The fairy tale of Zinedine Zidane vanished in an instant of visceral rage at the World Cup final. But what followed has proved strangely more compelling -- more human, more profound, more universal.
His now-legendary head butt -- a reaction to repeated insults -- fascinated viewers around the world, competed with wars for headlines and obsessed philosophers and sports fans alike.
And it elevated "Zizou" into an unlikely hero -- unrepentant and flawed, with an old-fashioned macho morality that has both captivated and appalled millions.
"Above all, I'm human," he said on French television last Wednesday, after three long days of silence following the brutal move that marked the end of his stellar, 18-year career.
The surreal week started on a Sunday night, in the 110th minute of a riveting World Cup final, with France and Italy tied 1-1 in extra time. Italian defender Marco Materazzi grabbed Zidane's jersey as a French attack on goal passed harmlessly by. The two exchanged words. Seconds later, Zidane spun, lowered his head and rammed Materazzi's chest, knocking him to the ground.
The next few days were a frenzy of worldwide condemnation and speculation: What, people asked, made Zidane crack? The head butt overshadowed the result of the Cup -- Italy won 5-3 in a penalty shootout -- and threatened to mar soccer's biggest spectacle.
In France, psychologists appeared on talk shows to ponder his motivations. Fear of success? Fear of failure? Childhood trauma?
Even before Zidane spoke out, the iconic French philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy wrote in the French press of the "suicide" of a "demigod," calling Zidane a "super-Achilles" who was humanized by a head butt instead of a vulnerable heel.
Many intellectuals saw a certain grandeur in Zidane's act -- a gesture of tragic or existential revolt against the huge weight of expectation the world had thrust upon his shoulders.
Others questioned how a player such as Materazzi -- widely known as a ruffian on the field -- could dare interfere with the workings of a genius.
In a New Republic commentary entitled "Zidane's Priceless Headbutt," Luke Dempsey indignantly observed that the Italian "had the temerity to speak words to Zidane -- who dares speak to Debussy as he composes, to Victor Hugo as he writes, to Edith Piaf as she sings, to Monet as he paints?"
And the incident immediately became the stuff of pop-culture legend -- generating Internet jokes, an online game where users mow down a field of Materazzis, and fierce, parodic pop jingles about head-butting.
Last Wednesday, when the fallen icon spoke out at last -- in successive interviews on French television, with an olive-green military-style jacket draped over his shoulders -- many around the world seemed to be looking for any excuse to forgive.
"I apologize, to all the children" who watched the match, he said -- but he didn't repent, saying Materazzi had insulted his mother and sister so deeply he had no choice but to respond.
Zidane shifted the blame to Materazzi and editorialists across Europe followed his lead. On Thursday, prompted by Zidane's TV testimony, soccer's governing body FIFA summoned Materazzi for questioning.
Some commentators have not been so keen to overlook the transgression -- seeing in Zidane's act the morality of the vendetta, an outdated sense of honor and machismo that has oppressed women for millennia.
Mick Hume of the Times of London bridled at the suggestion that the head butt was anything but an act of thuggery.
"It is a sign of the strange times how many big moral debates now seem to be about the antics of footballers. Apologists for Zinedine Zidane have wasted the week trying to read some higher meaning into his assault, claiming it as a righteous blow [against] racism, colonialism and Islamophobia," he wrote.
Soccer coaches in American suburbs -- a world apart from the rough immigrant neighborhood in Marseille where Zidane grew up and learned the sport -- have held talks with kids about dealing with anger on the field.
But for many French people, Zidane -- his skills, character, and life story -- have a significance that transcends soccer.
A son of Algerian immigrants, Zidane had come to symbolize the bright side of a multicultural France struggling with ethnic tensions that exploded in riots in squalid housing projects last year. He led France to its only World Cup victory in 1998 -- then came back from retirement after he saw his beloved "Bleus" struggle in qualifying rounds.
The story of how Zidane and other aging veterans of the 1998 French squad defied all expectations and made it to the final became one of the great stories of the tournament and prompted wild comparisons -- for many, they were "Musketeers" banding together for one last campaign.
In the end, France seems content to hold on to the legend of the tragic hero Zidane -- flawed by the brutal morality of the housing projects where he grew up -- who rose to great heights, fell, then found a measure of redemption in the love his countrymen bear for him.
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
China’s partnership with Pakistan has long served as a key instrument in Beijing’s efforts to unsettle India. While official narratives frame the two nations’ alliance as one of economic cooperation and regional stability, the underlying strategy suggests a deliberate attempt to check India’s rise through military, economic and diplomatic maneuvering. China’s growing influence in Pakistan is deeply intertwined with its own global ambitions. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative, offers China direct access to the Arabian Sea, bypassing potentially vulnerable trade routes. For Pakistan, these investments provide critical infrastructure, yet they also
RSS