tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post1582010370973292094..comments2024-01-06T10:36:04.084-05:00Comments on A Commonplace Blog: Fiction and the empirical turnD. G. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10659136455045567825noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-59494300729589336232009-07-08T03:10:30.156-04:002009-07-08T03:10:30.156-04:00Pete:
It might not change your mind about reading...Pete:<br /><br />It might not change your mind about reading the book, but the movie scene that you find so objectionable has nothing to do with Malamud. It is purely a product of the screen adaptation by Towne and Dusenberry and goes completely contrary to both the letter and the spirit of what Malamud wrote. In fact, the screenplay accomplishes something quite unusual...copying the external details of many scenes from the book quite faithfully and carefully, yet creating an overall story whose tone and sensibility is almost 180 degrees opposite of its original source material.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09926829612334274721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-62837091934550917332009-03-09T22:00:00.001-04:002009-03-09T22:00:00.001-04:00Is Ruth Ann Steinhagen still aliveIs Ruth Ann Steinhagen still aliveAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12243599943897207887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-44528308229414770852009-02-15T03:40:00.000-05:002009-02-15T03:40:00.000-05:00Couldn't agree more re The Natural - Malamud's att...Couldn't agree more re The Natural - Malamud's attempt was to write a novel not about baseball but about baseball's mythology. Great when you are a kid but as an adult not so much.<BR/>Michael Lewis' "Moneyball" would be a great example in many ways about both how sport writing has changed and maybe the purest form of what Wolfe was talking about (although, admittedly, Moneyball is more journalism than novelistic - but you could say the same thing abd "The Right Stuff."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-58602942260848535162009-02-08T14:43:00.000-05:002009-02-08T14:43:00.000-05:00Rice definitely didn't have the aura of those two,...Rice definitely didn't have the aura of those two, which probably had more to do with his personality than his playing abilities.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-26355359552717593122009-02-06T16:30:00.000-05:002009-02-06T16:30:00.000-05:00Well, I think it’s safe to say that Malamud expect...Well, I think it’s safe to say that Malamud expected his readers to imagine Roy Hobbs as belonging to the same class as Mays and Mantle. Jim Rice, not so much.D. G. Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10659136455045567825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-65818830149547929512009-02-06T16:27:00.000-05:002009-02-06T16:27:00.000-05:00Yes, I should have done some research or at least ...Yes, I should have done some research or at least given it deeper thought, which surely would have yielded Mays and Mantle. But I never realized about Rice, who I never thought of as being particularly swift on the basepaths. I wonder how many of those 15 triples were cannon-shot line drives which caromed off the Green Monster at unpredictable angles.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-4019804068309327652009-02-05T19:22:00.000-05:002009-02-05T19:22:00.000-05:00Jim Rice led the AL in 1978 with 15 triples and 46...Jim Rice led the AL in 1978 with 15 triples and 46 homeruns. Mays and Mantle led their respective leagues in 1955 (Mays, 13 and 51; Mantle, 11 and 37).<BR/><BR/>And what sports novelists need is more realism, yes; but less sentimentalism too; more demonstrable knowledge.D. G. Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10659136455045567825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-91122461819013982392009-02-05T17:46:00.000-05:002009-02-05T17:46:00.000-05:00A bit more realism would have done Malamud wonders...A bit more realism would have done Malamud wonders - without having checked the records, I would guess that nobody has lead the league in both homers and triples since the dead ball era. Homers are for oxen and triples are for rabbits, and it's rare to find a basher who is fast enough to leg out three-baggers. (Pardon the metaphorical excess.)<BR/><BR/>Any interest I might have had in reading Malamud's book was forever dashed by the utterly ridiculous movie scene when Redford/Hobbs hits the towering homer that shatters the overhead arclights and sets of a storm of sparks that would rival a Fourth of July fireworks display. And rounds the bases triumphantly while mortally injured. Yeah, right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3458341.post-36607828935747226512009-02-04T20:17:00.000-05:002009-02-04T20:17:00.000-05:00i'll have to check out Heinz book, thnxi'll have to check out Heinz book, thnxAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com