and for cricket throughout much of the ity between those who brought the game from Commonwealth. Cross-class participation in England and the lower-status colonial popula- such sports was supplemented, in other words, tions that adopted it that accounts for the suc- by intense efforts to recruit spectators, as well cessful diffusion of cricket. In such cases (i.e., as new talent, to the games. At some point, such self-promotion seems to cross a threshold at top-down, or heterophilous, diffusion), it is the which the game’s popularity fuels itself: base- authority and high social status of change ball was so popular and baseball rivalries so agents, combined with their willingness not intense that even American elites flocked to it, simply to transmit but actively to participate in thus leaving cricket virtually no following what- the promotion of the innovation, and their desire soever. Absent celebrity players and careful to continue their engagement with it even after marketing, crew and track and field, in con- it has begun to spread down and across the trast, lost momentum and popularity among social hierarchy, that accounts for successful American audiences. diffusion. The lessons here are rather simple: On the As shown in the case of cricket, all three ele- supply side, would-be audiences must be offered ments are necessary for this kind of top-down a steady stream of well-publicized events diffusion to work: It is not enough for elites between evenly matched, talented teams. Annual simply to introduce the innovation; they are matches, such as Thanksgiving Day college required to promote it actively and to persist in football games or “The Ashes,” a biennial crick- lending it their prestige by continuing to prac- et match between England and Australia, help tice it themselves. Where they do not, one of two solidify a sport’s place in the public mind (cf. outcomes, both fatal for the long-term accul- Schudson 1989). On the demand side, a surfeit turation of the innovation, is likely: One possi- of opportunities whereby talented athletes can bility is that the innovation becomes a fad, find selective incentives to devote time and thereby enjoying a brief period of widespread effort to one sport over another also appears to popularity because of its upper-class origins, but make a difference. Such factors, it should be later being abandoned by the elite transmitters noted, can also erode support for a sport even because of this very popularity, thereby trig- after it has been successfully adopted. The pop- gering a decline in overall popularity. The his- ularity of professional rugby in the Antipodes, tory of fashion is replete with examples of this for example, and the spread of basketball to the (e.g., Crane 2000). Another possible “negative” Caribbean, both potentially represent threats to outcome is that status-insecure first-adopters their nations’ hegemonic cricket cultures. “capture” the innovation, thus preventing its The evolution of the game in each country, diffusion into the population at large. Precisely then, is the result not only of the relative status #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–105 position of interested parties but also such intan- for the game. In other words, some portion of gibles as the rise of sports entrepreneurs devot- the population needed to devote itself to play- ed to the promotion of a specific sport; the rise ing cricket (adoption), and some larger portion of competitive league play, which helps draw needed to be persuaded to care about it (accul- regular ‘fans’ from different strata of society; turation). We note, too, that in the final, accul- and the rise (or demise) of other seasonal sports turation phase, the game appears to take on competing for the same talent and audience cultural valence unique to its people; in other base. Nonetheless, we feel that of these multi- words, it becomes part of the national patrimo- ple factors, it is social stratification that lies ny, as opposed to a simple cultural import. In most fundamentally at the heart of the matter. some colonial societies, for example, cricket The extent to which an elite cultural practice like developed as a way for settlers to prove their cricket was shared with or shielded from the “Britishness,” whereas in others, excellence at general population was a direct result of elites’ the game offered an opportunity for natives lit- own sense of their place atop the social hierar- erally to beat the British at their own game. In chy. Had American elite cricketers felt less anx- the unique case of Australia, moreover, both ious about their social position, for example, elements combined into a fiercely nationalist but they might have popularized the sport along ultimately anglophilic love of the game. the same lines as baseball (or golf and tennis). More specifically, cricket was elevated to a national sporting pastime in societies where CONCLUSION players and audiences were recruited from an array of social class backgrounds. In the United WHAT MIGHT WE LEARN States and Canada, elites literally took cricket FROM THE GLOBAL DIFFUSION OF CRICKET? from the public sphere and confined it to their We began this project with both substantive and own social circles. This contrasts sharply with theoretical questions in mind. Theoretically, we the history of cricket in the other colonies of the questioned the propensity of diffusion models British Empire, where racial inequality, selec- to emphasize solely structural or exclusively tive access to secondary education, and quasi- cultural factors in the adoption process. That is, feudal land allocation systems limited we wondered what, besides cultural affinity or socioeconomic mobility. Those at the top of the network ties, accounts for the successful diffu- economic system felt comfortable sharing their sion of a cultural practice from one society to pastimes with the masses. Elites actively pro- another. Furthermore, we wondered what soci- moted and stuck with the game even after it ological theories of diffusion might gain by became a sport practiced by low-status members considering examples where diffusion was ini- of society. Thus, cricket became a popular sport tially successful and then failed. Substantively played and enjoyed by all. speaking, we wondered why Canadians were not The very nature of the game itself, we have more enthusiastic about cricket given their argued, was also an important part of the diffu- strong cultural and political connections to sion process: Cricket’s strong identification England. This case seemed especially com- with English imperialism made it attractive to pelling in light of all the recent attention put on both those who cherished the “mother coun- globalization and the would-be homogeniza- try” and those who wished for nothing more tion of world culture. What might the global his- than symbolically to defeat it. The sport’s tory of cricket tell us about other potentially absence of physical contact, its strictures on diffusible phenomena, particularly those that rowdiness, and its low costs when played infor- bear with them such strong relations to their mally—bats, balls, and stumps can all be hand- country of origin? made—also contributed to its diffusion With regard to cricket, we have identified throughout much of the British Commonwealth. several factors that seem closely related to vari- We argue, furthermore, that it was the rela- ance in the success or failure of the sport in tive social mobility of mid-nineteenth-century countries connected to the former British American and Canadian society that prompted Empire. Beyond merely being exposed to the elites there to protect their cultural patrimony sport, settler societies needed to dedicate time from the masses. This reasoning is comparable and resources to nurturing indigenous support to that offered in explanation of the development #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

106—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW of other forms of exclusionary cultural practice. that require interaction with groups of com- According to Elias ([1939] 2000), for example, petitors and/or co-participants. While nearly economic elites in late medieval Europe anything can be had for the right price, some cul- responded to the status pressures of defeudal- tural commodities are simply too “social” to ization by promoting specific repertoires of eti- be assimilated without ready and consistent quette by which they might differentiate support. Thus, the global diffusion of cultural themselves from the masses. In a more modern practices requires not only that those in “receiv- context, social elites in late-nineteenth-century er” societies show interest in these practices, but Boston responded to similar status pressure by that the resources necessary to adopt them are cultivating tastes for European music, art, and widely available. This access often hinges on theater, as well as creating exclusive social ven- indigenous elites’ desire and ability to keep ues in which to partake of them (DiMaggio such resources to themselves. 1982; Levine 1988; see Dunae 1981 and We see here an important dimension of the Gruneau 1983 for comparable analyses of cross-cultural diffusion process otherwise over- Canada). Seen from this perspective, equality of looked; something we have called, borrowing a economic opportunity promoted elite efforts to term from Rogers (1995), heterophilous, or top- limit equality of cultural opportunity. down, diffusion. While popular tastes and con- In the big picture, the history of cricket high- sumer agency play a large role in the reception lights an important feature of global culture and adoption of easily accessible foreign cultural more generally. Global cultural diffusion relies goods and practices—so-called homophilous not simply on the transmission of cultural “sig- paths to successful diffusion—indigenous elites nals” from place to place, but also on: (1) The sometimes play an even more important role in relationship among different categories of recip- casting imported cultural goods or practices as ients in host societies, particularly with respect high- or low-brow items. Elites’ ability to con- to the distribution of social status among them, trol access to such goods has significant rami- as well as the equality of opportunity to gain fications for popular retention thereof. such status; and (2) the ability of some groups Presumably, cross-national variation in the dif- of recipients to dominate or otherwise limit fusion of many such items can be explained in access to cultural imports, thereby “capturing” exactly this fashion. Thus, it may be that future such imports for themselves. While limiting studies of cross-national cultural diffusion access to high-status goods might only make should pay as much attention to elite as to pop- them more attractive to lower-status consumers, ular tastes. So, too, should the institutionaliza- there is a point of diminishing returns at which tion of such tastes across public and private popular interest will peak and subsequently venues be of increasing concern to those inter- subside. Thus, for example, ownership of raw ested in the topic. Neither value nor venue are commodities like diamonds and pearls may a priori features of cultural imports, we argue. become more prevalent as their price increas- Diffusion scholars must then strive for renewed sensitivity toward the culturally specific mean- es; not so for cultural practices that are more eas- ings of the items or practices being diffused, as ily “protected.” well as toward the social strata associated with Access to cricket in the United States and and/or in control of access to their use. Canada was “overprotected,” so to speak, thus forestalling its acculturation as a “hegemonic Jason Kaufman is John L. Loeb Associate Professor sports culture.” In point of fact, any cultural of the Social Sciences at Harvard University, where good or practice can be so protected if it he teaches comparative/historical sociology, poli- requires: (a) repeated points of contact, as in the tics, and culture in the Department of Sociology. His case of anything that must be learned, replen- current research focuses on the comparative politi- ished, or maintained; (b) extensive gatekeep- cal development of the United States and Canada. A ing, as with cultural practices that are related project seeks to explain Vermont’s unusual sufficiently sophisticated, esoteric, or non-obvi- political trajectory from anti-statist Republican stronghold to bastion of the radical left. He is author ous as to require explanation, instruction, or of For The Common Good? American Civic Life prior evaluation by specialists; and/or (c) wide- and the Golden Age of Fraternity, as well as articles spread collaboration, as with “social” goods on urban politics and fiscal policy; AIDS/HIV poli- such as musical performances or team sports cy; ethno-religious and labor fraternities; civilian #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–107 militias; and cultural capital and educational attain- Story of Canada and the United States at Cricket.” ment. The Canadian Cricketer 22: 24–25. Bose, Mihir. 1990. A History of Indian Cricket. Orlando Patterson is John Cowles Professor of London, England: Deutsch. Sociology at Harvard. His work addresses, in com- Bouchier, Nancy and Robert Barney. 1988. “A parative/historical terms, the interactive causal role Critical Examination of a Source on Early Ontario of culture and seeks to unravel the neglected prob- Baseball: The Reminiscence of Adam E. Ford.” lem of continuity. Applications include the nature Journal of Sport History 15:75–90. and dynamics of slavery and resistance; the con- Bourdieu, Pierre. 1978. “Sport and Social Class.” struction and diffusion of freedom, globalization, Social Science Information 17:819–40. and reggae music; the sources and problems of eth- Brookes, Christopher. 1978. English Cricket: The nic identity; and the persistence of poverty and gen- Game and Its Players Throughout the Ages. der relations in the Caribbean and America. He is London, England: Weidenfeld and Nicholson. currently completing a book on the meaning and Burt, Ronald. 1987. “Social Contagion and experience of freedom in America. Recent publica- Innovation: Cohesion vs. Structural Equivalence.” tions include “Culture and Continuity” in Matters of American Journal of Sociology 92:1287– 335. Culture: Cultural Sociology In Practice, edited by J. Buskens, Vincent and Kazuo Yamaguchi. 1999. “A Mohr and R. Friedland, as well as papers on ancient New Model for Information Diffusion in helotic slavery and ethnic stratification in England Heterogeneous Social Networks.” Sociological and the Americas. Methodology 29:281–325. Cashman, Richard. 1979. “The Phenomenon of REFERENCES Indian Cricket.” Pp. 180–204 in Sport in History: The Making of Modern Sporting History, edited by Adelman, Melvin L. 1986. A Sporting Time: New York Richard Cashman and Michael McKernan. City and the Rise of Modern Athletics, 1820–1870. Queensland, Australia: University of Queensland Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Press. Allen, David Rayvern. 1990. Cricket: An Illustrated ———. 1980. Patrons, Players and the Crowd: History. Oxford, England: Phaidon Press. The Phenomenon of Indian Cricket. New Delhi, Appadurai, Arjun. 1996. Modernity at Large: India: Orient Longman. Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. ———. 1984. ‘Ave a Go, Yer Mug! Australian Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Cricket Crowds from Larrikin to Ocker. Sydney, Baltzell, E. Digby. [1979] 1996. Puritan Boston and Australia: Collins. Quaker Philadelphia. New Brunswick, NJ: ———. 1998a. “Australia.” The Imperial Game: Transaction Publishers. Cricket, Culture and Society, edited by Brian Barney, Robert. 1992. “In Search of a Canadian Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. Manchester, Cooperstown: The Future of the Canadian Baseball England: Manchester University Press. Hall of Fame.” Nine: A Journal of Baseball History ———. 1998b. “The Subcontinent.” The Imperial and Social Policy 1. Game: Cricket, Culture and Society, edited by Barney, Robert. 1989. “Diamond Rituals: Baseball Brian Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. in Canadian Culture.” Pp. 1–21 in Baseball History Manchester, England: Manchester University 2: An Annual of Original Baseball Research, edit- Press. ed by Peter Levine. Westport, CT: Meckler. Chadwick, Henry. 1868. American Chronicle of Beckles, Hilary McD. 1998a. The Development of Sports and Pastimes 1:52. West Indies Cricket, vol. 1 The Age of Nationalism. Clark, Manning. 1995. A Short History of Australia. Barbados: Press of the University of the West 4th rev. ed. Victoria, Australia: Penguin Books. Indies. Clemens, Elisabeth S. and James M. Cook. 1999. ———, ed. 1998b. A Spirit of Dominance: Cricket “Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining and Nationalism in the West Indies. Barbados: Durability and Change.” Annual Review of Canoe Press. Sociology 25:441–66. Beckles, Hilary McD and Brian Stoddart, eds. 1995. Coakley, J. J. 1998. Sport in Society. St. Louis, MO: Liberation Cricket: West Indies Cricket Culture. Mosby. Manchester, England: Manchester University Cole, Robert E. 1989. Strategies for Learning: Small- Press. Group Activities in American, Japanese, and Bhabha, Homi. 1994. The Location of Culture. Swedish Industry. Berkeley, CA: University of London, England: Routledge Press. California Press. Boller, Kevin. 1994a. “International Cricket: Coleman, James S., Elihu Katz, and Herbert Menzel. Launched by a Hoax.” The Canadian Cricketer 1966. Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. 22:23. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill. ———. 1994b. “The 49th Parallel Divide: The Connell, R. W. and T. H. Irving. 1980. Class Structure #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

108—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

in Australian History: Documents, Narrative and President and Treasurer of Harvard College, Argument. Melbourne, Australia: Longman 1887–1888. Cambridge, MA: Harvard College. Cheshire. Headlam, Cecil. 1903. Ten Thousand Miles Through Cozier, Tony. 1978. The West Indies: Fifty Years of Test India and Burma: An Account of the Oxford Cricket.Brighton, England: Angus and Robertson. University Authentics’Cricket Tour with Mr. K. J. Crane, Diana. 2000. Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Key in the Year of the Durbar. London, England: Class, Gender, and Identity in Clothing. Chicago, Dent. IL: University of Chicago Press. Hickie, Thomas V. 1993. They Ran with the Ball: How “Cricket.” 1907. New York Times, Sept. 21. Rugby Football Began in Australia. Melbourne, DiMaggio, Paul J. 1982. “Cultural Entrepreneurship Australia: Longman Cheshire. in Nineteenth-Century Boston.” Media, Culture, Hughes, Robert. 1986. The Fatal Shore: The Epic of and Society 4:33–50. Australia’s Founding. New York: Vintage. DiMaggio, Paul J. and Walter W. Powell. 1983. “The Humber, William. 1995. Diamonds of the North: A Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism Concise History of Baseball in Canada. Toronto, and Collective Rationality in Organizational Canada: Oxford University Press. Fields.” American Sociological Review 48:147–60. James, C.L.R. 1963. Beyond a Boundary. London, Dobbin, Frank and John R. Sutton. 1998. “The England: Hutchinson. Strength of a Weak State: The Rights Revolution Kaufman, Jason. 2002. For the Common Good? and the Rise of Human Resources Management American Civic Life and the Golden Age of Divisions.” American Journal of Sociology 104: Fraternity. New York: Oxford University Press. 441–76. Kirsch, George. 1991. “Massachusetts Baseball and Dunae, P. A. 1981. Gentlemen Emigrants: From the Cricket, 1840–1870.” Pp. 1–15 in Sports in British Public Schools to the Canadian Frontier. Massachusetts: Historical Essays, edited by Vancouver, Canada: Douglas and McIntyre. Ronald Story. Westfield, MA: Institute for Dunning, Eric and Kenneth Sheard. 1979. Massachusetts Studies, Westfield State College. Kirsch, George. 1989. The Creation of American Barbarians, Gentlemen and Players: A Team Sports: Baseball and Cricket, 1838–72. Sociological Study of the Development of Rugby Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Football. New York: New York University Press. Lester, John A., ed. 1951. A Century of Philadelphia Elias, Norbert. [1939] 2000. The Civilizing Process. Cricket. Philadelphia, PA: University of Rev. ed. Oxford, England: Blackwell. Pennsylvania Press. Frye, Northrop. 1971. The Bush Garden: Essays on Levine, Lawrence W. 1988. Highbrow/Lowbrow: The the Canadian Imagination. Toronto, Canada: Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in America. Anansi. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. “The Game Was Stopped.” 1888. New York Times, Levine, Peter. 1985. A. G. Spalding and the Rise of May 21. Baseball: The Promise of American Sport. New Gottdiener, M. 1985. “Hegemony and Mass Culture: York: Oxford University Press. A Semiotic Approach.” American Journal of Lillrank, Paul. 1995. “The Transfer of Management Sociology 90:979–1001. Innovations from Japan.” Organization Granovetter, Mark and Roland Soong. 1983. Studies16:971–89. “Threshold Models of Diffusion and Collective Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1996. American Behavior.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 9: Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword. New 165–79. York: Norton. Gruneau, Richard. 1983. Class, Sports, and Social Maguire, Joseph. 1999. Global Sport: Identities, Development. Amherst, MA: University of Societies, Civilizations. Oxford, England: Polity Massachusetts Press. Press. Guillén, Mauro F. 1994. Models of Management: Malcolm, Dominic. 2001. “‘It’s Not Cricket’: Work, Authority, and Organization in a Colonial Legacies and Contemporary Inequalities.” Comparative Perspective. Chicago, IL: University Journal of Historical Sociology 14: 253–75. of Chicago Press. Mandle, W. F. 1973. “Games People Played: Cricket ———. 2001. The Limits of Convergence: and Football in England and Victoria in the Late Globalization and Organizational Change in Nineteenth Century.” Historical Studies 15(60): Argentina, South Korea, and Spain. Princeton, NJ: 511–535. Princeton University Press. Mangan, J. A. 1986. The Games Ethic and Gunaratnam, Visva. 1993. “I Have a Dream.” The Imperialism: Aspects of the Diffusion of an Ideal. Canadian Cricketer 21: 11. London, England: Frank Cass. Hall, John E. and R. O. McCulloch. 1895. Sixty Years Markovits, Andrei S. and Steven L. Hellerman. 2001. of Canadian Cricket. Toronto, Canada: Bryant. Offside: Soccer and American Exceptionalism. Harvard College. 1889. Annual Reports of the Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

CULTURAL DIFFUSION AND CRICKET—–109

Marsden, Peter and Joel Podolny. 1990. “Dynamic at Cricket, edited by Michael Roberts and Alfred Analysis of Network Diffusion Processes.” Social James. Petersham, Australia: Walla Walla Press. Networks Through Time, edited by J. Weesie and “The Philadelphia Cricketers.” 1884. New York Times, H. Flap. Utrecht, Netherlands: ISOR. July 15. Melville, Tom. 1998. The Tented Field: A History of Pollard, Jack. 1987. The Formative Years of Australian Cricket in America. Bowling Green, IN: Bowling Cricket, 1803–1893. North Ryde, Australia: Angus Green State University Popular Press. and Robertson. Merrett, Christopher and John Nauright. 1998. “South Redmond, Gerald. 1979. “Some Aspects of Organized Africa.” Pp. 55–78 in The Imperial Game: Cricket, Sport and Leisure in Nineteenth-Century Canada.” Culture and Society, edited by Brian Stoddart and Loisir et société/Society and Leisure 2:73–100. Keith A. P. Sandiford. Manchester, England: Reese, T. W. 1927. New Zealand Cricket, 1814–1914. Manchester University Press. Christchurch, New Zealand: Simpson and Metcalfe, Alan. 1987. Canada Learns to Play: The Williams. Emergence of Organized Sport, 1807–1914. Robertson, R.1992. Globalization: Social Theory Toronto, Canada: McClelland and Stewart. and Global Culture. London: Sage Publications. Meyer, John and Michael Hannan, eds. 1979. Rogers, Everett M. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations. National Development and the World System: 4th ed. New York: Free Press. Educational, Economic and Political Change, Ryan, Greg. 1998. “New Zealand.” Pp. 93–115 in The 1950–1970. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Imperial Game: Cricket, Culture and Society, edit- Press. ed by Brian Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. Miller, Toby, Geoffrey Lawrence, Jim McKay, and Manchester, England: Manchester University David Rowe. 2001. Globalization and Sport, Press. London, England: Sage Publications. Sandiford, Keith A. P. 1994. Cricket and the Mizruchi, Mark S. and Lisa C. Fein. 1999. “The Victorians. Aldershot, England: Scholar Press. Social Construction of Organizational Knowledge: ———. 1998a. “England.” Pp. 9–33 in The A Study of the Uses of Coercive, Mimetic, and Imperial Game: Cricket, Culture and Society, edit- Normative Isomorphism.” Administrative Science ed by Brian Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. Quarterly 44: 653–83. Manchester, England: Manchester University Molotch, Harvey, William Freudenburg, and Krista Press. E. Paulsen. 2000. “History Repeats Itself, but ———. 1998b. “Introduction.” Pp. 1–8 in The How? City Character, Urban Tradition, and the Imperial Game: Cricket, Culture and Society, edit- Accomplishment of Place.” American Sociological ed by Brian Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. Review 65:791–823. Manchester, England: Manchester University Mrozek, Donald J. 1983. Sport and American Press. Mentality, 1880–1910. Knoxville, TN: University ———. 1998c. Cricket Nurseries of Colonial of Tennessee Press. Barbados: The Elite Schools, 1865–1966. Nandy, Ashis. 2000. The Tao of Cricket: On Games Barbados: Press of the University of the West of Destiny and Destiny of Games. New Delhi, Indies. India: Oxford University Press. Sayen, Henry. 1956. A Yankee Looks At Cricket. Palloni, Alberto. 2001. “Diffusion in Sociological London, England: Putnam. Analysis.” Pp. 67–114 in Diffusion Processes and Schudson, Michael. 1989. “How Culture Works: Fertility Transition: Selected Perspectives, edited Perspectives from Media Studies on the Efficacy by John B. Casterline. Washington D.C.: National of Symbols.” Theory and Society 18:153–80. Academy Press. Smith, Ronald A. 1988. Sports and Freedom: The Patterson, Orlando. 1994. “Ecumenical America: Rise of Big-Time College Athletics. New York: Global Culture and the American Cosmos.” World Oxford University Press. Policy Journal 11:103–17. Spalding, Albert G. [1911] 1992. America’s National ———Patterson, Orlando. 1995. “The Ritual of Game. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Cricket.” Pp. 141–47 in Liberation Cricket, edit- Starr, Paul. 1989. “The Meaning of Privatization.” Pp. ed by Hilary McD Beckles and Brian Stoddart. 15–48 in Privatization and the Welfare State, edit- Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers. ed by Sheila Kamerman and Alfred Kahn. Penn, Alan. 1999. Targeting Schools: Drill, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Militarism and Imperialism. London, England: Steen, Rob. 1999. The Official Companion to the Woburn Press. 1999 Cricket World Cup. London: Boxtree. Perera, S. S. 1998a. The Janashakthi Book of Sri Stoddart, Brian. 1988. “Sport, Cultural Imperialism, Lanka Cricket, 1832–1996. Colombo: Janashakthi and Colonial Response in the British Empire.” Insurance. Comparative Studies in Society and History 30: ———. 1998b. “Notes on Sri Lanka’s Cricket 649–73. Heritage.” Crosscurrents: Sri Lanka and Australia ———. 1998a. “West Indies.” The Imperial Game: #2117-ASR 70:1 filename:70105-kaufman

110—–AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Cricket, Culture and Society, edited by Brian Book: A Series of Historical, Biographical, and Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. Manchester, Descriptive Sketches. Cambridge: Welch, Bigelow. England: Manchester University Press. Van den Bulte, Christophe and Gary L. Lilien. 2001. ———. 1998b. “Other Cultures.” The Imperial “Medical Innovation Revisited: Social Contagion Game: Cricket, Culture and Society, edited by versus Marketing Effort.” American Journal of Brian Stoddart and Keith A. P. Sandiford. Sociology 106:1409–35. Manchester Warner, Sir Pelham. 1950. Gentlemen v. Players, Stoddart, Brian and Keith A. P. Sandiford, eds. 1998. 1806–1949. London: George G. Harrap. The Imperial Game: Cricket, Culture and Society. Watson, James L. 2002. “Transnationalism, Manchester, England: Manchester University Localization, and Fast Foods in East Asia.” Pp. Press. 222–32 McDonaldization: The Reader, edited by Stone, Derrick I. and Donald S. Garden. 1978. George Ritzer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Squatters and Settlers. Sydney, Australia: Reed. Press. Strang, David. 1990. “From Dependency to Wejnert, Barbara. 2002. “Integrating Models of Sovereignty: An Event History Analysis of Diffusion of Innovations: A Conceptual Decolonization 1870–1987.” American Sociological Review 55: 846–60. Framework.” Annual Review of Sociology Strang, David and John Meyer. 1993. “Institutional 28:297–326. Conditions for Diffusion.” Theory and Society Williams, Jack. 2001. Cricket and Race. Oxford, 22:487–511. England: Berg. Strang, David and Sarah Soule. 1998. “Diffusion in Winch, Jonty. 1983. Cricket’s Rich Heritage : A Organizations and Social Movements: From History of Rhodesian and Zimbabwean Cricket, Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills.” Annual Review of 1890–1982. (Bulawayo, Zimbabwe : Books of Sociology 24:265–90. Zimbabwe). Townsend, Kim. 1996. Manhood at Harvard: William Wise, S. F. 1989. “Sport and Class Values in Old James and Others. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Ontario and Quebec.” Pp. 107–129 in Sports in University Press. Canada: Historical Readings, edited by Morris Vaille, F. O. and H. A. Clark, eds. 1875. The Harvard Mott. Toronto, Canada: Copp, Clark, Pitman.