Joe Posnanski’s Why We Love Baseball

[singaporesoxfan]

Apologies if I missed a Posnanski thread, but the man just released Why We Love Baseball: A History in 50 Moments and I would love to discuss the book and his previous writings with those of you who are reading it.

Here’s an excerpt, about Ponderous Joe Bauman and the professional home run record chase:

https://www.esquire.com/sports/a44891776/who-is-joe-bauman-ponderous-joe/

Then in 1952, a doctor—Bauman never even remembered his name—showed up at Joe’s filling station and said he’d heard about Bauman’s hitting power. He offered Joe a chance to play for a baseball team called the Drillers in Artesia, New Mexico. Bauman declined until the doctor offered the princely sum of $600 a month with the promise that he could get a lot more from people shoving money through the chain-link fence. Bauman decided to go.

And it’s fair to say that Artesia, New Mexico—heck, all of New Mexico—had never seen anyone quite like Ponderous Joe Bauman. He was a seasoned baseball veteran in a league filled with local kids just hoping to get noticed. That first year, Bauman hit .375 with a league-record 50 home runs.

Anyone else reading? Some of the anecdotes are repeats from the Baseball 100 but overall I love his style and am loving the book.

 

[Bergs]

There is a beautiful innocence about Joe's writing that will forever be tarnished for me (not ruined, but tarnished) by how malevolently that innocence manifested itself in his Paterno hagiography. But I'll read this, and likely adore it.

edit:

"Bauman hit two more home runs—one of them off José Gallardo’s uncle Frank "

This seems like nothing. But Pos weaves it in beautifully. The man has a gift.

 

[ookami7m]

I had pre-ordered this ages ago (I'm a PosCast listener) and it's been on my table waiting for me. Excited to pick it up this weekend after I get off work.

 

[epraz]

There is a beautiful innocence about Joe's writing that will forever be tarnished for me (not ruined, but tarnished) by how malevolently that innocence manifested itself in his Paterno hagiography.

I missed this—what was in his Paterno biography? Or was it that he didn’t address Paterno’s relationship to Sandusky’s crimes?

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I missed this—what was in his Paterno biography? Or was it that he didn’t address Paterno’s relationship to Sandusky’s crimes?

It wasn't what was in the biography that was an issue, but what wasn't. IIRC he was about 90% finished with his bio (which he was wrote with the cooperation of Paterno) when the allegations came out. Posnanski was essenitally, "Rewriting would be too much work, my book is pretty much done, it's all bullshit anyway because Patterno shits rainbows, sports are really wonderful you guys and sorry not writing anything about Sandusky." Then he left his book as if nothing ever happened.

I was a huge Pos fan until that moment and that really, really soured me on him for a number of years. I read him every now and again, but I don't think he's a serious writer or wants to be a good journalist. He's just a guy who always wants to look at the bright side of things, kinda take the easy way out and only write about stuff he knows about. Which is fine, this world could use a little more sunshine especially in the sports section, but Posnanski is not going to tell you anything really important about any of his subjects that you don't already know.

His book about the Reds was a tongue bath for Pete Rose. And while Pete Rose was a great ballplayer he was also a huge piece of shit.

 

[cornwalls@6]

Pos was, and probably still is, a very good essayist. Particularly writing about things he loves and cares about. And like others, I think it’s fine, necessary even, to have people writing without cynicism. But he absolutely was a terrible fit to write a comprehensive biography about such an iconic(at the time) figure. Compare it to the Maraniss book about Lombardi, for example, and it reads like laughable hagiography. To have it written/released during the Sandusky revelations(and Paterno’s disgraceful culpability in allowing his crimes to go on for as long as they did), really put a dent in Posnanskyi’s credibility. But, this current book seems right In his wheelhouse, and I’m definitely going to add it to my queue.

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

Pos was, and probably still is, a very good essayist. Particularly writing about things he loves and cares about. And like others, I think it’s fine, necessary even, to have people writing without cynicism. But he absolutely was a terrible fit to write a comprehensive biography about such an iconic(at the time) figure. Compare it to the Maraniss book about Lombardi, for example, and it reads like laughable hagiography. To have it written/released during the Sandusky revelations(and Paterno’s disgraceful culpability in allowing his crimes to go on for as long as they did), really put a dent in Posnanskyi’s credibility. But, this current book seems right In his wheelhouse, and I’m definitely going to add it to my queue.

This is fair. I gave up on his Houdini book 40% of the way in. It was just so basic and lacked charm.

His old blog had some fantastic essays.

Katie the Prefect may have been perfect (and I don't even have kids).

 

[Jungleland]

It wasn't what was in the biography that was an issue, but what wasn't. IIRC he was about 90% finished with his bio (which he was wrote with the cooperation of Paterno) when the allegations came out. Posnanski was essenitally, "Rewriting would be too much work, my book is pretty much done, it's all bullshit anyway because Patterno shits rainbows, sports are really wonderful you guys and sorry not writing anything about Sandusky." Then he left his book as if nothing ever happened.

I was a huge Pos fan until that moment and that really, really soured me on him for a number of years. I read him every now and again, but I don't think he's a serious writer or wants to be a good journalist. He's just a guy who always wants to look at the bright side of things, kinda take the easy way out and only write about stuff he knows about. Which is fine, this world could use a little more sunshine especially in the sports section, but Posnanski is not going to tell you anything really important about any of his subjects that you don't already know.

His book about the Reds was a tongue bath for Pete Rose. And while Pete Rose was a great ballplayer he was also a huge piece of shit.

This says it better than I could. It's not that I necessarily think Pos is a horrible guy, but it destroyed his credibility for me. Shtick feels dismissive in a way I don't mean it to, but in the absence of a better word his shtick was always finding the emotional core of a story and making sure the reader could feel the same importance and meaning and gravitas as he did in whatever subject he was writing about. It's hard to go along for that ride when you realize how far he shoved his head into the sand on the Paterno stuff. (In part, if I recall, because he wanted to make sure the book was out in time for father's day? Come on.)

I've read occasional pieces in the years since and liked them, and I imagine I'd probably like this new book a lot, I just can't get up for his writing the same way as I did 12 years ago.

 

[epraz]

That makes sense. I never thought about his journalism cred that much but he’s certainly more of a cheerleader than a muckraker

 

[chrisfont9]

I think calling him an essayist is fair. He's been a journo for a long time and maybe he was a good one, I wouldn't know. But now he's just having fun, which is fine. He does well with this role. I have the book and am enjoying it. The research for interesting details is the real story, since the moments he covers are mostly well known already.