MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321354187 · doi:10.1353/nin.2023.0022

Whispers of the Gods: Tales from Baseball’s Golden Age, Told by the Men Who Played It by Peter Golenbock

2023· article· en· W4321354187 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
R. Zachary Sanzone

Bibliographic record

VenueNine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGloryStyle (visual arts)Art historyArtClassicsHistoryLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Whispers of the Gods: Tales from Baseball’s Golden Age, Told by the Men Who Played It by Peter Golenbock R. Zachary Sanzone Peter Golenbock. Whispers of the Gods: Tales from Baseball’s Golden Age, Told by the Men Who Played It. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2022. 216 pp. $24.95. Whispers of the Gods details hundreds of hours of interviews Golenbock conducted with former major leaguers such as Roy Campanella, Roger Maris, Ted [End Page 139] Williams, Monte Irving, and Rex Barney. These interviews, which Golenbock collected over the course of a few decades, give baseball fans new insight into the lives and opinions of their heroes. Golenbock’s new book closely resembles the style of writing and research seen in Lawrence Ritter’s classic The Glory of Their Times: The Story of the Early Days of Baseball Told by the Men Who Played It, which has emerged as a classic baseball book since its publication. Golenbock acknowledges just as much in the preface where he writes, “To this day I think of The Glory of Their Times as the bible of baseball” (xi). While it’s clear that Ritter’s book had a strong influence, Golenbock, a master of the oral tradition, manages to give baseball fans new information about their heroes without repeating what other writers and scholars have already written. Golenbock, the author of several dozen baseball books, including Bums and The Bronx Zoo (coauthored with Sparky Lyle), recounts discussions with famous players like Ted Williams, who boisterously expresses his support for Shoeless Joe Jackson’s induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame. What I appreciate about this chapter is that Golenbock doesn’t really take a side in the debate. He includes details Williams recounted that both support and reject the call for Jackson’s induction. Williams recognizes that while Jackson did have the highest batting average of the 1919 World Series, he also took the gamblers’ money. While I personally don’t have a vested interest in the debate— I could take or leave Jackson— it’s worth pointing out that Golenbock doesn’t allow any bias of his own to sway readers one way or the other. This is particularly important in this day and age where current events have driven people to develop stronger than normal opinions about almost everything. Perhaps more importantly though, the consideration regarding whether Shoeless Joe Jackson belongs in the Hall of Fame or not is one of the most contentious and hotly debated discussions in baseball today. Despite the combative debate, Golenbock manages to keep any personal views of his own in check— not an easy thing to do when Shoeless Joe is the topic of discussion—and allows his subjects to speak for themselves, a sign of true, objective reporting. While Golenbock includes Hall of Famers like Ted Williams, Stan Musial, and Roy Campanella, he also includes lesser-known players like Rex Barney, who pitched for the Brooklyn Dodgers from 1943 to 1950. Despite a better- than- average major league career— he won fifteen games in 1948, including a no- hitter against the New York Giants— control issues led to an early departure from baseball. Despite a somewhat premature end to his pitching career, Barney enjoyed a second career as PA announcer for the Baltimore Orioles from 1969 until his death in 1997. Barney’s name isn’t often mentioned in the debates over who the best pitcher was of the 1940s, but that doesn’t mean he [End Page 140] didn’t play a significant role in baseball history— Barney witnessed Jackie Robinson break Major League Baseball’s color barrier in 1947. Baseball writers should appreciate these little snippets of history told by those who are all but forgotten. While figures like Red Barber, Branch Rickey, Pee Wee Reese, and Roy Campanella have discussed Robinson in great detail through their own autobiographies, in my opinion, many of those stories grow repetitive, often recounting the same details about Robinson’s integration (though that’s not to say they aren’t important). Barney was on hand to see Robinson not only integrate the game but give firsthand details about Robinson’s experiences in the minors...

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)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.006

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNineSame topicAmerican Sports and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207