After Many a Summer: The Passing of the Giants and Dodgers and a Golden Age in New York Baseball
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Robert E. Murphy. After Many a Summer: Passing of Giants and Dodgers and a Golden Age in New York Baseball. New York: Union Square Press, 2009. 418 pp. Cloth, $24.95. Dodgers have now played longer in Los Angeles (since 1958) than they played in Ebbets Field (1913-1957), their famously intimate bandbox in Brooklyn. Fans who grew up doting on Boys of Dodgers teams of 1947-1957 are now elderly. New York Giants fans who thrilled Bobby Thomson's epic home run that won 1951 National League playoff at Polo Grounds and who rejoiced as Willie Mays and his teammates defeated Cleveland in 1954 World Series, similarly lost their team San Francisco in 1958. Like their onetime Brooklyn Dodgers antagonists, they must now be content either with memories or New York Mets. How did happen that two storied franchises--the Giants of John McGraw, Christy Mathewson, Mel Ott, and Willie Mays, and Dodgers of Jackie Robinson, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella, and Duke Snider--simultaneously deserted country's media and financial capital for California? Robert E. Murphy's After Many a Summer is a requiem for the Dodgers being taken from me, as well as an inquest: The boy left behind, and man he becomes, wants know more about man who did it (xiii). Murphy does not assume an impartial stance. From outset is clear him that Walter O'Malley, Dodgers' owner, is villain. And although his book is subtitled The Passing of Giants and Dodgers and a Golden Age in New York Baseball, Murphy's emotions are mainly engaged by O'Malley and Dodgers. Dutiful attention is paid Giants and Horace Stoneham, their owner, but microscope is focused on O'Malley. His is lead role and object of Murphy's undisguised animus. (Truth demands that this reviewer acknowledge a similar prejudice.) However, since publication of Neil J. Sullivan's Dodgers Move West in 1987, an alternative demon has emerged: Robert Moses, New York City's Parks Commissioner and power broker supreme. In this new scenario, also adopted by Michael Shapiro in his study of 1956 Dodgers, Last Good Season, O'Malley simply wants build a new stadium for Dodgers in Brooklyn, but Moses blocks him at every step and ultimately points him westward. Murphy mistrusts this revisionist view, and irks him to see become standard version of (xiv). After Many a Summer is thus written reestablish O'Malley's culpability. Does Murphy prove his case? I'll admit rooting for him, but I came away convinced that his exhaustive (and exhausting) dissection of events and evidence demonstrates that both O'Malley and Moses must share blame and bear obloquy. Murphy himself implicitly recognizes this, writing, The team's fans might have cursed fate that brought these two fiercely self-assured men together in an awkward dance around Brooklyn and Queens ...(113). Murphy begins with extensive historical vignettes of baseball in Brooklyn and New York dating back 1845. These include Civil War era Brooklyn Excelsiors, Brooklyn Atlantic's 1870 defeat of professional Cincinnati Red Stockings, and Brooklyn's National League championships in 1890 and 1899. great Giants teams of McGraw and Matty are invoked as well. We are given a review of Dodger ownership up appearance of O'Malley, brought aboard as a young lawyer and team director in 1932. Murphy even includes short biographies of O'Malley's father, Edwin, a Tammany Hall politician and New York Commissioner of Public Markets, and of Stoneham's father, Charles, a stock manipulator and gambler, who bought Giants in 1918 and left them his son when he died in 1936. Both Edwin O'Malley and Charles were onetime subjects of judicial investigations, and Murphy actually entitles a chapter Stoneham and O'Malley: Sinful Fathers. As much as one may rue later actions of sons, imputing them sins of their fathers surely departs from historical objectivity. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».