gary smith does it again

It's neck and neck with Worcester Magazine.

 

Charlie Pierce, Michael Gee and Lupica have all written for the Phoenix. Not your average underground rag.

 

Funny response on several levels.

 

Gary Smith is much of the reason I KNOW I'll never be worth a damn. Love reading him, will never come close myself.

Write, both of those are indeed in the book. Pick it up. It'll make you feel wholly inadequate.

 

Ok. Read the story today. Obviously very good. I've been thinking about it ever since.

Here's some initial thoughts:

It's one of those where you can't stop reading because he only tells you what he wants you to know until the appropriate time. I think he did a great job of adding perspective and context, like always ... the interviews with the current players really brought it home.

Not to demean the Great Mr. Smith, but I did feel a little robbed at the end when he machine gunned what happened to the older folks. I was left wanting a little bit more but it sounds like the ones who did talk to him were very reluctant about it and the others didn't want any part of it.

Anyone else feel a little empty at the end?

 

I think sometimes he uses a "no comment" as too much of a psychological tell for his story. He did that in the Mia Hamm piece, too, from a few years back. The whole story was built around Hamm not being a cooperative source.

"Mia wouldn't want you to read this part. Mia would be embarrassed if you knew this portion." Plenty of athletes aren't willing to give up that much of their time or open their thoughts to reporters. Happens to most of us all the time.

I noticed that with this story and the old guys, too. "This is a story that shouldn't be told," etc., etc., etc.

It's almost like ... well, let me put it this way. We're all told that we shouldn't include quotes just to prove we talked to someone. Is this the Smith equivalent of that? "I don't want to talk to you" becomes, "This is a story that shouldn't be told. A story they hold buried inside. How it must eat at them. Oh, how much you can discern from their reluctance."

Thoughts?

 

Here's the link. Read and discuss...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/the_bonus/04/05/little.rock0409/index.html

 

Sirs, Madames,

There are a few set pieces in the Smith canon. Like I said before, using the photo as a start is certainly one of them. The no comment thing is one that I haven't considered but I suspect it's a commonplace in features, hardly unique to GS. If someone doesn't get back to you on deadline, one thing (did not return a call); for a feature, another (won't talk about it).

YHS, etc

 

If I ever get rich enough to have a tomb stone, I'd prefer it to have a setence like this, "No coach on earth could make a player cry, crap and vomit all at once like Wilson Matthews could."

 

Here is some of what I might say if I were a contest judge and didn't know I was reading Gary Smith:

Great piece, but the boldface lead-ins about the photos and story didn't resonate with me like the rest of the story. They seemed forced to allow for the literary device rather than flowing naturally from what the material required.

This picture shouldn't be published.
This story shouldn't be told.
This picture should never have been made.

Shouldn't and should never have screamed overkill for me because the subsequent logic didn't support the use of such strong language. Maybe it's just me, but he could have accomplished the same with less of a heavy hand.

Had I been an editor assigned to this story, I might have changed them to:

This picture has been searching for its place in history.

Few want to tell this story, but it begs to be told.

There is no team photo for 1958. There was no team. There was no school.

The writer's versions are more poetic and lyrical than mine, and he was obviously going for the benefit of parallel construction, but he went over the top to get there. Sometimes you have to read what you've written and admit when you've worked hard to force something to appear organically connected to the heart of the story. If I were as good a writer as this one clearly is I'd do a better job of explaining my opinion, but all I can say is those choices were jarring to me as I read them.



The story would probably win anyway. Damn compelling read.

I realize I've just committed heresy, but I just didn't like those lead-ins. Maybe I am just cranky from lack of sleep. Perhaps I have read too many stories lately with absolutes, superlatives and hyperbole inserted to convince me this is a big story. Of all those stories, this is the best, no doubt.

The rest of the story was powerful. As usual, he knocked it out of the park with exhaustive reporting and riveting analysis and narrative.

 

I loved the ending and thought he nailed it perfectly.

 

Smith is my favorite magazine writer in any genre, and his old ('94?) anthology is one of the few books I've purchased. His stance in this piece, though, makes me uncomfortable. His point - that things in Little Rock weren't, no pun intended, black and white - is fine. But he seems to give more than a mere airing to the I-shoulda-done-something regrets of the guys from the all-white team; he seems to be making a concerted effort to justify them.

I'm uncomfortable, also, with the unstated implication that the negative effects of the integration crisis on the white kids - the loss of that great team, the loss of scholarships, etc. - is somehow comparable to the horrors inflicted on the Little Rock 9 or other early black integrators.

(But...I don't know. My thoughts are not fully-formed. Yours?)