Wednesday, April 11, 2007


See below for the Home Opening Game column

Chris in the comments points to an odd editorial by the Globe staff. My understanding is that although editorials are credited to the staff, each editorial is written by an individual, most often one on the editorial staff, but occasionally by other writers. While the subject of the column, story lines to watch for this Red Sox season, suggests Dan's fingerprints, the writing style is not his.

Instead, the editorial seems to be written by someone who recently graduated with an M.A. in English, who has little historical knowledge of baseball. The writer starts off by claiming that among the things to look forward to this season is a "cornucopia of soap opera story lines." Stop right there. This writer is NOT a baseball fan. He/she is some overeducated wannabe writer who thinks that because literary types like John Updike and Roger Angell wrote about baseball, then he/she should also mine that vein. Instead of writing about the game, which they know noting about, they seek out off the field stories.

The writer goes on to cinch the case that he/she knows nothing about baseball, particularly its literary past. I like to keep posts short but this writer's ignorance has to be pointed out.

"Anyone who has taken the time to browse pitcher Curt Schilling's blog will realize that the loquacious right-hander aspires to be both Don Quixote and Cervantes at the same time, Raskolnikov and Dostoyevsky, Hamlet and Shakespeare. Flying back from Texas Sunday night after hurling seven dominant innings against the flummoxed Rangers, the erstwhile cheerleader for President Bush typed out a pitch-by-pitch analysis of his performance."

First of all, the analogies fail. Rather than explaining the situation they are the writer's attempt to display how knowledgable he/she is. Schilling is neither an author nor a fictional character. He is a highly thoughtful baseball player writing about himself. His blog is nothing more than the publication of the thoughts he goes through after every start. In fact, the subject is nothing new. Bill Lee and Jim Bouton have already offered insight into a pitcher's mind. What is new is the technology. Further, the author seems to imply that there is some inviolable line between the roles of athletes and journalists, that the former can never presume to write for the public, which is the sole province of learned journalists. BS. (Also note the irrelevant inclusion of Schilling's political leanings.)

The writer goes on to claim that if Schilling fails this season, the blog somehow will become a distraction to the team. This seems more like fancy than actual belief. In my brief reading of the blog, Schilling has never made any derogatory remarks towards teammates and reserves all criticism for himself. How this will create a distraction for a team that already seems to keep Schilling at a distance is not stated.

There are more head scratching concerns offered up that I wish I had the space to go into. They all seem to be from the head of Dan, but written by someone else. Very odd.

Fixed for the awful misspelling of "Jim Bouton."


endangered coffee said...

I've never been a huge Schilling fan and I've never been a big Globe basher (even though there seems to be plenty of them around), but the whole Globe/Dan attitude toward number 38 has done nothing but alienate me. I can't imagine how it makes people who are big Schil fans feel - hey, you're favorite player is a big jerk.
The whole Globe ship just seems to be listing aimlessly when it comes to the Sox, even though there are some writers who are doing their best to get us some modicum of intersting, well-written information.

Peter from Worcester said...

Jim BOUGHTON? Didn't he write BAWL FORE?

dbvader said...

bleep me. I mispelled "Jim Bouton." The guy was only a baseball and literary hero to me. I feel awful. It what happens when I write at 3AM.

ObjectiveBruce said...

Just because more than one person at the Globe seems to exhibit common sense is no reason to get all worked up and start in with the anti-intellectual attacks.

Guarantee: If Schilling has lost more than he's won by Independence Day, blog-as-distraction will be an issue.

dbvader said...


Just because you and Dan and the nitwit who wrote the editorial want the "blog as distraction" to be a storyline doesn't mean it will or even can have any effect on the Red Sox clubhouse. Give me one reason the blog can be a distraction. Point to one thing in the blog that should be of concern.

It wasn't an anti-intellectual attack. If you knew me, you would know how silly that is. It was an attack on a writer who so clearly did not know what he/she was talking about. It was an attack on someone who I would assume claims to be a Red Sox or baseball fan, but cares more about "soap opera storylines" than what happens on the field. Storylines are for lazy columnists, no-talent sports radio hosts, and people who know nothing about the game.

Anonymous said...

Bouton reads this blog.

And he doesn't like The CHB, either.

dbvader said...


Hi Mr. Bouton. I loved "Ball Four" and thanks for reading.