The Spanish Tragedy

Thomas Kyd was a contemporary of Shakespeare or more specifically a playwright who preceded the Bard both chronologically and artistically. Kyd's most famous work was "The Spanish Tragedy," a revenge tragedy which was apparently very successful on the Elizabeth stage. The work has multiple revenge themes including a character named simply revenge, who provides a chorus like function commenting on the action of each act.

The tragic hero the play is Hieronimo who serves at the court of the King of Spain without being of noble blood himself. Hieronimo's son, Horatio is murdered by two of the characters among other things to end his romance with Bel-Imperia, the female lead. Understandably upon discovering the murder and the murderer, Hieronimo vows revenge which he first seeks unsuccessfully through the "system." Undeterred by this obstacle, he proceeds to achieve his goal through the use of a play within in a play.

If the latter sounds familiar, it is, of course, a mechanism that Shakespeare will use in "Hamlet," another, more fully developed revenge tragedy. In fact, a great deal of Kyd's significance in the history of drama is how much of what happens "Hamlet" - the use of ghosts, the play within a play is seen in this earlier play. There has also been speculation, although without any documented evidence, that Kyd was the author of the Ur Hamlet, an earlier version of the play now lost.

Last weekend I listened to a BBC archived broadcast of an interview with noted Shakespearean scholar Jonathan Bate and two other scholars about revenge tragedies from Kyd through Shakespeare. Bate made the point that in the case of "Hamlet," as in much of Shakespeare, the original source material has been given a much more in depth treatment. According to Bate, much of what is considered to be Hamlet's vacillation about revenging the death of his father is his inner debate about the right and wrong of revenge. That's an issue that is of some interest - much of the intellectual/moral world where I have spent a lot of time suggests that revenge is an empty human motivation that doesn't produce the benefits one expects. Reading "The Spanish Tragedy" showed me how revenge can escalate far beyond the original issue, perhaps making its value somewhat questionable. It will now give me an additional perspective on "Hamlet" which I expect to see at least once this fall.

Marling Hall

"Marling Hall" is the third of Angela Thirkell's Barsetshire novels set during World War II. We learn the period covered by this story at the very end when mention is made of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. The novel concludes with a detailed depiction of the Christmas festivities at Marling Hall. This all done in the spirit of Christmas that Thirkell captured in "Northbridge Rectory" when she wrote (my words, not her's) that the problem with Christmas is that it separates people who want to be together and brings together people who should always be kept separated.

In this novel Thirkell introduces a new family, the Marlings as well as a number of other new characters. However, the story also serves to re-introduce the Leslie family who were at the heart of "Wild Strawberries." The Leslies have aged with David Leslie back to his old tricks making himself a love interest with little effort of his own. The love story revolves primarily around Lettice Watson (nee Marling) who was widowed at Dunkirk. Thirkell creates another 2/1 dynamic as well as the possibility that there will be no resolution at all.

Most of this familiar to the reader and I would put the novel somewhere in the middle in any rankings of her work. The war time novels do feel somewhat "choppy" as my buddy DT would say, but I will see how I feel about that after reading the last two which should arrive from Amazon in the next day or so. The thing that really stuck out for me in this book came early on with little real impact on the main story. One of the minor characters, Ed Pollett, who is gifted with machines, but apparently of limited mental capacity takes the obligatory physical for military service. The doctor who is apparently even more limited doesn't recognize or doesn't care about Ed's problems and tries to label him as prime military material.

At this point Sir Edmund Pridham intervenes and Ed is spared something that could easily have been the end of him both physically and mentally. One got me about this was not what happened, but how Thirkell describes Ed and those like him. She notes that Sir Edmund "took an immense pride in all country idiots," protecting them against harm because he regards "them on the whole as part of our National Heritage (as indeed they are.)" This is followed by several more paeans to village idiots - the language is incredibly blunt and judgemental, something that would never be accepted today. The bluntness is even more shocking given the understated, almost non-verbal communication used by many of the characters in Thirkell's novels.

Yet in spite of the blunt, cruel words, there is a caring here for people like Ed that is quite touching. Sir Edmund has no official position in all of this, he is simply a leader in the county and takes personal responsibility for a group that it would be quite easy for him and others to ignore. This just reinforces my belief that there is a lot more depth to Thirkell's work than meets the eye - the stories are not just light hearted satires on the middle and upper classes with too much money and too little to do. I still have a long way to go to finish all of her books, when I do, I plan to read some criticism of her work that I think shares this idea - that the books can be ready at several levels.

Setting the Record Straight

Editor
Civil War News
234 Monarch Hill Road
Tumbridge, Vermont 05077

Dear Sir or Madam:

Scott Boyd’s article (“States Lagging on 150th”) in the June issue of Civil War News calls needed attention to the slow pace at which states are working on the upcoming Civil War Sesquicentennial. There is, however, at least one state whose name needs to be added to those already in the field – New Jersey.

Since the fall of 2008, members of the New Jersey Civil War community have been meeting to plan how our state might observe the 150th anniversary of this watershed event in our nation’s history. Our group has been drawn from roundtables, re-enactor groups, educators and authors (including Civil War News columnist Joe Bilby).

We have named ourselves the New Jersey Civil War 150th Anniversary Committee and are working under the auspices of the New Jersey Civil War Heritage Association. The NJCWHA is a not-for-profit organization with a long record of working in this area. While we are not an official state commission, the committee was endorsed by Governor Jon Corzine at the end of 2008. In his proclamation, the Governor called on all “state and local government agencies, as well as non-profit organizations and educational institutions” to work with the committee on this important anniversary.

The NJCW150 Committee has been working on a website (NJCW150.org) which will be operational early this summer. Initially the website will feature biographies of 150 prominent New Jerseyans from the Civil War era. The subjects of these brief essays include soldiers and civilians, black and white, and men and women giving a sense of New Jersey’s broad participation in these events.

A number of other projects are in various stages of development. These include several possible publications, educational programming, re-enactments and other ways of honoring these brave men and women who made such important contributions to our state and our nation’s history. We hope to collaborate with the appropriate groups in other states as well as publications like Civil War News throughout the course of the sesquicentennial.

Sincerely yours,




John G. Zinn
Chair, New Jersey Civil War 150th Anniversary Committee
Verona, New Jersey

Cheerfulness Breaks In

Finishing "Cheerfulness Breaks In" brings me close to one-third of the way through Angela Thirkell's Barsetshire novels. In some cases these stories of country life in England before, during and after World War II can be read out of sequence without any real loss. However, that is not the case, in my view, in this one which is basically a continuation of "Summer Half," which centers around life at the Southbridge School.

One of the main characters in that novel is Rose Birkett, daughter of the head master and in my mind one of the most obnoxious characters in English fiction. This novel begins with her wedding, followed mercifully by her departure for South America, appearing only brief thereafter through letters to her parents.

In the last few Thirkell novels that I read, I have noticed a pattern of a series of episodes seemingly without a lot of significance until all the sudden at the end the significance becomes very clear. This novel followed that pattern, but with the significance magnified by the fact that this is the first of her books that takes place after the beginning in World War II. Apparently written in 1940, the time frame of the book appears to cover what has become known as "the phony war." This refers to the period between September of 1939 when England declared war on Germany and the spring of 1940 when the first real fighting broke out. The book ends at the time of Dunkirk with a reference to someone having betrayed the British army - a reference I didn't and don't understand unless it is supposed to mean Neville Chamberlain.

While I wasn't surprised by something significant happening towards the end of the book, I was surprised by the scale and also the abrupt inconclusive ending. Going against my rule of reading series in sequence, I had already read "Northbridge Rectory" which follows this book in the series and also covers a period relatively early in World War II. I thought "Northbridge Rectory" was a really good book about interpersonal relationships, but the war seemed to have little real impact on the story. So while I expected something to happen at the end of "Cheerfulness Breaks In," I assumed the war would still be kept at a distance especially given the period covered. That was not the case, however as two of the main characters marry right before the man is ordered overseas and the book ends with his wife receiving, but not opening a telegram that may have brought terrible news.

Although I have read the next book, I don't recall anything that reveals the outcome of the telegram. I may go back and reread this book both to find out whether the end of the story from the prior book is revealed and also to see if there is anything else of significance that I missed because I read the book out of sequence. One of the few things that has concerned me about Thirkell's novels seemed to be either nothing but happy endings or anything of negative nature being kept "off-stage" as it were. That certainly isn't the case in this book so that I look forward to the remaining World War II books with even more anticipation.

Writing Update

Like my reading goals, my 2009 writing goals were fairly simple - finish the five New Jersey base ball team histories well before the May deadline and then get the Lloyd letters out to potential publishers by Labor Day. Interestingly I am well ahead of schedule on both goals, but things are no longer that simple. One of Carol's friends said something like "Life is what gets in the way of the plans you make" and there is certainly some truth to that in this case.

I sent my five pioneer project histories off in February long before they were due in May. Then at the end of beginning of June, I got an e-mail from Peter Morris suggesting that I might want to take the introductory material from one of the histories and expand it into a full length chapter. After reviewing what I had, this made a lot of sense, of course, it also meant one more round of edits and revisions to all five team histories. It didn't take too long, however and all the material was e-mailed out last week so that should be pretty much done, although there is always the possibility of more edits.

On the Lloyd letters, I have been pleasantly surprised that editing these letters of a 33rd NJ sergeant has gone much more quickly than I would have thought. Barring something unforeseen, I think another week or so should have this manuscript ready to be sent out - certainly no later than July 1st. So if nothing else had come up, I would be finished with my 2009 writing goals almost two months ahead of time. My original plan had then been to take the fall off from any writing projects both to take a break and to think intentionally about what comes next. That, however, is where life got in the way not just once, but twice.

The first change happened when I heard that proposals were being requested for editing a book about Ebbets Field which would be part of a McFarland & Co. series on historic ballparks. Paul and I discussed this, decided to submit a proposal and recruited a good team of contributors. The proposal is now in the hands of McFarland so at this point all we can do is wait. The second thing is something I have written about before regarding a book on early base ball in New Jersey. This had been of interest for some time, but a conversation at the SABR 19th Century committee conference in Cooperstown and another book on early base ball convinced me that I have a call to write such a book.

This book will be a lot different than the team histories I have done for the Pioneer Project, but a lot of the research I did for that project can be easily transferred to the new book. I already have an outline in mind and plan to at least try to work on this simultaneously with the Ebbets Field book if that happens. In the latter project I will only be writing one chapter so while it will be plenty of work, it will be a different kind of work. I could actually get started on the New Jersey base ball book now, but since I won't be taking the fall off, I am going to at least take a break as soon as the Lloyd letters are in the mail. At least that's the plan, hopefully life won't get in the way again!

Reading Update - June

My new year's resolution for 2009 reading was fairly simple, keep track of the books that I read over the course of the year. Since the task was simple, I have managed to do so without much difficulty for almost the first six months of the year. With less than two weeks left in the first half of the year, I have finished 25 books. I am currently reading three books at present and it is highly likely that I will finish all of them by June 30th giving me almost 30 for the first six months. If I maintain that pace it would work out to close to 60 for the year. Since I have never done this before, I have no basis for comparison, but I think I would be satisfied if I hit that number.

Obviously it would be easy to build up the numbers by intentionally choosing books that were short, easy to read or both. Thus far, I have avoided that temptation, basically reading what I want to read. Something that I am very pleased about is that I have done a good job of reading the books I have purchased this year rather than allowing them to lie around gathering dust.

Two of the books I am currently reading fall into that category - Jonathan Bate's "Soul of Age" - his biography of Shakespeare's ideas and the latest in the Angela Thirkell canon - "Cheerfulness Breaks In." Once I finish the latter work, I just have to read "Marling Hall," another Thirkell novel and I think I will have read everything I bought this year. "Cheerfulness Breaks In" was written in 1940 about life in the fictional county of Barsetshire during 1939 - the first year of World War II - the part sometimes known as the "phony war." Many of the characters in this book appeared in some of the earlier novels, confirming my thought that they need to be read in sequence.

The third book currently underway is part of an effort to read myself through my own library - this time with David Halberstam's last book, "The Coldest Winter" about the Korean War. I bought that book not that long ago, but it has been on the shelf for sometime so I am glad I am working my way through it. Actually work isn't really a fair word, Halberstam was such a good writer that his books read like fiction. Reading this book while thinking about my own writing has made me try to understand something of how he does ,what he does. Part of it, I think, goes back to his experience as a newspaper reporter which helped him write in a more reader friendly style. I can't draw any other conclusions as of yet, but it is certainly something I will think about some more.

But in any event, that resolution has been well kept and while it may sound simple, it is the first time that I have ever done it. In my next post, I will do a similar check in on my writing goals for 2009 and see how things stand in that arena.

Exorcising The Demons

These days I am at some level a Mets fan because they are the National League team in New York - the spiritual descendants of my beloved Brooklyn Dodgers. Like the Dodgers, blue is one of their primary colors and now with the new Citi Field, the Jackie Robinson rotunda and other things reminiscent of the Dodgers, the connection is even stronger.

There is another level, however, which the connection to the Dodgers is just plain depressing - some of the things that have been happening on the field. The way the Mets have collapsed in the heat of the pennant race the last two years is all too similar to classic Dodger collapses of which the 1951 disaster (pictured above left) is probably the best/worst example. While no where near as important, the just awful way the Mets lost to the Yankees (it had to be the Yankees) on Friday night on Luis Castillo's error brought back too many painful memories of past Dodger debacles.

While I know many Brooklyn fans gave up on the Dodgers after their move to California, I remained a devoted Dodger fan for many years thereafter. It wasn't easy following a team 3000 miles away especially in the days before cable television, ESPN and other expanded sports programing. Even though they had moved so far away there were still some similarities in the on the field problems of the Dodgers. While not as well known as the 1951 calamity, 1962 was not a lot a different. I wasn't a baseball fan in 1951 (finally something I was too young to remember), but I remember 1962 all too well which was eerily similar to Branca/Thompson debacle. The Dodgers blew a seemingly safe lead the last week of the season, led the third playoff game 4-2 going to the bottom of the ninth only to lose when among other things, Stan Williams walked in the eventual winning run.

As noted 1962 isn't as well remembered as 1951 and, I think, one of the reasons for that is because in 1963 the Dodgers exorcised that demon as well all of the demons from prior horror stories forever. Once again in 1963, the Dodgers led the pennant race into September, this time beat off a challenge from the Giants only to be threatened by a Cardinal team that won 19 straight games going into late September. Even though the Dodgers had won 12 of their last 19 their lead was down to a single game before a three game series in St. Louis. As in prior years the newspapers and fans were talking about how the Dodgers would choke and lose the pennant at the very end of the race. But this time, the Dodgers swept the Cardinals and won the pennant by six games.

That was important, but by itself was not enough to exorcise the demons of the 1962 and beyond. Waiting in the World Series were the hated and feared New York Yankees, winners of the last two series. As today, there were more Yankee fans than Dodger fans including one particular obnoxious Yankee fan at Wayne High School, who regularly belittled the Dodgers and their star pitcher Sandy Koufax. While we Dodger fans believed in Koufax, he, and these Dodgers, had never faced the Yankees in the World Series. Any doubts we may have had ended quickly when Koufax set a new World Series record striking out 15 Yankees in the first game of the Series at Yankee Stadium. The next day at school, the obnoxious Yankee fan opened his locker to find a full length picture of Sandy Koufax staring him in the face.

It got even better after that as the Dodgers went on to sweep the Yankees in four straight games including another Koufax gem in the last game. It wasn't the Dodgers first World Championship, but because of the way it happened, it had more far reaching effects than the first two. The Sporting News described it best with the comment that the Dodgers had banished the choke up label forever. And that is true, 1963 is a dividing line in the history of the Dodgers, today no one thinks of the Dodgers of a team that always falls short, that breaks down or collapses under pressure. That's not to say that there haven't been bumps along the way. I have this vague recollection of the Dodgers being upset in a World Series a few years later by some obscure team who's name I forget. Anyway the Mets took care of that bunch a few years later in another World Series, but I digress.

Although the last thing I should be thinking about at this point is another book, I think there is a real story here. How the disaster of 1962 and all those prior disasters were ultimately redeemed in just one season - winning the 1963 pennant race and sweeping the Yankees in the Series. The Mets are in a similar situation today, they need to exorcise the demons of the past two plus years. The bad news is that they have to do it themselves, no one can do it for them. However, that is also the good news - they can do it by themselves!

The Harder Right

Like most people (I think), when I read fiction I like happy endings and I like to see people get what they deserve or not get what they don't deserve. That seems only normal, we wish well even to fictional characters and few of us like to see someone get something they don't deserve even in a make believe world. At the same I time I am troubled by books, or more accurately series of books that have only happy endings where everyone gets what they deserve. This especially bothers me in Jane Austen's work and to a much lesser extent in Angela Thirkell's Barsetshire novels.

That being the case, it is not surprising that I loved "An Autumn Sowing" by E. F. Benson, which, once again, I discovered through the good work of Elaine over at Random Jottings. In "An Autumn Sowing" no one, especially the two main characters, seems to have a happy ending or get what they deserve. In his introduction to the edition I read, John Norwich suggests that Benson started out to write satirical light fiction and the book somehow got away from him and that certainly seems possible.

This is not to say that the book is a deep tragedy with people losing their lives or anything like that gruesome. Rather it is about finding true love (as opposed to physical passion), but then losing it because of choosing the hard right over the easy wrong. The latter line is from the cadet prayer at West Point - "Make us choose the hard right over the easy wrong." In this case it is more a question of choosing the hard right over the hard wrong, but that decision eliminates any happy endings.

Yet it is interesting that while he doesn't have happy ending, the main character, Thomas Keeling is a better person because of the love he both gives and receives (again love, not physical passion). In one instance, after taking a harsh vindictive response to being wronged he reverses himself making him more the "gentleman" than the "gentlemen" who wronged him. More important, however, is his relationship with his daughter Alice who at the end of book has her own unhappy ending. Up until his own experiences, Keeling, no doubt thought of himself as having a daughter, at the end of the book he is more concerned with being a father. Having and being are concepts developed by the philosopher, Eric From - the point being that, in my case, I cannot have a son, I can only be a father. While Keeling doesn't articulate it this way the book ends with him playing a much more positive role in his daughter's life.

I am not trying to suggest that from this point forward, I only want to read books without happy endings, but rather that I like to see some kind of balance. After all in real life there are many people who don't have happy endings or get what they deserve in certain aspects of their lives. - I certainly know my share and I am sure others do as well. That doesn't mean, however, that their stories are tragic or without interest - in fact, their stories are part of what life is all about and are of interest in their own right. I understand that E. F. Benson wrote almost 40 books, "An Autumn Sowing" was my first, but it certainly won't be my last.

A Book For Everyone

Last night before a successful (seven books sold) and enjoyable talk at the Wyckoff Historical Society, I was talking with one of the members about books on the American Revolution. I was able to suggest two books by David Hackett Fisher that he had never heard of - "Paul Revere's Ridge " and "Washington's Crossing," both in my mind classics. I think anyone who enjoys reading also enjoys those moments when they can introduce others to good authors and good books. Most of the time that tends to happen with specific areas of interest - the American Revolution, the Civil War, Shakespeare etc.

If that is true, and I think it is, then perhaps the highest compliment one can pay a book is the belief that it can be recommended to anyone, which is my feeling about "The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society," by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Burrows. As noted in an earlier post the book was written by Shaffer and then revised by Burrows (her niece) when Shaffer became terminally ill. The book is about life on the Island of Guernsey (above left) during and immediately after the German occupation during World War II. In fact the present of the book is 1946, a year of no small importance in my life. Guernsey is an island in the English Channel actually closer to France, but with a population wise enough to align themselves with England.
Because Guernsey is an island, the German's were able to maintain a higher level of control during the occupation, for example islanders who evacuated their children to England were unable to communicate with them until the Germans left.

The title of the book refers to a ruse used by Elizabeth, one of the main characters, to get a group of islanders out of a tight spot. Out after curfew with no good excuse, she tells the Germans, they are part of a literary society and were coming back from a meeting. In order to validate their excuse they have to then form such a society which forces many in the group to start reading books that they would otherwise never read. To their surprise they find out not only do they enjoy it, but what they read helps them cope with the difficulties of the occupation. One of them, for example, says that if he only knew the following quote from Shakespeare, "The bright day is done, and we are for the dark," that it would have kept him from despairing so much. I think Shakespeare has the ability to do that in a number of different ways which helps explain his universal appeal.

At first I was a little reluctant to read this book because with one brief exception it takes the form of letters, but once I got into it, I found it worked really well. One such letter to an author, Juliet Ashton, alerts her to Guernsey, the Society and the lives of the islanders during the occupation. She is ultimately drawn to the island, the people and their efforts to pull their lives back together. Some parts of the book have "A One Fine Day" feel to them - what was saved by England winning the war and why, therefore, it was so important. But perhaps even more appealing are the characters, both Juliet and her mainline friends as well as the people of Guernsey - without much difficulty one gets caught up in their lives, anxious to find how it will all come out.

I was shocked to find out that both authors are Americans, I don't know how an American could so perfectly capture British life, although I am not sure I would notice any errors. But given the overwhelming praise the book has received, I doubt that there were many, if any. The only thing that wasn't appealing about the book is the recipe for Potato Peel Pie -Barrows in her afterword writes that she advises against trying to make one, and with good reason. The book is, as I say, one I recommend to everyone and it is hard to give it more praise than that. In fact, the best review of the book would probably consist of only two words - read it!

"Baseball's First Inning"

"Baseball's First Inning" by William Ryczek is the last volume of his trilogy about the early years of base ball (19th century spelling). Ryczek has worked his way backwards starting with the period dominated by the first all professional team, the Cincinnati Redstockings, moving to the post Civil War years ("When Johnny Came Sliding Home"), and now on the founding period.

Of course, the further one goes back the harder it is to write with any authority. There is the well documented history of the Knickerbockers, but there is obviously something before that, but no one has yet found it. I have already written earlier posts about what I think are two of the biggest positives of this book - the author's new way of looking at old data and how thinking in time helps us to understand the 19th century rules that vintage base ball players and fans find troublesome.

Having now read the full book (as well as "When Johnny Came Sliding Home"), I think this is a valuable book in giving an overview of the game's early years. As Peter Morris has pointed out authors writing about the early years of baseball face a very difficult balancing act because the early game was so decentralized. As a result simply recording the details of the game in different areas can be almost unreadable, while anything too general runs the risk of adding nothing new to the story. In the case the author has done a good job of striking that balance and provides important background information for those looking for the basic story or researchers who need a framework for their more specific area of interest.

As is probably very clear by this point, my primary area of interest for early base ball history is New Jersey. In that regard, I don't particularly care for how Ryczek has treated New Jersey in both of the books I have read. In "When Johnny Came Sliding Home," I think he puts too much emphasis on the negative aspects of the Irvington Club making them look too much like a group of ruffians. While the Irvingtons certainly had their rough edges, my own research has certainly found plenty of examples of how they observed the common courtesies of the game. In this book, the problem is not so much what is written about New Jersey, but rather how little is included in the story and how little importance is attached to what is written. For example, the Liberty Club of New Brunswick's 1861 upset victory over the champion Brooklyn Atlantics is presented as evidence that the Atlantic's did not have a "memorable year" becuase they lost to the "lightly regarded Liberty Club." There is no mention of what the victory might have meant to the New Jersey team.

To be fair, part of this has to do with perspective. The author's focus is on the big picture which in those days was the New York and Brooklyn teams. Still I would argue that New Jersey teams played a significant role in the era which is not reflected in either of these books. This reinforces the feeling I got at the 19th century base ball conference in Cooperstown that I have a call to write a book about the early days of New Jersey base ball. That sense of call got even stronger this week when I had an e-mail from the editor of the pioneer project suggesting I add an introduction to the team histories that I have already written. Looking at my research files, I found some good material and am now working on that introduction.

All of this has made me think that I need to move this project more on to the front burner or more accurately on to the front burners. There is another book possibility that I hope will be formalized very soon. My thought had been that book first and then the NJ base ball book. I am now wondering if it would be possible to work on two books at once especially since my role in the other one would be more editing than actual writing. It's something that will definitely require further thought.

24 & 5

Back in early April when Paul and I went to our first game at the new Citi Field, I calculated the total of major league baseball stadiums where I had attended a game. I qualify it by attending a game because I have been to a football game at the Diamondbacks stadium and took a tour of the Astros' stadium in Houston. The tour in the latter park included the opportunity to sit in the dugout, but unlike the stadium in Phoenix, I still want to go back to Houston for a game.

With Citi Field, my total had reached 23 (Paul's is a little higher), it isn't as easy a calculation as one might think because multiple stadiums for the same city have to be included. Yesterday both numbers went up as I made my first visit to the new Yankee Stadium (above left). I was somewhat surprised to realize that I have now seen five different teams play in two different home stadiums. There are, of course, the two New York teams and the Phillies, all of which isn't that surprising given where I live. But I have also seen two games in the home ballparks of the Cincinnati Reds and the Detroit Tigers. In the case of the Reds that was a fluke of the schedule as by coincidence we made a trip there the last year the Reds played at Riverfront and then intentionally went back the next year to see the Mets play at the Great American Ballpark. In the case of Detroit, it is due to my professional baseball fan cousins living in Michigan, we have made multiple trips to both Tiger Stadium and the new Comerica Park.

I think the approach that ownership took to the new Yankee Stadium is interesting. Once you are inside the park, there really isn't a lot of difference between the old and the new. I am sure there are to purists, but it didn't look or feel that different and I am confident that was intentional. The part of the stadium inside the gates before you get the seats, however, is dramatically different, much bigger, much more open - my companion, a college age Yankee fan found it majestic, almost cathedral like. Certainly that makes attending a game a lot more enjoyable - access to everything was easier and getting out was remarkably simple especially since we were sitting in the upper deck.

My overall sense of it is that Yankee fans will really like it - it maintains the memory and feel that it is important to them while improving the other aspects of attending a game. That is after all the team's market and it makes sense that ownership did everything possible to please that market. At the same time as a non-Yankee fan, it doesn't have the same kind of appeal to me that other new stadiums have. I really like Citi Field primarily because everything about it is new and different I am sort of a Mets fan, but that doesn't explain why I have enjoyed my two trips and want to go back more this year. The same is true of Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, I will go back because of the Stadium. That will not be the case with Yankee Stadium, although I will be going back this year with my cousins and most likely with Paul as well.

I am also very glad that I went yesterday, it was good to reward someone who has given me a lot of help on my research projects and I always like seeing the numbers go up. With trips to Chicago and Milwaukee scheduled for July, I should be at 26 this year - four more than a year ago. I don't have any ambition to see all the parks, but still probably have at least another 1/2 dozen that I would like to see. Of course, there are also a lot of minor league parks as well - so many stadiums - so little time!

"Of Books There Are No End" - Thank God for That!

Last night I finished the excellently conceived and equally excellently written "The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society" by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows. I plan to write at least one post about this book, but for now want to reflect on something that Annie Barrows wrote in the afterword to the paperback edition. Barrows (Shaffer's niece) took over when her aunt was too ill (she died in February of 2008) to complete the substantial rewriting required by the publisher.

In the afterward Barrows makes the following comment:

"The only flaw in the feast is that it ends. If I could
have anything I wanted, I would choose story, without
end, and it seems that I have a lot of company in that. I
have received many letters from readers all over the
world bemoaning the fact that the book comes to an
end."

This is, of course, a dilemma faced by all readers both about individual books and also series written by the same author. Barrows offers a partial solution (there is no complete solution) when she suggests that the book does continue every time two people talk about it. There is certainly truth in that, but there is something else to be kept in mind - something that I have been thinking about in my reading of Angela Thirkell's Barsetshire novels.

As anyone who reads this blog can tell, I am ripping through those books, six so far in 2009. They are both a quick read and addictive to the point that I get some sense of withdrawal if I am not reading one. And while there are no new Thirkell novels coming out, the fact that there are close to 30 in the series means it will be a while before I face the last one. But the question still remains should I slow down and spread them out more gradually - at the current rate I will probably finish them at the end of next year.

I have thought about that, but decided against it for two different reasons. One (and it's not the most important) is that we all need to remember that we don't have unlimited time to read every book that we want to read. More importantly for me is something that I have realized from following Elaine's blog, Random Jottings of a Book and Opera Lover. In the past year Elaine has written about close to a dozen authors that that I had never even heard of, much less read. Every time I have followed one of her recommendations, I have enjoyed it immensely.

Just this past week Elaine wrote about a book by E. F. Benson entitled "An Autumn Sowing," which she praised highly while at the same time mentioning that it was out of print and hard to get. I went directly to the Internet and was fortunate enough to find a copy that arrived just yesterday - while I was at it I also ordered the next two Thirkell novels as well as "The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society," which is now out in paperback. According to the introduction to "An Autumn Sowing," Benson wrote close to 100 books in his lifetime so if I enjoy this one, as I think I will, there will be plenty new material for the future.

Following Elaine's blog has made me realize what perhaps should have been obvious, while each author's work is finite, the total universe of good books is infinite. Anyone who enjoys reading is always going to find more authors that he or she enjoys. So, in other words, the fact that "Of books there is no end," is really not the problem, it's part of the solution!

Four Words Are Worth a Picture

Yesterday morning when Carol and I entered St. Paul's Church in Paterson for the annual Pentecost service we were greeted by what sounded very much like music from the classic Simon & Garfunkel (above left) song - "The Sounds of Silence." The reason that it sounded so much like "The Sounds of Silence" was it was "The Sounds of Silence." The music was used as a setting for a sung version of the Lord's Prayer which was haunting and in my case, at least, brought back a lot of memories.

For someone who spent the late 60's and early 70's in college, graduate school and the army, the music of Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel captured certain feeling and events in very effective ways that were hard to explain. One thing in particular that came to mind yesterday were four words from a song called "Bridge Over Troubled Waters" - the words are "Sail along silver bird."

I have not idea what their intent was behind those words, but for me they capture perfectly a picture of my time in Cam Ranh Bay Vietnam. During the Vietnam War most of us got there and came back by airplane - a 20 hour flight from between Seattle, Washington and either Saigon or Cam Ran Bay. The U.S government contracted those flights out to commercial carriers so I went to war on either Pan American or American Airlines - I am not sure which. Of course, in the army, we had our names for everything, I don't remember if there was a name for the planes that took you to Vietnam (if there was it was probably unprintable), but the planes that brought you home were called "freedom birds."

In Cam Ranh Bay where I spent my entire tour of duty without leaving the peninsula once, except for R&R in Australia, there wasn't much in the way of scenery. It was basically sand, sand and more sand set off by some scrub vegetation. On top of that the buildings weren't much to look at, for the most part think basic Quonset hut. I distinctly remember one sunny Sunday morning coming out of the officers mess hall very early and seeing a "freedom bird" leaving Cam Ranh airbase on the way to Tokoyo and then back to the United States. Immediately those four words from that Simon & Garfunkel song came into my mind and have stayed their ever since. Seeing a "freedom bird" was a big deal, we would sometimes leave our office just to watch one - obviously we wished we were on it, but it at the very least it gave us a sense of hope that our time would come.

I am also reminded by this of one thing about the flight to Vietnam, as I say on either Pan Am or American Airlines. Throughout the flight we got the typical messages from the stewardesses and the cockpit that happen on every commercial flight. As we got into the last leg of the flight passing over the Vietnam countryside on the way to Saigon, I kept hoping there would be some acknowledgement of where we were going and/or what we were doing. But I hoped in vain, it ended the with typical commercial hoping we would fly their air line again.

I suppose in some ways that was a metaphor for the entire Vietnam experience, if you weren't part of it, the rest of society just went on with their lives. When I came back from Vietnam in January of 1972, I set about finding a job, of course in each interview there were questions about what I had just been doing. Almost without exception when I said, I was just back from Vietnam, the unspoken body language was pretty much - "how come you were so stupid that you couldn't find a way out." The bitter veteran can almost be a cliche and I am not trying to be like that, but that reaction was clearly there. Of course since then there have been a lot of efforts to try to appropriately recognize Vietnam veterans, but it was fairly ironic last year when at three different major league baseball games all veterans were asked to stand. Ironic because that was three more times than I had been honored in the previous 36 years - as I have come to learn irony is not as enjoyable when you are recipient!

Lobster Shells, Baseball Cards and Other Artifacts

In the Lord Peter Wimsey murder mystery, "The Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club," Lord Peter insists on seeing books owned by one of primary suspects in the case. He explains this to his great and good friend, Inspector Parker of Scotland Yard when he says, "Books, you know, Charles are like lobster shells, we surround ourselves with 'em then we grow out of em' and leave 'em behind, as evidence of our earlier stages of development."

I thought of this today while continuing my ongoing quest to bring some degree of order to our attic. We moved into this house on Memorial Day weekend of 1977 and we have certainly accumulated enough stuff. My current task is sorting through a lot of Paul's belongings - when he was here at Christmas we reached some general agreement on parameters which I am now implementing and finding some interesting things.

Today, for example, I found a bound copy of his senior English thesis at Bates. The subject was the minor characters in James Joyce's "Ulysses." Of course, I set that aside to share with DT. It's not everyone who has an equal grasp of Shakespeare, Chaucer, the Beowulf poet, Wordsworth and Joyce as DT does. Once he reads it perhaps, DT and Paul can discuss some of the finer points of this enigmatic work.

The main thing I have been going through, however are baseball cards, literally hundreds and hundreds of baseball cards. Of course like everyone else in my generation my parents threw away almost all of my baseball cards helping to create the scarcity that drives up the prices of those cards today. I checked this first with Paul so the purging is all done with his approval. I have to be careful going through the cards because mixed in with his are the few of mine that survived like the 1959 Sandy Koufax card pictured upper right. In addition to the Koufax card I was surprised to find cards for Mickey Mantle, Roger Maris and Don Drysdale which have to have some value today.

As I was working on this today, I realized that what I am really doing is going through the artifacts of the early years of Paul's life. All those cards, many housed in notebooks and organized in boxes are the tangible evidence of something that was a major priority in his life for a number of years. There's an folk song - "Puff the Magic Dragon" that has a line to the effect - "Dragons live forever, but not so little boys." And just like so many little boys, including myself, Paul is no longer that little boy, but has left these metaphorical lobster shells behind him. They all can't be kept, of course, but getting rid of these things also means getting rid of that evidence and to some extent those memories.

As a result as I go through these things, I do consciously try to save some things, if nothing else to help maintain those memories. Some of the connections like the baseball cards are obvious, but I find other things where only Carol, Paul and/or I might remember the significance. Today in another box of Paul's things, I found an Essex County jurors badge - it took a minute, but then I remembered why it was there. It dates back to one of my first stints on jury duty when he was very young. For some reason he was fascinated by the badge and wanted me to give it to him when I was finished even though you were supposed to turn the badge back in at the end of your time. Of course, I kept the badge and it has been around ever since, I doubt if he remembers how important it was to him all those years ago. So as I go through this process, I am constantly making decisions about what things should be kept - for some reason, the badge wasn't a very difficult decision.

Before Lunch

I thought that I had noticed a pattern in the last two or three of the Angela Thirkell novels that I have been reading with great enjoyment. Most of the book is taken up with the semi-comic comings and goings of a large cast characters, some of whom have appeared in the earlier novels. Then just when I thought it would never happen, a serious issue or issues arise the resolution of which brings the story to a more or less satisfactory conclusion.

Most of these elements appear in "Before Lunch," the last of the series to be written prior to World War II. Indeed this, of the all those read so far, seems to have more of the characters from prior novels including tying up some loose ends from other stories - in one case without the characters in question saying a word. The caption on the book cover (above left) calls this "a glorious social comedy of rural England," which is certainly true, but in my opinion doesn't go anywhere near far enough.

As noted in the first paragraph, most of the novel seems to be taken up with the social comedy aspects of the story. But once again just in the nick of time, the serious issues arise - in this case they seem to be more about what to do when one makes a commitment in a relationship, but then realizes it is a mistake. As usual these issues come out of love triangles or, as I call them, 2/1 dynamics. The the end of the book is taken up with resolving these issues "before lunch," which happens in typically elegant Thirkell style. However this time there is more, at the very end one, and probably two, of the characters are in a great deal of pain. Exactly why isn't explained and, while one can infer, the logical inference seems hard to believe. This answers the one concern I have had about Thirkell's novels - fairy tale endings with everyone more or less happy. It will be interesting to see if there is some further explanation or resolution of this pain.

Something else that is interesting about Thirkell's novels is that while they are stories of the gentry and upper classes, the servants are presented as developed characters who hold their own with their masters and mistresses. These relationships were part of rural life in England during the period, Thirkell couldn't have changed that reality, she could, however, have chosen to ignore the servants, but to her credit doesn't do so. As noted this is the last of the novels set in pre World War II England, it will be interesting to see how Thirkell treats this issue in her post war novels. From some fiction I have read recently (especially Mollie Panter Downes - "One Fine Day," the unwillingness of people to continue in those servant roles forced a major adjustment on the middle class/gentry during the post war years. However, I still have to read my way through Thirkel's 4-5 novels set during the war itself - so many books so little time!

I Get Into the Game (At Least Metaphorically)

Yesterday Carol and I drove down to Newtown, Pennsylvania for a vintage base ball game between the Eureka and our "mother" club the Flemington Neshanock. The match was organized as part of the town's Memorial Day observation and they did a great job of promoting it. The crowd looked to be somewhere between 2-300 by far the largest crowd I have ever seen at a vintage game. In fact, there had to be more people there than have attended all the other games I have been at combined. Brad Shaw, the President of the Neshanock, says that the best way to schedule is as part of an event and yesterday certainly illustrated the truth of that statement.

For those of us who are historic purists there were some unhistorical features of the day including the National Anthem (probably began during WWI) and singing "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" (no either than 1908). However since the vintage base ball postage stamp to the upper right also uses baseball's theme song in an uhistorical way I suppose I can't complain to much. There were also some baseball trivia questions for those in the stands some of which were absurdly easy - "When was the first World Series played?) (bad) and "Which team has won the most World Series? (by far the worst - both because it is so simple and because the answer is so depressing).

The venue was spectacular, a field with a grass infield, well maintained with plenty of shade all around. Once again the Eureka got off to a slow start and lost to the Neshanock, but it was a good game. One thing that always strikes me about vintage games is the combination of adapting to the old rules (1864 in this case) and remembering some aspects of the game that probably have never changed. In the latter category are things such as how one bad play can lead to a disastrous inning, not making the first or last out of inning at third, and the importance of getting runners into scoring position with two out. On the other side are things like 3 balls for a walk, batters/pitchers getting a warning pitch before balls and strikes are called, any ball caught on the bounce being an out, underhanded pitching, and not being allowed to over run first base.

Because of the travel involved, most of these games tend to take a whole day. Almost without exception the day before the game, I start thinking about how else I could use that time. Yet from the moment I get there I enjoy the whole experience. A big part of that is just the fun of being back participating in a game I love, the game that I played more than any other growing up. I wish I had known about vintage base ball at least 10 years ago when I could have still played and it might have been possible to make it a father and son activity. At least this time part of me did get into the game - one of our younger players didn't have a uniform so I lent him my shirt so he could play. Anything (well almost anything) for the team!

Lest We Forget

Today is the 38th anniversary of the worse day of my life. Some may find it difficult to make that statement with such clarity, but for me to this point there has never been any doubt. On May 23, 1971, I left my parents home in Wayne, New Jersey for army duty in Vietnam. I had to fly from Newark airport to San Francisco, go to a base in Oakland, California where I would board a plane for Seattle, Tokyo and ultimately Saigon.

I couldn't face the idea of my parents driving me to Newark Airport so I asked a long time friend of mine (still a friend today) to take me. As he turned his car around to pass my parent's house on the way to the airport, the only thought in my mind was that this might be the last time I ever saw my parents, sister or the house I grew up in. It was a beautiful spring day like it is today, a Sunday, and all I could think of was what felt like the unfairness of being on the way to war while everyone else had more pleasant things to do. It got worse on the plane to San Francisco - I enjoy irony, but I have come to realize that irony is a lot less enjoyable when one is the target. On the plane was someone who I went to graduate school with - he had done everything in his power to get out of the draft and had succeeded. Now he was on his way to San Francisco for vacation and job interviews. When he heard where I was going, his body language was as if he was accompanying my coffin - just great.

Many years later when I came to write "The Mutinous Regiment," I began one chapter just after the regiment had fought its last battle with the following words:

"If life is unfair, little in life is less fair than war. In every war some go through
combat unscathed to live long and full lives, while others, for no reason besides
luck or chance, die without ever having had the chance to live."

In addition to the reasons already mentioned, this has been on mind because I am close to having the William Lloyd letters ready to go to potential publishers. Lloyd was a sergeant in the 33rd who left the largest collection of letters of any member of the regiment. One of the characteristics of his letters is their total honesty, anything he thought or was unhappy about, he wrote about it. While working on this I have tried to remember that he was only 21, married for about three months when he enlisted in the 33rd, his wife couldn't have been much older. Imagine being that young and trying to cope with adjustments and stress that seems almost unimaginable. Lloyd's story has a happy ending, not only did he survive the war, he lived until 1928.

Yet that's just the point about the unfairness, Lloyd was in every battle and every campaign, lived to tell about it and live a full life thereafter. Another 163 members of the regiment weren't quite so fortunate - they never had a chance to live. The fact is that it is unfair and that can never be changed. To me that means at least two things - war has to be really justified before bringing that kind of unfairness into play. There is no doubt in my mind that the Civil War was such a war which brings in the second issue. The fact that it is so unfair to those who give their lives, it is even more important that we never forget those "who gave their lives that that nation might live," not just in the Civil War, but all wars.

Edward II

In some previous posts I noted that I had read in several places that Shakespeare's early work was influenced by interaction with his contemporary, Christopher Marlowe. I had certainly known about Marlowe, but had never knew much about him, nor had I read any of his works. That changed last night when I finished Marlowe's one English history play, "Edward II."

The historical Edward II was probably one of England's worse kings - catering to favorites, in conflict with his nobles to the point of the Civil War. The end result was Edward's deposition in favor of his son, Edward III who would go on to be a great medieval king. Interestingly Edward II's, father and his son were both great English kings. After his deposition, Edward II was brutally murdered, for medieval kings giving up the crown usually meant giving up one's life as well.

The first two acts of Marlowe's play focus on the conflict between Edward and his nobles over the kings favorite - Gaveson - a relationship that Marlowe makes pretty clear was homosexual in nature. What struck me about these first two acts was the frenetic nature of the pace - Gaveson is recalled from exile, barely arrives and is exiled again, just leaves for exile and is recalled again and then on his return is condemned and executed. Trying to visualize it on the stage made me feel like it would be like watching a movie where the film is being shown at too fast a speed - sort of like the Keystone Cops.

In fact, that was sort of my reaction to the first four acts - they were episodic in nature at a pace that seemed to allow little time to develop anything in any depth. Surprisingly all of this seemed to change in Act V. At this point Edward has been deposed and is in prison while his queen and Mortimer are plotting his murder. All of the sudden the action seemed to slow down, creating drama about the events and making Edward appear almost sympathetic which is no small feat. There are similarities between the both the historical and the dramatic Edward II and Richard II. I have always found Richard II to be about as unsympathetic a character as there is, but Edward goes even beyond that with his obsessions first with Gaveson and then with Spencer.

One of the things I noticed in reading the introduction to the play was critical commentary suggesting that "Edward II" is really not a history play because it doesn't address any of the issues typical of that genre. Rather it is the story of people who just happen to be in those positions - perhaps if the characters weren't kings and nobles, nobody would care. I think there is something in that view of the play. I didn't come away feeling I had learned anything about kingship or leadership as I do in Shakespeare's plays. The lessons appear to have more to do with the dangers of obsessions with someone or something. Edward II's obsessions seem extreme, but that may be artistic license to make a point. In any event I came away with another reminder of the importance of balance in one's life - an important lesson for anyone, king or not.

Discerning the Lack of a Call

A few weeks ago I wrote a post where I said that a casual lunch time conversation at the 19th Century Baseball conference in Cooperstown convinced me that I had a call to write a book about early baseball in New Jersey. With the past few days, it has also become clear to me that I don't have a call regarding another possible book topic - Andrew Jackson and his war against the Second Bank of the United States.

I have written before about how this is a topic that I have been interested in since high school, primarily for two reasons, nothing that I have read has ever explained how the bank operated and there seemed to be so many arguments that the bank was a good idea. Over the past six months, I read Robert Remini's "Andrew Jackson and the Bank War, as well as Jon Meacham's Pulitzer Prize wining biography - "American Lion." (Sometime I may write about my reaction to the latter book winning that award). In both cases, the author's did not explain how the BUS (pictured above left) worked nor did they give (in my opinion) any good explanation of why the bank was a bad idea. The merits of the bank just get dismissed by saying the issues were really political.

I decided to keep reading about this to see if there was, in fact, a call to try to write a book about the topic. My next book was Thomas Govan's "Nicholas Biddle: Nationalist and Public Banker," basically a biography of Biddle as a banker. Govan's book had been criticized by Remini (the dean of Jackson scholars) as being prejudiced, a complaint that I sometimes think can be made against Remini. Reading the book gave me a little more sense of how banking worked in the 1820's and 1830's, but it still seems a very complicated topic. More importantly was the portrayal of Biddle, for more than half the book, it certainly seemed as if he was far from the evil figure portrayed by Jackson and then subsequent biographers and historians.

However as I read on it seemed like Biddle was indeed guilty of some of the things he had been accused of, some of which Govan admits and some of which he seems to excuse. For some reason, as I read the second half of this book, I lost a lot of my interest in the topic. As noted I think it is a very complicated one and it also appears that a lot of the original source material, especially the records of the bank, do not survive. More than these things though is that my interest, almost passion, for the subject took a big hit. It may come back, but it doesn't feel like it now.

In any event recognizing the lack of a call is a sort of negative clarity which isn't such a bad thing, but it helps simply things. It also isn't like I have a lack of potential writing projects, I am very hopeful about the Ebbets Field book, still have to finish editing the Lloyd letters and have a clear sense of a call on the New Jersey baseball book. There are some smaller projects in the offing as well including a chapter in a book about New Jersey and the Civil War plus the possibility of contributing something to a book about the greatest baseball games of the 19th century. Beyond or behind all of this is another possibility for a book on a much larger scale - a book about Charles Ebbets, Brooklyn and the Dodgers. In a lot of ways the Ebbets Field book would be a way to pursue that further so here is hoping that works out and I continue to get more clarity about what I should and shouldn't be doing.

Thinking In Time

After Sunday's vintage games on Central Park's North Meadow, I was walking to the subway with one of my Eureka teammates and we started discussing some of the different rules of the 19th century game. For example, I mentioned that I don't enjoy watching the 1890's overhand game (or the 1880's game either for that matter) primarily because it is not a lot different from the modern game. As a result the experience loses its uniqueness and is little different than any older group of men (and sometimes women) playing baseball.

There is, however, one significant difference between the 1890's game and the modern one - the foul strike rule. Under this rule, foul balls are not strikes thereby significantly increasing the potential length of any at bat. I believe this was a big controversy at the end of the 19th century since players like John McGraw would endlessly foul off pitches until they either got a walk or a pitch they wanted to swing at. I don't like that rule either so for me 1890's games aren't unique and they have at least one rule that prolongs the game unnecessarily.

My teammate, however, had another rule, he didn't like - one in use in the 1860's and 1870's - the bound rule, especially as how it applies to foul balls. Through 1864 any ball caught on a bounce was an out, after 1864 through the 1870's, the rule still applies to foul balls. As my teammate mentioned from a hitter's standpoint, little is more sickening than tipping a pitch - thinking it is just a foul ball and then watching the catcher come up with it on the bounce and realizing the at bat is over. As a score keeper, its a wrinkle I have to keep an eye on or I end up missing outs.

I was thinking about all of this because of something I read in William Ryczek's new book, "Baseball's First Inning." He was talking about the typical experience of those playing vintage baseball for the first time and how frustrated they get with it, leading to comments about certain rules being stupid. According to Ryczek the best response is, yes ,it is a stupid rule and that is why they changed it. This reminded me of a reality of historic recreations like vintage baseball, we operate under the disadvantage of realizing how the game has changed and evolved. The pathfinders of the early game were unhampered by that knowledge and so they are playing and thinking about the game, especially how it can be changed and improved. Those attempting to recreate or re-enact look at the game from an entirely different perspective that makes it more difficult to get a sense of what it was like to know only the beginning.

That may or may not be of great significance to some one who is only try to re-enact history. It can be much more important for those trying to write history - it's the old thing about 20-20 hindsight. It is far to easy to be critical of those who came before because they made decisions and took actions with less information and less time for consideration. Another example of this was the last panel discussion at the Civil War conference, Carol and I attended in Richmond last month. The last discussion was on looking forward to the election of 1860 knowing only what was known in 1859. As a result Abraham Lincoln was hardly mentioned in the discussion because he wasn't considered to be that much of a factor. This whole way of thinking in time is something for me to keep in mind with all of my historical writing.

Getting there (and back) is half the fun

Back in 1964 when Shea Stadium and the New York World's Fair opened simultaneously and adjacent to one another, there was a commercial that said that half the fun was the subway special that took you there. I was reminded of that today when I traveled to the North Meadow of Central Park (pictured above left) in New York City for the second day of the annual Gotham Cup. The Gotham Cup is a vintage base ball festival that draws clubs from up and down the east coast, from as far away as Providence and Maryland.

My team, the Eureka, played two games today, the first at the ungodly hour of 9:00 a.m. I remember going through the North Meadow almost three years ago as part of the New York City 1/2 Marathon, but today was the first time I was conscious of the magnificent quality of the grass and what seemed like unlimited baseball and softball fields. I got there about 8:20 and there were already games going on as far as the eye could see, which was pretty much the case until I left a little after 4:00.

Recently I have started using the New York City subway to get around in Manhattan, usually after driving and parking at the Port Authority. It has worked pretty well and with the AIDS walk going on in the same area, driving didn't seem like a real great idea. Getting to the Port Authority early on Sunday morning, was no problem, I followed the signs to the C train, used my Metro Card and all of the sudden saw a sign that said "No C trains - 5/16-5/19. My confidence took a big hit, but below that statement was the question - "How does this effect me," followed by directions to take the A train if you wanted to go uptown. Sure enough about 10 minutes later the A train arrived, I took it to 96th Street and Central Park West and arrived at the North Meadow.

With the uncertain weather forecast, I was focused on the possibility of rain and didn't pay too much attention to the temperature so I was fairly cold most of the day, especially when the wind picked up. As noted our first game began at 9:00 and it was somewhat reminiscent of last week's Mets-Braves game that Carol and I attended. It was a back and forth affair that we finally lost 11-10 in the bottom of the 11th inning, an exciting well played game.

Unfortunately, due to the vagaries of the schedule our next game wasn't until 2:15, giving us almost 3 hours to kill. There were other games going on at the time so I watched them including an overhand game by 1884 rules - the first time I had seen this version of base ball. Like the underhand game no gloves are allowed in the field, with the one exception being the catcher. The really strange rule, however, was six balls being required for a walk. If they used that rule today, games would last four hours.


Finally our second game began about 2:30 against the host team, the Gotham club of New York City. It was another well played game that we lost, this time 10-6 after being tied 6-6 going into the 7th inning. Although we have lost all five games this year, we have been in every one and could easily have won one, if not both games today. I hope the players don't get discouraged because we don't seem to be that far way.

The second game didn't end until a little after 4:00 and I was sure it would take me forever to get home. By the time some of my teammates and I reached the subway station it was 4:17, to my surprise, I pulled into our driveway almost exactly an hour later at 5:17. Carol didn't seem too impressed with that, but it surprises me that I could go from 96th Street and Central Park West to Verona in just 60 minutes. The subway ride may not be half the fun, but it certainly works pretty well and I am glad that I have been able both to understand and use it on a more regular basis.

The Brandons - Angela Thirkell Strikes Again

As I read my way through Angela Thirkell's novel, "The Brandons," I thought that this was one book that was just a light story of the gentry in the English countryside with nothing really serious to say. I had the same feeling through much of "Summer Half" and, once again, I was wrong. In the editions, I have been reading, "The Brandons," is one of the longest and it took a long to time to get to the serious bit, but it was there none the less.

The character in question is a Miss Morris who is serving as companion to the elderly, eccentric and infirm Amelia Brandon. The daughter of a widowed clergy man, Miss Morris apparently served as his unpaid administrative and sometimes pastoral assistant. Once he died, she was left without money and/or a career and had to resort to serving as a companion to a succession of elderly ladies. Based on how Thirkell describes Miss Morris' experience, it sounds like the 1930's version of having the Victorian situation of governesses.

As noted, in this book Miss Morris is serving that role for Amelia Brandon, who in addition to her other characteristics is very wealthy and living on a large, but unattractive estate. The remaining Brandons are Lavinia Brandon and her two children, Francis and Delia plus a cousin named, Hilary Grant, who is conveniently living and studying with the local vicar, a Mr. Miller.
Amelia Brandon has a large fortune to dispose of and no immediate heirs so one of the questions is who will inherit, an especially interesting question because the obvious male candidates, Francis Brandon and Hilary Grant both want nothing to do with property. When Thirkell does resolve the question, she does so with a Dickensian twist that is not without humor.

But as noted earlier what was of most interest to me was the situation with Miss Morris who is once again without a "home" when Amelia finally does die. There are, of course, financial and romantic aspects to this which get full treatment, but more important from my point of view was that the work Miss Morris did for her father was clearly a calling. Thinking about it much of her frustration with her current situation doesn't appear to be either the romantic or financial side, but rather the frustration of not being able to do what she does well and loves to do. The exploration of that issue by itself was important, something I have found in each of Thirkell's novels.

"The Brandons" is also full of the Barsetshire characters from other novels and while it isn't necessary to read them in order, I do think it helps. The book also has an interesting 2/1 dynamic or love triangle where both Hilary Grant and Mr. Miller are infatuated with Mrs. Brandon whom, at some level, seems oblivious to the whole thing. It wasn't the most attractive part of this novel, but on reflection, it was probably used as a vehicle to help both Grant and Miller come to a better understanding of themselves and what they both want and need. Most, if not all, of Thirkell's novels end with a series of engagements or marriages. In "The Brandons," the different situations seem headed there, but not with quite that level of closure. I am not sure whether that was intentional understatement or there are some surprises ahead. The only way to find out will be to read on, with "Before Lunch" next up on the list.

New Analysis of Old Data

Supposedly when George Eliot was writing her first novel, "Adam Bede," the publisher sent her a letter asking about the topic. She responded by saying she didn't want to answer that question because she believed that art was not the subject, but the treatment of the subject. "Adam Bede," by the way is still my favorite Eliot novel. My cultural companion, DT prefers "The Mill on the Floss" since he thinks using dental floss for a building foundation shows the Victorian early appreciation of environmental issues.

I have always liked Eliot's position on this and it came to mind again as I was reading William Rcyzek's new book, "Baseball's First Inning." I was first introduced to Rcyzek's work in "When Johnny Came Sliding Home," a history of the game in the immediate post Civil War era. The author had previously written about the first professional teams so his latest work represents the the last volume in a trilogy basically written backwards - sort of like Shakespeare's approach with his two sets of four history plays. Since Rcyzek looks at the early days of baseball from a larger perspective, his work helps me set a context for the work I am doing on early New Jersey baseball.

I am only about 50 pages into the latest book, but it was the author's treatment of the question of who invented baseball that made me think of Eliot's position on art. Rcyzek doesn't offer any new information, but he analyzes the existing information in an important and helpful way. Basically he says that if we look at baseball from a genealogical perspective, everything that comes after the New York Knickerbocker Club (pictured above left) can be more or less traced back to or through that club. The Knickerbockers were founded in 1845 and played their first game or match a year later.

The problem, Rcyzek notes is what happens when anyone tries to move back earlier than the Knickerbockers. As he notes when the Knickerbockers wrote down the rules for the first time (or the first set that has survived) they were obviously working of some form of baseball game since their rules don't provide a full explanation of how to play the game. What no one has been able to do is prove or document what game it provides the basis for the game that they codified. That game which may never be found would be the missing link in baseball history on the national level. Like most people who have studied or thought about the question, Rcyzek doesn't believe that any one person invented baseball, rather it gradually evolved. Yet his perspective on the Knickerbocker's is both interesting and helpful.

As noted my own research focuses on early baseball in New Jersey where the proximity to New York City certainly was important. The current beliefs are that the first New Jersey club was the Newark club founded in 1855 and the first game or match was played that season. I believe, but have not yet been able to prove that the Newark club was not the first club, I think a Jersey City club is a more likely candidate. I started looking a week or so ago at 1854 newspapers to see if I can find a game for 1855, no luck so far, but it would be like the missing link of New Jersey baseball history and is, therefore, well worth pursuing.

I Don't Care if I Never Get Back (Well Almost!)

In our book about the 1916 baseball season, Paul and I argue the season was important because it represented baseball at its best. We looked at the issue in terms of a season and concluded that close pennant races, controversy, record setting performances and teams that never quit are some of the elements that make baseball such a great game. Interestingly we didn't look at that on the level of individual games - what is that makes one game, baseball at its best.

I thought about this after Carol and I went to today's Mets-Braves game which I believe was one of the best games that I ever attended. That same sentiment was expressed by a number of people on the return trip on the LIRR (upper right) after the game. The Braves won 8-7 in 12 innings in a game that featured a grand slam home run, over 20 hits by both teams, a number of double plays and both managers using almost their entire rosters. After the Braves went ahead in the 12th, Jose Reyes just missed tying it again and then was left on third base when Gary Sheffield struck out looking on one of the wickedest pitches I have ever seen (with the benefit of watching it on television when we get home).

Usually when people talk about what makes an exciting game, they tend to focus on pitcher's duels. I still remember an epic Roger Clemens - Pedro Martinez match up on Sunday night baseball one Memorial Day weekend - I was also fortunate enough to see in person a Bob Gibson - Tom Seaver duel, won by Seaver and the Mets. Roger Angell once wrote something to the effect that pitcher's duels make the most exciting games because they force managers and teams to maximize their creativity since runs are so few and far between. There is a lot of truth in that and I certainly enjoy that kind of game much more than some the softball like scores that many American League teams tend to play - remember I am an old National League guy.

Yet at the same time, I have to say that in person, I do prefer games with some hitting. One thing that was interesting about today's game is that in spite of the scoring and extra innings, the game moved along - 12 innings 8-7 in 3:46 isn't too bad under today's standards. I guess for me a big issue continues to be the American League's use of the designated hitter. While it doesn't seem like it should make that much difference, the absence of that one relatively easy out just seems to make it too easy to score runs. I think it also contributes to what I think has always been more or less the norm in the American League wait for someone to hit a home run instead of trying to make things happen. The Mets so far this year remind me of an American League team because I think that is the way they play even with all the offense they generated in this game.

Almost as enjoyable as the game itself was the feeling that I am starting to deal with my anxiety about traveling to and from games. For some reason, I always worry about getting out afterwards to the point that it influences how I choose to travel and thinking when, or if, to leave early. Some of that anxiety is due to bad past experiences, for example taking an hour to get out of the parking lot at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia last July 4th - putting up with that knowing you have a two hour ride afterwards is not pleasant. But a larger part of it is just some unexplainable worrying that might have made some sense when I was working and had limited free time. Now however, in retirement it's not like I have that many places I have to go or things I have to do by certain times. I kept telling myself that throughout the day and was comfortable staying the for the whole game, recognizing that if we got home at 8:00 rather than 7:00 it was no big deal. I am very grateful for what feels like some progress because I really like Citi Field and hope to get there on some kind of a regular basis.

West Point

Supposedly the motto of Princeton University (in Latin, of course) means "in the service of the nation" or words to that effect. I once read a column in the New York Times that claimed that it really meant "boy do we have networks." Since I don't understand Latin and am not that interested, I will leave it up to others to debate what it really means.

However, this year I have gotten a sense of how beneficial networks can be. My work on the New Jersey Civil War 150th Committee has introduced me to a number of dedicated and helpful people including the good folks at the Phil Kearny Civil War Roundtable especially Joe Truglio, the group's leader. Working with them and speaking at their March meeting has led to three other speaking (and book selling) opportunities, one last February in Rockland County, last night at the West Point Museum and next month at the Wyckoff Historical Society.

Last night's talk was to the West Point Chapter of the Company of Military Historians. This group has chapters throughout the country and as the name suggests they meet to hear presentations on different aspects of military history. The meeting was at the West Point Museum which is actually not on the grounds of the military academy itself, but rather located not far from the main gate. A few of them hosted Carol and I for dinner before hand and I had the opportunity to talk with the chair who is very active in the study of civilian and women's issues related to the Civil War. Since this will be an important part of the New Jersey 150th anniversary observations, she could be a very helpful resource.

The talk went well and I sold five books which was especially gratifying. I have come to realize that I shouldn't have expectations about how many, if any, copies I will sell and just take it as it comes. As I noted in a recent post, I have learned that it is my job to write the books, not sell them. I will still take advantage of opportunities like these, but will be careful about how far I will travel to do so. West Point is probably a little further than I would normally want to travel, but the opportunity to go there was one that I would not pass up. I have been to West Point many times over the years, primarily for Rutgers football games, but when I was in college, I was there as a basketball and baseball manager. On one occasion we had the opportunity to have dinner in the dining hall an opportunity that doesn't come along very often in life.

I have now given my basic talk about the 33rd New Jersey enough times that I don't need a lot of practice and preparation time. Up until last November the talk consisted of telling about the regiment's troubled beginnings and then an overview of its service. At a talk to a New Jersey CWRT where I sold only one book, I realized that I was telling too much of the story leaving little incentive for anyone to buy the book. Since then I have changed the second half of the talk to focus specifically on the Atlanta campaign, leaving a lot of other material for people to read about in the book itself.

Interestingly last week in the Rutgers library I found an article about the 33rd's second regimental reunion on September 5, 1892. The article indicated that they chose early September for the reunion because it was the time they left Newark and the time (a year later) that they entered Atlanta with the rest of the triumph Union army. Unintentionally on my part, I had decided to focus two periods that the participants themselves thought were especially important - a nice feeling of connection with them. I would like to do more research on the 33rd especially their post war lives - I am not sure if there is another book there or not - I am also wondering if there is another New Jersey regiment whose story needs to be told - we will see.

"Oh to be in England"

Initial planning for our next trip to England began today over a Mother's Day lunch at Pal's Cabin in West Orange. Tentatively set for late spring of 2010, this will mark our fourth trip to the land of my ancestors, the most recent being the Shakespeare marathon in early 2008. This will be shortest turn around for a trip to England which is a sign of how much Carol and I both like it there - no small statement for two people who are not the most enthusiastic travelers.

The givens for this trip are visits to the homes of my ancestors - Audley in Staffordshire, Horsley/Nympsfield in Gloucestershire and the city of Worcester. The last time we visited Gloucestershire I wasn't sure that my ancestors were from Nympsfield so this will be our first visit to the place where the Window/Winder family lived for generations before moving to Horsley and then Worcester. The other given is a return to Stratford-on-Avon perhaps for a play, but definitely for a visit to Warwick Castle which is only eight miles away - we should have visited it in 2008.

Up until now, the only other place under serious consideration was Dartmoor (pictured above right) because of its connection to the classic Sherlock Holmes' story, "The Hound of the Baskervilles.'' Now one of England's largest national parks, supposedly it is possible to find the sites that Conan Doyle used in writing his story of death and terror on the moor - "Beware the moor during the hours of darkness when the powers of evil are exalted," - you can believe we will take that seriously.

After some reflection over the past few days, we have added to the list the Lake District in northwestern England and the city of Salisbury, especially Salisbury Cathedral. The latter place gave Anthony Trollope the inspiration for his much beloved Barchestershire novels and both the Cathedral and the city are supposed to be well worth seeing. It also helps that Salisbury is on the rail line to Dartmoor. The Lake District is supposedly one of the most beautiful places in all of England with a lot of opportunities for walks over spectacular country. It is also a large area and I was trying to think of how to focus that part of the trip and realized last night that the best approach might be to focus on the great English poet, William Wordsworth.

Wordsworth lived at Dove Cottage in the village of Grasmere from 1799 to 1808 when he apparently wrote most of his greatest poetry. Apparently Grasmere is right in the center of the Lake District so a brief (1-2 day) stay in the area would allow us to learn more about Wordsworth as well as go on some long walks throughout the area. I am not sure about how my poetic partner, DT, will feel about me stepping outside of the Elizabethean era but given the openess of his mind, he will be as fond of Wordsworth as he is of Shakespeare. In any event, as they say in England, it is "early days" yet, but it is exciting to start thinking about this trip which will take a lot of planning and thought.

Brooklyn and Ballparks - Continued

Reflecting some more on Walter O'Malley's move of the Dodgers to Los Angeles makes me wonder if the Brooklyn owner may have been ahead of his time, ahead in an unhelpful way - looking for a new ballpark for a sitting team. What I mean by that is building a new ballpark for a team that was staying in the same city.

The first two decades of the twentieth century marked the beginning of the concrete and steel era of ballparks where club owners could replace the inadequate and dangerous wooden ballparks with new larger structures that were not at such great risk of fire. Of the 16 major league teams in existence between 1900-1920 all but a handful built new parks during that period or became tenants in one - the Yankees leasing of the Polo Grounds from the Giants is an example of the latter.

With the exception of Yankee Stadium (early 1920's) and possibly Cleveland, the only new ballparks built between 1920 and 1955 (let's say) were facilities for teams that had moved. Of the Dodgers direct competitors in the National League, the only club playing in a new ballpark were the Braves after their move to Milwaukee. That, of course, for O'Malley was the case in point, a team that hadn't offered much competition, moving and becoming an instant competitor with record setting attendance. Looking at the overall situation, however, it seems that little was being done in terms of building new ballparks for existing teams. Even after 1955, it is almost 15 years before the new stadiums are built in Cincinnati, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia - all of them unattractive and relatively short lived.

Given the difficulties building a new ballpark almost any place, consider the difficulties O'Malley had building Dodger Stadium as an example, makes me wonder if combining those challenges with an idea that was probably out of fashion was just too much to overcome. After reading "Forever Blue" and thinking about it, my feeling is that it is simplistic to accept the evil image of O'Malley, especially the one created in the media. It was his misfortune to offend a number of articulate and visible writers. Certainly there is enough blame to go around for what still must be considered the tragedy of the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn. However, it is also, I think a mistake to conclude O'Malley had no choice, as mentioned in the earlier post the success of Fenway Park and Wrigley Field shows that it can be done even without much parking.

It is somewhat ironic to be thinking about all of this at the same time that two new stadiums have opened in New York City. I have been to Citi Field once and will be there again this week, I like it and the Mets certainly needed a new ballpark. It looks like I will be going to the new Yankee Stadium a few times this year, from what I can see of it on television, it looks like they tried to make it exactly like the old one, but much more fan friendly. If so that would make it the only one of the new generation of stadiums where the new stadium is so similar to its immediate predecessor.

That similarity may be part of the reason that a New York Times columnist, Harvey Araton or Ira Berkow - I think, wrote a column surveying fans at Fenway Park (above left) about how they felt about their 1912 vintage park. Almost to a person they liked things as they were and had no desire for a new ballpark leading the writer to question the wisdom of building the new Yankee stadium. It's a fair question when the new park is so much of a replica of the old one. I also have to say, however, that attending a game at Fenway Park has its challenges.

Because Paul and Sarah live in the Boston area, I have been there many times, probably 15-20 and once the novelty has worn off, it is certainly not the most fan friendly venue. I am not a big patron of concessions at ballparks, but I do need to get out of my seat once and while - in a lot of locations, to do that for any basic human need, means missing an inning even with how long it takes to play an inning today especially in the American League. I am going to stop here because if I don't, I will go on to all the other things I don't like about the modern game which even with its faults is still my favorite.