France turned the games into a city-wide celebration for all

This is part of Slate’s coverage of the 2024 Olympics. Read more HereIf you like our coverage from Paris, sign up Slate Plus to support our work.

The games convinced me.

I have been critical of the Rio and Tokyo Games and of public money for sports stadiums in general. I remain suspicious of the IOC, bored by the arrogant Olympic mythology and very doubtful that the competition does any good to its host cities.

But the Paris Olympics coverage is biased, and by being there you become a participant in whatever you are trying to judge. At least that’s how it was for me. I felt the Algerians shaking Chatrier with their cries of “Imane, Imane.” I marveled at the scrawny table tennis serves and the huge volleyball blocks. I high-fived the sweaty-handled joggers at Saturday night’s “Marathon for All,” in which tens of thousands of ordinary people ran down the official course at 1 a.m. I even enjoyed the golf, which surprised me to find the most egalitarian spectator experience of the Olympics, with all ticket holders on equal footing as they climbed gracefully over the grassy hills surrounding the course.

Even beyond the interviews I sought and the events I bought tickets to, the Olympics were all around me – blocking my way to the subway, but also surprising me in unexpected encounters. Team doctors on the subway, a track star getting a massage on the side of the road, those inescapable volunteers with their coveted pink caps. Some days there were so few cars on the road that I got used to walking in the middle of the street.

“Paris Superstar” was the cover of the Saturday edition liberationthe left-wing daily, usually known for its Olympic cynicism. To understand the hype, it helps to remember that all of France feared this. Even the mayor of Paris said the public transport system was not ready; the government published an appeal for remote working and debunked “prejudices” about Television work“Remote work doesn’t necessarily mean staying at home!”

The transition from Olympic fear to bliss is nothing new; Londoners experienced a similar revelation in 2012. But the French weren’t just afraid of the Games; they doubted that Paris could pull them off at all.

And so the goalposts for Olympic success were moved in a direction favorable to the organizers. To use a more precise Olympic metaphor, Paris set the bar so high that people forgot why they were even trying to jump over it. The question was: Can Paris do it?

The answer was clear ouais. Central infrastructure was completed on time. The masked torchbearer at the opening ceremony did not fall from the slippery, wet roof of the Musée d’Orsay and die. Miraculously, the Seine was tested for bacteria on race days. The no-building model not only worked, it was beautiful. The Games were embedded in the city, on television and in person. With venues scattered throughout the metropolitan area, distinctive local traditions emerged around the culture of each sport, such as the makeshift ping-pong headquarters in a Chinese restaurant in the 15th arrondissement. This decentralization was possible, in turn, because the city’s policy of discouraging driving and instead encouraging walking, cycling, and public transportation proved more than capable of transporting hundreds of thousands of spectators each day.

But the Olympics were not a final exam that Paris had to pass. Policymakers decided a decade ago that the Paris Olympics were not only possible, but a great idea.

It is in this light that these Games should be evaluated. It may be years before we can assess the full impact – until we find out whether the children in Seine Saint-Denis have learned to swim, until we see how the Olympic Village becomes a district, until we see whether this “magical interlude”, as the local press likes to call it, sets French politics on a new course.

The Olympics probably helped the Paris region to do the things it wanted to do more quickly, including: building a new train station, completing thousands of new housing units, cleaning up the river and improving cycling infrastructure. A journalist told me about a conversation with the planner of Germany’s 2006 World Cup, who said it was like preparing a house for a wedding: you take care of all the things you’ve always wanted to do. I believe the officials when they say, as they have said over and over again, that this and that would not have happened without the Olympics.

But who was all this money and effort for? Only 62 percent of ticket buyers were French, and even fewer were Parisians. The supposed benefits of the Olympics for the local economy will be a huge disappointment. We already know that the capital’s museums have seen massive drops in visitors; now there is talk of a state fund to financially support cultural institutions – as if Paris were recovering from a hurricane rather than finishing a huge two-week festival. It is difficult to imagine what kind of “image boost” this overexposed city could possibly receive, or to understand how a 76 percent increase in the number of Airbnbs in the capital is supposed to be a positive development.

So Paris reinvented the Olympics, but to what end? Other cities may pursue the idea of ​​games with no buildings and no cars, but other cities are not Paris, with its excellent public transit, wonderful public spaces and street life that made the Olympics a legitimate citywide event. But it was fun while it was lasted.