Deford's confessions in SI

[clutchcargo]

That's been known about the Sullivan story since it was published in SI, and Deford's long acknowledged he saw it in the paper.

How much enterprise that's ever appeared in SI truly originated with one of their own staffers?

I'm sure there's some, but it's not like it's a discredit to a magazine piece if it first appeared in a newspaper or on TV or whatever, if the writer expands on it or simply writes it better.

It's not like it's unique to SI; what's really original? Countless classic stories started when someone saw it elsewhere. Capote saw the In Cold Blood killings in the New York Times. It's not like the book loses points simply because the idea didn't start with Capote getting a tip from a police officer in Kansas about some killings.

The tragedies of John Wideman's family were well-known, but Smith's piece on Jamila Wideman is still a classic. And on and on.

I am pretty sure that Plimpton didn't see the curious case of Sidd Finch in any newspaper before his SI story.

Sidd Finch was fiction, not enterprise.

 

[Smasher_Sloan]

Went in prepared to not like it, came away loving it.

Maybe the detractors don't understand how radically this business has changed since 1960, and I'm not just talking about the Internet. The steady encroachment of television and almost-constant coverage of live events had a huge impact in a different way.

Deford's piece put that all in perspective from the viewpoint of someone who was on the front lines. If I were teaching any kind of media or mass communications class, this would be required reading.

 

[cyclingwriter]

That's been known about the Sullivan story since it was published in SI, and Deford's long acknowledged he saw it in the paper.

How much enterprise that's ever appeared in SI truly originated with one of their own staffers?

I'm sure there's some, but it's not like it's a discredit to a magazine piece if it first appeared in a newspaper or on TV or whatever, if the writer expands on it or simply writes it better.

It's not like it's unique to SI; what's really original? Countless classic stories started when someone saw it elsewhere. Capote saw the In Cold Blood killings in the New York Times. It's not like the book loses points simply because the idea didn't start with Capote getting a tip from a police officer in Kansas about some killings.

The tragedies of John Wideman's family were well-known, but Smith's piece on Jamila Wideman is still a classic. And on and on.

I am pretty sure that Plimpton didn't see the curious case of Sidd Finch in any newspaper before his SI story.

Sidd Finch was fiction, not enterprise.

WHAT !?!?!?!!?!

 

[Den1983]

Went in prepared to not like it, came away loving it.

Maybe the detractors don't understand how radically this business has changed since 1960, and I'm not just talking about the Internet. The steady encroachment of television and almost-constant coverage of live events had a huge impact in a different way.

Deford's piece put that all in perspective from the viewpoint of someone who was on the front lines. If I were teaching any kind of media or mass communications class, this would be required reading.

Ditto. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Not sure why there's so many people who dislike it so much.

 

[Boom_70]

Reading Deford long pieces was never easy. It was analogous to driving on a busy interstate in a heavy rain storm. A white knuckle ride that required total concentration. Deford packed a lot into each sentence and from a reader perspective it never seemed to flow easily. That said, upon completion you came away knowing that you had read something of substance and uniqueness.

I still keep a copy of the SI with his "Toughest Coach There Ever Was" on my desk and from time to time read a paragraph or two. By far my favorite all time sports story.

 

[Versatile]

One of my (non-journalism) friends told me in college he didn't like Sports Illustrated because he felt every story was the same. I told him to read "The Boxer and the Blonde" and "True to his Words" (the "Hurricane" Carter story by William Nack).

Two of my favorites I've ever read by two legends, as far as I'm concerned. And each was written entirely different, yet each was about a former boxer.

He came back saying, "OK, so Sports Illustrated <i>used</i> to be good."

 

[Fran Curci]

Deford's writing "never seemed to flow easily"? If you mean that it's unpredictable and lively and that almost every phrase is spot-on, yeah, I guess I'd have to agree.

 

[Boom_70]

Deford's writing "never seemed to flow easily"? If you mean that it's unpredictable and lively and that almost every phrase is spot-on, yeah, I guess I'd have to agree.

Just my observation, but you put it in a much clearer way. Deford stories are unpredictable and dynamic. You have to concentrate and stay on every word.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Deford's writing "never seemed to flow easily"? If you mean that it's unpredictable and lively and that almost every phrase is spot-on, yeah, I guess I'd have to agree.

Just my observation, but you put it in a much clearer way. Deford stories are unpredictable and dynamic. You have to concentrate and stay on every word.

A guy (one of the select few, I know) who
actually likes my work put it a different way: "With your stuff, the reader has to to run under the pass".

Feel the same way about Deford. Love how
the guy writes, and I'll read his non-fiction
about topics I don't particularly care about,
for that reason.

 

[Double Down]

If this was mentioned already and I missed it or skimmed over it, I apologize, but it seemed clear to me reading this that it was an excerpt from Deford's memoirs, which I suspect he's writing, being in the autumn of his life and all. I think that's probably why it was interesting, but felt a bit off in tone. It lacked context. If this appears in a book in a year or two, it will make much more sense. And I suspect that's what will happen.

 

[flexmaster33]

I thought it was fine...his best work? No. But I'll agree with the earlier post...I'll take Deford off his game a bit over most other writers out there.

 

[Den1983]

If this was mentioned already and I missed it or skimmed over it, I apologize, but it seemed clear to me reading this that it was an excerpt from Deford's memoirs, which I suspect he's writing, being in the autumn of his life and all. I think that's probably why it was interesting, but felt a bit off in tone. It lacked context. If this appears in a book in a year or two, it will make much more sense. And I suspect that's what will happen.

Good point, and I do hope he is writing a memoir. Would love to read it. That, and Kindred's book about his days at the Post would be must-reads.

 

[Gator]

Went in prepared to not like it, came away loving it.

Maybe the detractors don't understand how radically this business has changed since 1960, and I'm not just talking about the Internet. The steady encroachment of television and almost-constant coverage of live events had a huge impact in a different way.

Deford's piece put that all in perspective from the viewpoint of someone who was on the front lines. If I were teaching any kind of media or mass communications class, this would be required reading.

Ditto. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Not sure why there's so many people who dislike it so much.

I loved it, too. I wish times were still like that.

As far as people who didn't like it, I find that those who can't do, generally criticize.

 

[Den1983]

Deford's writing "never seemed to flow easily"? If you mean that it's unpredictable and lively and that almost every phrase is spot-on, yeah, I guess I'd have to agree.

Just my observation, but you put it in a much clearer way. Deford stories are unpredictable and dynamic. You have to concentrate and stay on every word.

I agree with you Boom. Deford's writing can certainly be rough, more often than not, but it's still exquisite.

 

[Trey Beamon]

As others have said, the presentation wasn't great. I enjoyed the piece, though.

 

[bob]

I didn't even notice the "Confessions" hed. Who reads headlines? But as an older guy--not nearly as old as him--I can relate to a lot of what he wrote. I don't quite understand why everyone has to pick the piece apart. Can't we just take it for what it is, an interesting look back by a guy who'se been around the block a few times? Haven't finished it yet, but it's a good read.

 

[Boom_70]

I didn't even notice the "Confessions" hed. Who reads headlines? But as an older guy--not nearly as old as him--I can relate to a lot of what he wrote. I don't quite understand why everyone has to pick the piece apart. Can't we just take it for what it is, an interesting look back by a guy who'se been around the block a few times? Haven't finished it yet, but it's a good read.

You lost me when you admitted to not finishing story yet.

 

[Gator]

He nailed, absolutley nailed, the industry today, as a whole, in one sentence:

"There are more good sportswriters than ever, although there may not be more good sportswriting."

 

[Den1983]

He nailed, absolutley nailed, the industry today, as a whole, in one sentence:

"There are more good sportswriters than ever, although there may not be more good sportswriting."

I thought the ending anecdote about Auerbach was perfect, and on the money, as well.

 

[Gator]

He nailed, absolutley nailed, the industry today, as a whole, in one sentence:

"There are more good sportswriters than ever, although there may not be more good sportswriting."

I thought the ending anecdote about Auerbach was perfect, and on the money, as well.

Wish it was that way now. Instead, we have coaches giving half-assed halftime interviews as reporters chase them to the locker room. Think Red would have done that?