Posted using ShareThis
(I happened to come across this article and believe that it’s a fantastic solution for my Beloved Atlanta Braves. It low risk – high reward. And if Hank Aaron is upset, so be it.)
She mentioned that if someone says something that disparages another group of people, whoever hears the comment and doesn’t stand up for that group is as bad as the person making the remark.
Unfortunately, one of New York’s best known broadcasters never heeded that advice.
Today, there is much coverage over remarks by Don Imus which can only be described “racist”. And while it would be easy to jump on the bandwagon, I’ll allow for others to beat the drum of what should happened to him.
To me, the bigger issue revolves around Warner Wolf.
Nearly a year ago, it was apparent that Syd Rosenberg egged Imus on during his commentary about the Rutgers women basketball team. Rosenberg, who has compared the Williams sisters to primates and poked fun at Kylie Minouge’s bout with breast cancer, has the sophomoric, “me too”, mentality which would prevent him from actually standing up for something that was blatantly wrong. (Even if it was done for the sake of humor.)
Yesterday, Wolf, who read the report about Adam “Pac Man” Jones, did not force Imus to explain himself.
In fact, Wolf paused and continued reading the story either to (a) minimize the damage or (b) didn’t know what to say. I expect more out of a seasoned broadcast. Similar to Tom Jackson and Chris Berman who just sat silent when Rush Limbaugh made his racist diatribe about the media’s treatment of Donovan F. McNabb, Wolf’s silence spoke volumes. It showed that he was merely a company man who chose to not make waves than actually asking Imus, “Why are you asking about the race of Jones?”
This is just as damning as Imus’ question. For this nation to have a legitimate conversation on issues of diversity, it takes people to actually stand up against what is wrong. This is an even better remedy that protests days after an incident or saying what they would do if the situation occured again. Wolf went with his instincts and that instinct was to be silent.
It takes individuals to confront those who do wrong at the very instant homophobic, sexist, xenophobic, or racist language is used.
Whatever action WABC takes against Imus should also be taken against Wolf as Wolf was part of the program and did little to change the dialogue.
For a man who has strong opinions on issues of little consequence, in my eyes, Wolf is a small man when confronted with the realities of life.
The argument is that Babe Ruth is as vital to the baseball history as Jackie Robinson, the only professional athlete to have this distinguished honor.
Those in support of this memorializing cite how Ruth brought the game back after the “Black” Sox scandal through his monstrous home runs. And that his power move the game forward from the horse-and-buggy “deadball” era. Finally, they cite the fact that he was one of America’s first sports heroes and that without him, they game as we know it may not exist today.
I’m not sold.
There is not question that Babe Ruth is one of America’s first sports icons. But that alone is not worthy of having him being honored by every team.
At times, I get the feeling that Ruth’s career has taken on mythical legend. The player has countless defenders of his legacy, despite never witnessing him in a game. And though he is the standard to which modern players are compared, I find that Ruth gets too many accolades considering that he played in leagues with eight teams, scouting was rudimentary, travel was minimal, and most importantly, players of color were banned.
Honoring a player who played in segregated leagues leads to too many arguments about the validity of his “records”.
Most importantly, Ruth’s significance to the broader American landscape pales in comparison to Jackie Robinson.
Robinson’s mere presence in April 1947 was part of a process that ignited the modern Civil Rights movement. His influence can be measured in an post-War America that was about to witness a dramatic set of changes within twenty years of him stepping on the field. This made Robinson more of an American icon than a pop cultural hero. And in a society where Americans are quick to forget the struggle that is recent when viewing American history as a whole, having 42 missing from the roster and hanging on a placard of every stadium serves as a reminder how far our nation has come in a seemingly short time.
Jackie Robinson’s name become synonymous with progress. Granted, there are streets, parks, and schools named in his honor. Yet, most importantly, the fact that parents would name their children after this man speaks to the significance that goes beyond legend. To this day, ball players around the world recognize him as a hero and understand that with their name, their uniform number, and there presence on a diamond carries great weight with how they are perceived.
In fact, there is a generation which viewed Robinson as the embodiment of the American Dream. He, like Joe Louis, represented hope for Black America in time where second-class status was the norm. And for non-Black Americans, Robinson represented the promise of a future that was just as exciting as his play on the field.
In comparison, Ruth has come to symbolize a character from a bygone era when drinking and eating to excess came represented athletic regime, along with undocumented “feats”. Even with Ruth’s effect on the American cultural landscape, few, if any, recall him as a hero or source of inspiration.
Ruth’s “legend” cannot even touch Robinson’s “fact”.
Alternatively, Ruth’s name continues to thrive off the tongue in the annals of baseball and American lore. To say that he will soon be forgotten is an unrealistic view of our society. Robinson forces fans to remember a game where he was viewed as a society experiment for whether our nation could move beyond segregation. If baseball did not take the step to permanently retire “42″, it is not hard to imagine an America that would not remember the grander significance of his career.
This is not to slight Babe Ruth’s accomplishments. He, by all measures, was a significant person in his time.
But the honor of retiring a number in perpetuity must be relegated to individuals who carried significant impact not only in the game, but beyond.
Jackie Robinson is the only man worthy of such an honor.
I read a few days ago that Janet Jackson was going to star in a scripted, er, “reality” television show that will premiere on MTV towards the end of the summer.
The goal of the program is for Jackson to choose a dancer for her upcoming world tour. (As if anyone is truly waiting for another tour by this woman.)
The easy thing for me to write would be how this is another desperate attempt by Jackson to remain relevant in a music marketplace that has passed her by. (Despite whatever “boyfriend” Jermaine Dupri may think.) However, since it is the dawn of another summer, I will play the role of old-timer and remember twenty-two years ago when Jackson was at the height of her game.
Unlike today’s urban “remixes” which constitute little more than yet another “guest” vocalist and an extra verse or two, there was a time when remixes were truly reinterpretations of a song which was embedded into the public’s ear.
Riding high on the success of “Control” and still realizing that there was plenty of steam left in what would become a classic album, executive producers Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis created three “Cool Summer” remixes of Janet Jackson that came out from late spring through the summer of 1986.
I recall the first “Cool Summer” remix was performed by Jackson on the 1986 Grammy Awards. (See the grainy, probably Betamax, clip above.) Though I am the last person to scream when watching a pop performance, Jackson had me humming the song until this very day. It was a vast re-creation of “What Have You Done For Me Lately” that was funked up, yet still doing the original justice. Of course, this version was strictly for stage performances as it would be impossible to actually sit through the break leading to the bridge while in your room, in the car, or in the club. Still, this version was only an inkling of what was to come.
The “Cool Summer” remixes for “Nasty” and “Diamonds” actually set the bar for how I view pop/R&B remixes.
Both version were stripped down from the hyperkinetic energy of the original singles. Relying up on Herb Alpert’s trumpet and a groove the trended towards chill, it was the perfect compliment to her songs. In fact, it was as if Jam & Lewis wanted these version to be the urban radio counterpart to songs where were MTV staples. Furthermore, while Jackson is still given the feature role on the records, the remixes show case an almost jazzy, instrumentation that gives the listener an appreciation of Jam & Lewis as songwriters and producers.
When these versions were played on KT16, the Quad-Cities’ urban station (which lasted for what seemed to be about five weeks during the summer of 1986), they were gems.
And still hold up well today.
Since today is merely the second day of summer, it is nice to harken back to when the release of a Janet Jackson project actually meant something. The songs are a perfect way to spend a lazy Sunday afternoon inside while doing chores, reading the papers, or walking.
And savor that point in time when Jackson truly was a pop icon.
|
