New SI: Charles Pierce on Wes Welker

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

DietCoke

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
50
Long-time poster. Long-time lurker. First-time re-poster. After following the Wright Thompson piece on Cleveland sports, I think this board needs to get back to its roots a little and tear apart and praise some writing:

Just got the new SI this morning (Mark Wahlberg cover). It is good timing, because there's been some talk about Charles Pierce on here this week, and there is a Pierce story in the magazine - a takeout feature on Wes Welker.

I'm curious what people think about the piece:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1179944/1/index.htm

Seems to me that the lede is overwritten and unnecessary. The Mark Twain reference seems a little obscure, at least as written. I would have probably started here:

Wes Welker's eyes are blue-gray and wide. Their gaze is steady, and their focus is like something alive. It misses nothing in a circular field of vision that seems greater than other people's. Welker sees spaces that nobody else sees. He looks at a field where everyone seems to be colliding and sees a place to run. He looks at a game played by much bigger men and sees a place in which a man who stands 5'9" and weighs 185 pounds can create a kind of art. An old friend of his remembers a broken love affair and sees the words of a song, a deep blue tint on every syllable. Wes Welker looks at a noisy, crowded, violent profession and sees a career.

I know he ties his genius lede back to the beginning with his final paragraph, but by the time you get there, it's been so long that I don't think it has any impact.
 
I will try to periodically post pieces on here and try to get some discussion going on them. We'll see how popular the threads are. I think it would be good for young writers - and also for veterans looking to sharpen their games.
 
DietCoke said:
Long-time poster. Long-time lurker. First-time re-poster. After following the Wright Thompson piece on Cleveland sports, I think this board needs to get back to its roots a little and tear apart and praise some writing:

Just got the new SI this morning (Mark Wahlberg cover). It is good timing, because there's been some talk about Charles Pierce on here this week, and there is a Pierce story in the magazine - a takeout feature on Wes Welker.

I'm curious what people think about the piece:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1179944/1/index.htm

Seems to me that the lede is overwritten and unnecessary. The Mark Twain reference seems a little obscure, at least as written. I would have probably started here:

Wes Welker's eyes are blue-gray and wide. Their gaze is steady, and their focus is like something alive. It misses nothing in a circular field of vision that seems greater than other people's. Welker sees spaces that nobody else sees. He looks at a field where everyone seems to be colliding and sees a place to run. He looks at a game played by much bigger men and sees a place in which a man who stands 5'9" and weighs 185 pounds can create a kind of art. An old friend of his remembers a broken love affair and sees the words of a song, a deep blue tint on every syllable. Wes Welker looks at a noisy, crowded, violent profession and sees a career.

I know he ties his genius lede back to the beginning with his final paragraph, but by the time you get there, it's been so long that I don't think it has any impact.

I'm going to give him another shot, with an open mind, though the lede doesn't bode well.
 
We have a place called Writers' Workshop for these kind of threads. Doesn't get a ton of traffic, but maybe this kind of thing can help make it a popular board again. So I'm gonna move this.
 
The lede is way, way too much...

It's well-written. I don't know much about Welker now that I didn't know before I read the story.

It's a solid feature, but I expect more, a lot more, from SI and Pierce.
 
This is better on the journalism board.

I don't think anyone is trying to tell Charles Pierce how to write better. I think it's just letting people know that something from a board fave, like Thompson or Posnanski is out there.

Just my opinion. I'm sure it will be ignored.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
I read it and thought the same thing. He could have started a story off with that second graph. But I still think it was a good story. I enjoyed reading it.
 
Wow, seven whole posts (this makes eight).

What a good decision to move this off a board where it would have been read.
 
calm down, mizzou. it's posted on the j-board and takes one more click to get here.

i've read the first two grafs, and agree that the first one is overloaded with false portent and significance and history that the life and game of wes welker certainly has no business supporting. at the moment -- and i'll be happy to be surprised by this if i end up being wrong and welker's ancestry includes columbus, michalangelo and mark twain -- it seems like pierce saw a story about a guy whose worldview comes down to the glass being half-full and realized, "****! how'm i going to make that new and interesting?" with the nagging undercurrent being, "****! i should've been a culture writer like malcolm new yorker! sometimes sports is about sports and not the usual steroidal puffery i try to make every story...."

that said, i also really liked it. part of me thinks pierce is a talented but annoying blowhard, and part of me admires that he tries to throw the long bomb with every piece even if there's no foundation for it, and has the ego to make every subject -- whether they warrent it or not -- a vehicle for his very special historiographic view of the world.
 
Welker sure seems to get a lot of pub. He's a good player, but nobody would know who he is if the Chargers never cut him.
 
AD said:
calm down, mizzou. it's posted on the j-board and takes one more click to get here.

i've read the first two grafs, and agree that the first one is overloaded with false portent and significance and history that the life and game of wes welker certainly has no business supporting. at the moment -- and i'll be happy to be surprised by this if i end up being wrong and welker's ancestry includes columbus, michalangelo and mark twain -- it seems like pierce saw a story about a guy whose worldview comes down to the glass being half-full and realized, "****! how'm i going to make that new and interesting?" with the nagging undercurrent being, "****! i should've been a culture writer like malcolm new yorker! sometimes sports is about sports and not the usual steroidal puffery i try to make every story...."

that said, i also really liked it. part of me thinks pierce is a talented but annoying blowhard, and part of me admires that he tries to throw the long bomb with every piece even if there's no foundation for it, and has the ego to make every subject -- whether they warrent it or not -- a vehicle for his very special historiographic view of the world.

Nobody comes here. This thread would be hovering around 100 posts if it was left where it was originally.
 
Mizzougrad96 said:
Wow, seven whole posts (this makes eight).

What a good decision to move this off a board where it would have been read.

The sub-boards exist for a reason. DietCoke is a newbie and I wanted to establish this before we had a dozen threads on the j-board picking apart individual stories for writing-minutiae discussion. If there's an ethical issue or something bigger with a particular story, that's different and more appropriate for the j-board.

As for this story, I'll admit that I skipped right over it on my first flip-through of the new issue, solely because it was Pats-related.
 
Mizzougrad96 said:
This is better on the journalism board.

I don't think anyone is trying to tell Charles Pierce how to write better. I think it's just letting people know that something from a board fave, like Thompson or Posnanski is out there.

Just my opinion. I'm sure it will be ignored.

I happen to agree with the opinion (not that it will be ignored). I like this kind of thread here more than on the workshop thread, for the reasons you state. It's a fine line, I guess, to decide who's a board favorite, but some stories should be discussed here.
 
Mizzougrad96 said:
AD said:
calm down, mizzou. it's posted on the j-board and takes one more click to get here.

i've read the first two grafs, and agree that the first one is overloaded with false portent and significance and history that the life and game of wes welker certainly has no business supporting. at the moment -- and i'll be happy to be surprised by this if i end up being wrong and welker's ancestry includes columbus, michalangelo and mark twain -- it seems like pierce saw a story about a guy whose worldview comes down to the glass being half-full and realized, "****! how'm i going to make that new and interesting?" with the nagging undercurrent being, "****! i should've been a culture writer like malcolm new yorker! sometimes sports is about sports and not the usual steroidal puffery i try to make every story...."

that said, i also really liked it. part of me thinks pierce is a talented but annoying blowhard, and part of me admires that he tries to throw the long bomb with every piece even if there's no foundation for it, and has the ego to make every subject -- whether they warrent it or not -- a vehicle for his very special historiographic view of the world.

Nobody comes here. This thread would be hovering around 100 posts if it was left where it was originally.

If this thread had 100 posts on the j-board, at least half would be continued Simmons-Pierce snark. You know that.

And you have posted four times on this thread on the "nobody comes here" board.
 
finished it. what i said about the lead stands.

but i also think pierce painted himself into a corner here. not only does welker not support such a grand, big-picture view of the world, but on a secondary level nothing in pierce's reporting lived up to his rhetoric. nothing he found backs up the idea of welker's "vision", his seeing, that can somehow be equated with michelangelo, making him any more special than any other player. as for his "art"? come on. guy juked the **** out of a linebacker, but, really, i know nothing more about his PLAY than i did before. would've been good to talk to some defenders, to find out why welker is so good, no?

meanwhile, i bet welker reads the thing and says, 'i have no idea what he's talking about.' sometimes, a writer can figure something true about a man and his impact -- talese on sinatra, dimaggio -- that the subject has no knowledge of. welker ain't that kind of man.

brady? you can make the case. you can be wrong, but he's big enough in the culture to handle such an effort. it's almost as if pierce wanted to write his book on brady. again.
 
I'm sure Pierce would have a laugh about mix of successful journalists, has-beens and never-weres critiquing his copy.
 
DanOregon said:
Welker sure seems to get a lot of pub. He's a good player, but nobody would know who he is if the Chargers never cut him.

Wow. I was going to say you had to be mixing Welker up with Tim Dwight, but I'll be damned, Welker played with the Chargers in 2004. Huh. Had no idea.

Haven't read it yet, but as for the idea that Welker didn't measure up to such a grand piece: That's the Patriot Way. You're not supposed to know any more about Welker after reading the piece than before it.
 
Stitch said:
I'm sure Pierce would have a laugh about mix of successful journalists, has-beens and never-weres critiquing his copy.

Tell us, then - at what point, if any, does one become qualified to critically discuss the work of Charles P. Pierce?
 
Stitch said:
I'm sure Pierce would have a laugh about mix of successful journalists, has-beens and never-weres critiquing his copy.

A sports journalist's work being talked about by other journalists, retired/washed out/aspiring sports journalists and sports fans/magazine subscribers?

Will wonders never cease...
 

Latest posts

Back
Top