Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: The Culture of Sports in the Harlem Renaissance by Daniel Anderson Ron Kates Daniel Anderson. The Culture of Sports in the Harlem Renaissance. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2017. 209 pp. Paper, $35.00. Following the media’s coverage of Colin Kaepernick’s National Anthem protests, a public debate has arisen regarding whether professional athletes—professional athletes of color in this instance—have a right and/or [End Page 199] responsibility to use their platform as entertainers to address and/or protest social justice issues. The use of sport as a platform to address matters of social responsibility is by no means a contemporary phenomenon; nor is the media’s role in the debate—one need only consider the symbiotic relationship that Muhammad Ali and Howard Cosell shared in the 1960s and 1970s. Within this context, Daniel Anderson’s The Culture of Sports in the Harlem Renaissance examines how sports writing and writing about sport closely intertwined with the social, political, and intellectual spheres of influence in Harlem—and indeed within black culture as a whole—during the first third of the twentieth century. Indeed, as Anderson notes in his conclusion, “writing and sports, like literature and popular culture, were intrinsically linked rather than diametrically opposed,” and sportswriters—Renaissance men themselves—“represented Harlem’s full range of culture on its most unlikely canvas: the newspaper’s sports page” (186). Anderson’s book provides an essential primer on early twentieth-century African American intellectual and literary life as seen through the lens of sport. While the chapters incorporate many of the major figures one would expect to encounter from the period—DuBois, Washington, McKay, James Weldon Johnson—readers are likewise introduced to journalist stars of the day like Romeo Dougherty, who “reigned supreme as the leading sportswriter in the Harlem press” during the Renaissance (141). Chapter 5, “‘Jazz Journalism’: Sportswriting and Popular Culture in the Black Press,” begins with a comparison of the 1922 Harvard-Yale football game with a contest played five days later between Howard and Lincoln Universities; here Anderson points out that the crowds attending the games were representative of the highest societal strata of each race, calling the former “‘a presentation of American civilization in its meridian splendor,’” and the latter as “‘represent[ing] the civilization of the American Negro at its highest water mark … colored society at its best’” (101). Indeed, as Anderson relates, for Dougherty and fellow sportswriter William H. Ferris, the “opulence on display in Washington [at the Howard-Lincoln game] exemplified not so much conspicuous consumption as cultural achievement and social progress’” (102), superlatives well in line with the tendency of the African American press, “whatever their political leanings,” to “promote sports as a vehicle for social change rather than a pleasant diversion” (103). While the literature and arts of the period remain the most visible representations of the Harlem Renaissance, one must also consider the period’s growing emphasis on sport—as reported in Negro newspapers across the country—as an agent and reflection of African American social consciousness and achievement. Anderson’s focus thus reinforces how the current cultural and political climate of the activist athlete—ESPN The Magazine dedicated an [End Page 200] entire issue to “The State of the Black Athlete”—is patterned after, and builds upon approaches presciently taken by Dougherty, Ferris, and their journalistic peers. While the book considers the influences of football, boxing, track, and basketball on both the Renaissance movement itself, as well as those participants, spectators, and writers who played and attended the contests, Anderson’s strongest point of emphasis comes when he considers the role that baseball in general—and the burgeoning Negro Leagues specifically—plays in melding sport with culture, politics, and society. While portrayals of the Negro Leagues mainly emphasize the play on the field and the presence of larger than life characters like Satchel Paige, Josh Gibson, and Cool Papa Bell, Anderson points out that “the Negro League baseball clubs collectively composed the second-largest black business interest in the country in the 1920s” (42). Unlike the general suspicion with which their white major league counterparts viewed college-educated teammates, “Negro Leaguers tended to have bourgeois aspirations that were rooted...
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) | 0,003 | 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 ».