MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2927420920 · doi:10.1353/esc.2002.0053

Imagining Baseball: America’s Pastime and Popular Culture by David McGimpsey

2002· article· en· W2927420920 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
James D. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish studies in Canada · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopular cultureLeagueRomanceCulture of the United StatesArtArt historyHistoryLiteratureMedia studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

REVIEWS Black’s splendid book reminds us that psychobiography, when it is done well, has a most valuable role to play in lit­ erary studies, for it shines an indispensable light on an author’s work that is not available to us in any other way. WORK CITED Tomkins, Silvan. Affect, Imagery, Consciousness, Volume 3, The Neg­ ative Affects: Anger and Fear. New York: Springer, 1991. JOSEPH ADAMSON / McMaster University David McGimpsey. Imagining Baseball: America’s Pastime and Popular Culture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000. x, 195. Unique among major sports, baseball occupies a special place in American culture. “Like soda pop and the open road,” as David McGimpsey writes in Imagining Baseball, it “has be­ come a celebrated metaphor for America” (1). When it comes to popular culture, this, as McGimpsey acknowledges, is “old news.” Yet baseball’s uniqueness also lies in the hold that it has on America’s “high” culture. What other major league sport could recruit a Commissioner from the ranks of Ivy League Renaissance literature professors? Then again, when Commis­ sioner Bart Giamatti was given to saying things like baseball is “the Romantic Epic of homecoming America sings to itself” (5), what other sport would want to? It is to McGimpsey’s credit that in this wide-ranging “discussion of the tropes in baseball’s cultural products,” he brings a consistently fair and fresh approach to studying both the best and the worst of those “products.” In five chapters and an epilogue, McGimpsey pursues the various meanings and expectations that makers of American culture have brought to baseball. He ranges back and forth be­ tween history and literature as he evaluates the significance of events such as the Chicago Black Sox Scandal and the Pete Rose suspension as well as assessing the work of writers like the leg­ endary Ring Lardner and “perhaps the most idealistic author of 549 ESC 28, 2002 baseball fiction,” W. P. Kinsella (35). These names and events are just a few among many. From Homer and Bart Giamatti to Homer and Bart Simpson, by way of Walt Whitman and Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman, Bernard Malamud, and Bill Cosby, McGimpsey takes the reader on a witty and thought-provoking journey through the highs and lows of baseball at the movies, baseball on TV, and baseball in literature. McGimspey builds his study around the identification and analysis of the familiar tropes of baseball culture and how they are both constructed and challenged in the intertwined worlds of baseball and baseball literature. Perhaps the most common of these tropes, in McGimpsey’s view, is that baseball is “the very best sport, maybe even possessed of some sublime integrity or mystical quality that makes it, among all sports, most appropri­ ate for serious reflection” (4). As such it has attracted countless creators of culture eager to find ways of viewing baseball as more than a game. For many it is the “perfect game,” where Amer­ ican space and time come to play “inside the lines,” insulated from the demands of commerce or the clock. Baseball thus offers a “pastoral retreat” from the world of commerce, or a national backyard where generations of American fathers play meaning­ ful catch with generations of American sons. McGimpsey ex­ plores these fondly stated and endlessly debated claims through extended readings of such major baseball books (as well as of the movies eventually based on them) as Malamud’s The Nat­ ural (1952) and Mark Harris’s Bang the Drum Slowly (1956). In McGimpsey’s view, these studies engage rather than simply endorse the pastoral ideal as they use its “conventions [...] as a way of testing baseball’s claims to a virtuous setting” (76). In these and other readings McGimpsey is especially adept at drawing out the symbiotic tensions and mutual neediness bind­ ing the ballpark to the market place, the (paying) fan to the “product” (whether on the field or on the shelf), and the ma­ terial to the sentimental. In a chapter entitled “Everybody Can Play (Except You): Baseball Fiction and Difference,” McGimpsey dissects another cherished article of the baseball faith: that “the best game” em­ bodies the inter-related ideals of American assimilationism and meritocracy. The...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish studies in CanadaSame topicAmerican Sports and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207