A Kierkegaardian Reading of March Madness

Between my junior and senior years of high school, I took an introductory philosophy course at Georgetown. The course description stated that we would read a certain book by Soren Kierkegaard, and for the life of me I can't remember the title of it. So I read the book early that summer, to get a "headstart" on the course. (Turned out that we didn't end up reading it at all- a classic case of the all-too-frequent divorce between course description promises and the harsh reality of actual classroom experience).

I wish now that I could recall the name of the book, so that I could quote from it directly, but I will have to rely on my fallible memory instead. I remember that the writer of the preface said that no one would object more to having a preface to his works than Soren Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard believed that people should define their own experiences, come up with their own interpretations of what they read, and not have someone else impose their preface, their interpretation, on anyone else.

All this has made me think of March Madness, and how the commentaries made by the sportscasters seem like an important part of each game. What would the Carolina-Duke rivalry be without the wisdom and enthusiasm of Dick Vitale? And yet, is my interpretation of the game being imposed on me by someone else? By listening to the analysis and commentaries of sportscasters, am I letting go, in some small way, of my liberty to interpret my own experience and to frame my own basketball narrative?

Would Kierkegaard tell me to turn the sound off, watch the game, and form my own analysis of the events before me?

Sometimes I wonder.