Dad, I love the optimism you display regularly with our Yanks. I wouldn't say that I'm specifically pessimistic, but I'm far away from anything that constitutes a "Yankee baseball scene", especially since I don't ride the train anymore and I took the newspaper app off my phone (it sure did suck...).
But a few weeks ago I had my laptop and I went through and watched all the available videos concerning the up-and-coming Yankee prospects...the future, as it were.
I don't remember their names, but there were a few mentioned. I was trying to be optimistic, feeling that eventually we'd talk, and I was trying to guess your view. Really I was trying to talk myself into Teixeria not being totally broken down and A-Rod being useful.
Headley at 3rd I'm not really against, but it seems like Yankee-Business-As-Usual---hire a former all-star on the back end of his career. He was an all-star, right?
Anyway, I like the Caribbean kid they have to follow up Jeter, Didi Gregorious, even though it sounds like he can't hit. Maybe I just like his name.
Dave Robertson's gone...is Dellin ready to close? Tanaka is a superstar, for sure, as long as his elbow holds up. For sure the rotation depends on him and CC and that kid from Miami, Nate Eovaldi. The Eovaldi move, for me, didn't have the Pavano-stink that that particular move had, but how much of that is the perpetual optimism we Yankee fans have?
What's the over-under on wins for the season? 87? I just went to look it up: 86 wins. They also mention McCann and Ellsbury, two guys I forgot. For some reason Beltran makes me sad like Teixeria, but McCann should bounce back well, and he wasn't even that bad. And Ellsbury was everything we wanted, right?
Maybe Nova will return before the Break and Pineda will leave the pine-tar alone while working up his rebuilt elbow...
See? Talked myself into some optimism...
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Author Notes
Happy New Year!
I was perusing Amazon.com the other day and checking up on a few books I'll be making the purchase of in coming months. One is by Marlon James and is titled A Brief History of Seven Killings, and takes place in Jamaica. It's about the corruption and craziness involved in social upheaval and what-not. I heard it was very good.
I was also looking up some info on Up Up and Away [Expos Book] by Jonah Keri. The subtitle is far too long to put here, so I paraphrased it. It's a book about the Montreal Expos, and it looks pretty cool.
Another baseball book that caught my attention came out in 2014 was titled 1954, and like the Expos book, had a long subtitle. Written by Bill Madden, a baseball writer from New York that I remember fondly, it's about, namely, 1954 and how that was the first year both world series teams had black players and the the social changes that happened the same year (Brown vs. Board of Ed.). It looks good.
Baseball books aside, it was on Amazon's page for A Brief History... that I saw, down on the bottom where they have suggestions about "Customers who bought this also bought...", a familiar name: Bone Clocks by David Mitchell.
Mitchell, Dan if you don't know, wrote the nested egg "novel" Cloud Atlas, which I'm guessing was better than the movie (which I missed). Dad turned me onto it a decade or more ago. Bone Clocks follows a similar structure it sounds like, but with more connection between the sections.
Next to Bone Clocks was The Laughing Monsters, about shady business folks and shady African deals and shady weddings and nationalities---but was written by Denis Johnson, he of Tree of Smoke and Jesus' Son fame. Denis Johnson and David Mitchell both had books published in 2014. What the hell was I doing that I missed these?
THEN I saw another familiar name: The Narrow Road to the Deep North, a novel about POWs during WWII carving a road out of the Indonesian jungle written by Richard Flanagan and published in 2014.
So, along with Murakami's Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki..., Richard Flanagan and Denis Johnson and David Mitchell all published books last year, 2014.
Narrow Road... is being highly touted by the reviews on Amazon... Have you gotten to it yet, dad? I'll ask when I call sometime soon, seeing as how blog posts make for strange communiques. So far, besides Gould's... I've read Wanting and The Unknown Terrorist. Both aren't bad, but I would never had read them had I found them at a non-dollar bookstore AND hadn't read Gould's Book of Fish. Those two I don't really even recommend to people, whereas I've bought multiple copies of Gould's... as gifts for people.
Another book listed on that bottom scroll was Station Eleven by Emily St John Mandel. It was familiar to me because of a list put together by the fine folks at Powell's Bookstore. Powell's is the Portland institution that we visited on our Oregonian sojourn, and I was reading up on their website about good books in 2014 and Station Eleven was listed. It tales place in some weird post-apocalyptic world where acting troupes roam wild...or something.
It kinda reminds me of something I'm reading now, Brittle Star by Rod Val Moore. It's published by a small press of LA writers, and Moore's been described on some websites as a "writer's writer". I guess that means his general audience is writers? It sure sounds like that's the case as I read.
Brittle Star is about prisoners that have been exiled on a distant planet where they are to remain for one year. These aren't hardened criminals, mind you, they are all former humanities professors. They are instructed to choose between two different colored uniforms upon arrival: one color is celery, the other, something called "celedon", which Corrie assures me is an actual thing. It's rare that I come across an English word that I've never seen while people like Corrie and other folks in the design industry use with regularity.
Anyway, celery and celedon are basically the exact same shit, and in the first 40 pages, picking the uniforms is about as exciting as it gets. I joke, and dad, you'd probably like it, but you'd also get what I'm saying. It's moody and well written, and, for better or for worse, is like the back says (incidentally the tidbit that convinced me to go with this book over another unknown quantity): Sartre meets television's "The Prisoner"; and A Brave New World as reinvented by Italo Calvino.
Now, I don't even know what the hell that last part is talking about, but I know I like Aldous, and my interest was piqued. Now I just need to look up Italo Calvino...
I was perusing Amazon.com the other day and checking up on a few books I'll be making the purchase of in coming months. One is by Marlon James and is titled A Brief History of Seven Killings, and takes place in Jamaica. It's about the corruption and craziness involved in social upheaval and what-not. I heard it was very good.
I was also looking up some info on Up Up and Away [Expos Book] by Jonah Keri. The subtitle is far too long to put here, so I paraphrased it. It's a book about the Montreal Expos, and it looks pretty cool.
Another baseball book that caught my attention came out in 2014 was titled 1954, and like the Expos book, had a long subtitle. Written by Bill Madden, a baseball writer from New York that I remember fondly, it's about, namely, 1954 and how that was the first year both world series teams had black players and the the social changes that happened the same year (Brown vs. Board of Ed.). It looks good.
Baseball books aside, it was on Amazon's page for A Brief History... that I saw, down on the bottom where they have suggestions about "Customers who bought this also bought...", a familiar name: Bone Clocks by David Mitchell.
Mitchell, Dan if you don't know, wrote the nested egg "novel" Cloud Atlas, which I'm guessing was better than the movie (which I missed). Dad turned me onto it a decade or more ago. Bone Clocks follows a similar structure it sounds like, but with more connection between the sections.
Next to Bone Clocks was The Laughing Monsters, about shady business folks and shady African deals and shady weddings and nationalities---but was written by Denis Johnson, he of Tree of Smoke and Jesus' Son fame. Denis Johnson and David Mitchell both had books published in 2014. What the hell was I doing that I missed these?
THEN I saw another familiar name: The Narrow Road to the Deep North, a novel about POWs during WWII carving a road out of the Indonesian jungle written by Richard Flanagan and published in 2014.
So, along with Murakami's Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki..., Richard Flanagan and Denis Johnson and David Mitchell all published books last year, 2014.
Narrow Road... is being highly touted by the reviews on Amazon... Have you gotten to it yet, dad? I'll ask when I call sometime soon, seeing as how blog posts make for strange communiques. So far, besides Gould's... I've read Wanting and The Unknown Terrorist. Both aren't bad, but I would never had read them had I found them at a non-dollar bookstore AND hadn't read Gould's Book of Fish. Those two I don't really even recommend to people, whereas I've bought multiple copies of Gould's... as gifts for people.
Another book listed on that bottom scroll was Station Eleven by Emily St John Mandel. It was familiar to me because of a list put together by the fine folks at Powell's Bookstore. Powell's is the Portland institution that we visited on our Oregonian sojourn, and I was reading up on their website about good books in 2014 and Station Eleven was listed. It tales place in some weird post-apocalyptic world where acting troupes roam wild...or something.
It kinda reminds me of something I'm reading now, Brittle Star by Rod Val Moore. It's published by a small press of LA writers, and Moore's been described on some websites as a "writer's writer". I guess that means his general audience is writers? It sure sounds like that's the case as I read.
Brittle Star is about prisoners that have been exiled on a distant planet where they are to remain for one year. These aren't hardened criminals, mind you, they are all former humanities professors. They are instructed to choose between two different colored uniforms upon arrival: one color is celery, the other, something called "celedon", which Corrie assures me is an actual thing. It's rare that I come across an English word that I've never seen while people like Corrie and other folks in the design industry use with regularity.
Anyway, celery and celedon are basically the exact same shit, and in the first 40 pages, picking the uniforms is about as exciting as it gets. I joke, and dad, you'd probably like it, but you'd also get what I'm saying. It's moody and well written, and, for better or for worse, is like the back says (incidentally the tidbit that convinced me to go with this book over another unknown quantity): Sartre meets television's "The Prisoner"; and A Brave New World as reinvented by Italo Calvino.
Now, I don't even know what the hell that last part is talking about, but I know I like Aldous, and my interest was piqued. Now I just need to look up Italo Calvino...
Monday, November 24, 2014
From Tyree to Beckham: Catches during the Eli Era
The Giants lost another winnable game last night, this time against the Cowboys. But during the first quarter fans were treated to a show.
Odell Beckham Jr. of the Giants had one of the greatest catches you may ever see. He was being mauled by the defender--it was a penalty. He shook the mauling off, snatched the ball one-handed and landed on his back in the end-zone, not part of him out of bounds...
Check out the extension:
I was thinking about Giants catches in recent memory, and how this could stack up. The other two that fully come to mind are both part of the Lore of Eli, like that's a William Blake illustrated classic or something.
The first is, of course, the Super Bowl-swinging, never-happen-again-deliberately-if-you-were-trying Tyree helmet-catch:
Watching Eli avoid the sack, get free, launch a pass to the middle of the field, and then see Tyree trap it against his helmet? Ridiculous moments turning into incredible memories. We knew the Giants were winning at that point. Twenty seconds later when Eli found Plaxico in the end zone open for the TD, we weren't surprised.
The second incredible catch had less to do with luck or the skills of the receiver, but were a bit of a show that Eli himself was putting on: another Super Bowl moment, but one in which Eli was fully the narrator of: Manningham on the sideline during Giants/Pats II:
Perfect throw to a tight spot. I was in Honduras for that game, watching it at a hostel with lounge music playing over the muted television. I had the feeling the G-Men were in control after the safety on Tom Brady's first pass attempt. They coughed up the lead, but I always felt it.
Of course, we'll always have the other side of the Eli-Era coin, the side titled simply "Eli Face":
It shows up regularly after interceptions, dropped passes, or blown routes. So there's that, too...
If it weren't for Eli, Tom Brady may have five Super Bowls championships and be considered the best quarterback ever. That makes me laugh.
(I'm not sure who took all of these photos, but I appreciate their professionalism.)
Odell Beckham Jr. of the Giants had one of the greatest catches you may ever see. He was being mauled by the defender--it was a penalty. He shook the mauling off, snatched the ball one-handed and landed on his back in the end-zone, not part of him out of bounds...
Check out the extension:
I was thinking about Giants catches in recent memory, and how this could stack up. The other two that fully come to mind are both part of the Lore of Eli, like that's a William Blake illustrated classic or something.
The first is, of course, the Super Bowl-swinging, never-happen-again-deliberately-if-you-were-trying Tyree helmet-catch:
Watching Eli avoid the sack, get free, launch a pass to the middle of the field, and then see Tyree trap it against his helmet? Ridiculous moments turning into incredible memories. We knew the Giants were winning at that point. Twenty seconds later when Eli found Plaxico in the end zone open for the TD, we weren't surprised.
The second incredible catch had less to do with luck or the skills of the receiver, but were a bit of a show that Eli himself was putting on: another Super Bowl moment, but one in which Eli was fully the narrator of: Manningham on the sideline during Giants/Pats II:
Perfect throw to a tight spot. I was in Honduras for that game, watching it at a hostel with lounge music playing over the muted television. I had the feeling the G-Men were in control after the safety on Tom Brady's first pass attempt. They coughed up the lead, but I always felt it.
Of course, we'll always have the other side of the Eli-Era coin, the side titled simply "Eli Face":
It shows up regularly after interceptions, dropped passes, or blown routes. So there's that, too...
If it weren't for Eli, Tom Brady may have five Super Bowls championships and be considered the best quarterback ever. That makes me laugh.
(I'm not sure who took all of these photos, but I appreciate their professionalism.)
Thursday, November 13, 2014
MVP! MVP!
I joke, but for the first time in LA's history, both the American and National league's MVPs reside in the Southland: Clayton over at Chavez and the reincarnation, it seems, of The Mick over in Anaheim--Mike Trout.
With Clayton and Puig and Trout we're in the middle of a bit of a Golden Age of baseball down here in los Diez Sur.
With Clayton and Puig and Trout we're in the middle of a bit of a Golden Age of baseball down here in los Diez Sur.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
We Await Game 7!
Should we be upset that the Royals made the big series?
On paper the A's, Angels, and Tigers were supposedly better teams. The Dodgers were world beaters, along with the Nats, but we saw how that worked out.
Personally it doesn't bother me---if you're close enough to get in, and then get hot at the right time, so what? Is Billy Butler possibly getting a ring and not Mike Trout or Clayton supposed to get the purist blood in my veins boiling?
To quote Tony Soprano: "Ugats to fair! Who said anything about fair?" Trent Dilfer has a ring and Dan Marino doesn't.
I'm not sure what's more curious in my baseball temple at the apartment in Long Beach: that I'm actively rooting for the Giants (represent Nor-Cal!)(But I do like the Royals, and wouldn't be upset at their possible victory); or that I'm all for the single play-in game...
Which broken down hulk of muscle will man first base for the Yanks next year, A-Rod or Texeira? Are we really having this conversation? (Um, it appears so...)
On paper the A's, Angels, and Tigers were supposedly better teams. The Dodgers were world beaters, along with the Nats, but we saw how that worked out.
Personally it doesn't bother me---if you're close enough to get in, and then get hot at the right time, so what? Is Billy Butler possibly getting a ring and not Mike Trout or Clayton supposed to get the purist blood in my veins boiling?
To quote Tony Soprano: "Ugats to fair! Who said anything about fair?" Trent Dilfer has a ring and Dan Marino doesn't.
I'm not sure what's more curious in my baseball temple at the apartment in Long Beach: that I'm actively rooting for the Giants (represent Nor-Cal!)(But I do like the Royals, and wouldn't be upset at their possible victory); or that I'm all for the single play-in game...
Which broken down hulk of muscle will man first base for the Yanks next year, A-Rod or Texeira? Are we really having this conversation? (Um, it appears so...)
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Let Lester and McNulty at 'em...
So, I'm not sure why I'm putting this missive on this specific blog, but most likely because of Dan's affinity for The Sopranos. Corrie and I have been checking out episodes slowly and with a slightly joyless critical eye.
We laugh at the jokes, for sure, and marvel at the lengths that the protagonist, Tony, goes to be an involved father and husband, despite being a pathological liar, serial philanderer, and murderer.
The "Lester" in the title of the post is a reference to Lester Freeman and the"McNulty" is Jimmy McNulty. These are two of the smartest cops in the version of Baltimore that lives in The Wire, my favorite television show ever (quite possibly the best show ever, as well).
Seeing how shifty and brilliant the gangsters in the Baltimore heroin trade are, and watching these two (as well as the team around them (these guys aren't exactly partners)) figure out ways to ensnare them, and then watching Tony Soprano chillin' day after day at the pork store or Silvio's titty-bar makes me almost laugh.
Corrie and I have discussed this at, what is honestly likely a wasteful conversation, length. The major crimes unit in Baltimore is concerned with the flow of heroin into the city, the violence that arises from the trade of said heroin, and the trail of the money from said heroin trade to all sides of the city. It's not exactly the same kind of less tangible criminal activity that can be tied to the Soprano crime syndicate--gambling, garbage, bust-outs...
So...I don't know... I'm a tough sell. It'll be hard to convince me that Lester, running Lt. Daniels' unit, or, rather, a federal task force, wouldn't be able to bring down Tony.
Or McNulty, with the bottle of Jameson in one hand and a Soprano case in his gut like the cancer? Please...
We laugh at the jokes, for sure, and marvel at the lengths that the protagonist, Tony, goes to be an involved father and husband, despite being a pathological liar, serial philanderer, and murderer.
The "Lester" in the title of the post is a reference to Lester Freeman and the"McNulty" is Jimmy McNulty. These are two of the smartest cops in the version of Baltimore that lives in The Wire, my favorite television show ever (quite possibly the best show ever, as well).
Seeing how shifty and brilliant the gangsters in the Baltimore heroin trade are, and watching these two (as well as the team around them (these guys aren't exactly partners)) figure out ways to ensnare them, and then watching Tony Soprano chillin' day after day at the pork store or Silvio's titty-bar makes me almost laugh.
Corrie and I have discussed this at, what is honestly likely a wasteful conversation, length. The major crimes unit in Baltimore is concerned with the flow of heroin into the city, the violence that arises from the trade of said heroin, and the trail of the money from said heroin trade to all sides of the city. It's not exactly the same kind of less tangible criminal activity that can be tied to the Soprano crime syndicate--gambling, garbage, bust-outs...
So...I don't know... I'm a tough sell. It'll be hard to convince me that Lester, running Lt. Daniels' unit, or, rather, a federal task force, wouldn't be able to bring down Tony.
Or McNulty, with the bottle of Jameson in one hand and a Soprano case in his gut like the cancer? Please...
Friday, July 25, 2014
Quick Realizations from Current Read
I'm currently reading a math book:
The Poincare Conjecture is a math problem from the late 19th century. A summary of the details may come from me over a scotch and a beer at a later date. It is pretty interesting, but can get a bit technical. If the conjecture is true (and it looks like it is), then we may be able to devise tests to discover the true shape of the universe.
Anywho...
A quick anecdote in an early chapter is the source for the titular realizations of this post.
Most Americans are taught that Columbus was trying to prove the Earth was a sphere, and King Ferdinand and his court of advisers were convinced it was flat. THIS WAS NOT THE CASE (1). Most every somewhat educated person was sure the Earth was a sphere, especially in the 15th century. The argument that Columbus was having with the Spanish Royal Court was over their opposing estimates to the size of the planet.
The King's advisers were using Eratosthenes estimate (24k mile circumference), claiming that the voyage would be far too expensive to outfit properly. Columbus was using Ptolemy's estimate(18k mi), claiming that the size of the planet would make outfitting such a voyage profitable.
History has shown that Eratosthenes was more accurate, but Ferdinand bought into Columbus anyway.
Now, Columbus was a lot of things. History has not viewed him well, and I have said many negative things about him and his legacy, things I wouldn't take back. But, other things that I've learned about should be in the same conversation. I'm talking about one of the last things Columbus wrote, an oft-ridiculed passage where he muses that the planet isn't spherical, but rather pear shaped--thin in the northern hemisphere and more bulbous in the south.
He got to this conclusion because, up until the end of his life, Columbus was convinced he'd reached the islands off the Indian subcontinent. Having arrived as quickly as he had (rather luckily for his near-starving crew), and knowing how long it took to get get around the southern tip of Africa, led him to reevaluate his understanding.
That's the important part here: (2) Columbus reevaluated his beliefs about the shape of the planet so they would fit the data he encountered. He didn't try to massage the data to fit his beliefs--he changed those beliefs. That's intellectually courageous. Not quiet making up for the wholesale slaughter of the Cubano Arawak, there, Chrissy, but it's an aspect I didn't know before.
This book also inspired the rabbit-hole trip into the history of Germany that I'll be putting into my upcoming "Watching the Gerries" post. Go Riemann!
Riemann ist der Raketenmench!
The Poincare Conjecture is a math problem from the late 19th century. A summary of the details may come from me over a scotch and a beer at a later date. It is pretty interesting, but can get a bit technical. If the conjecture is true (and it looks like it is), then we may be able to devise tests to discover the true shape of the universe.
Anywho...
A quick anecdote in an early chapter is the source for the titular realizations of this post.
Most Americans are taught that Columbus was trying to prove the Earth was a sphere, and King Ferdinand and his court of advisers were convinced it was flat. THIS WAS NOT THE CASE (1). Most every somewhat educated person was sure the Earth was a sphere, especially in the 15th century. The argument that Columbus was having with the Spanish Royal Court was over their opposing estimates to the size of the planet.
The King's advisers were using Eratosthenes estimate (24k mile circumference), claiming that the voyage would be far too expensive to outfit properly. Columbus was using Ptolemy's estimate(18k mi), claiming that the size of the planet would make outfitting such a voyage profitable.
History has shown that Eratosthenes was more accurate, but Ferdinand bought into Columbus anyway.
Now, Columbus was a lot of things. History has not viewed him well, and I have said many negative things about him and his legacy, things I wouldn't take back. But, other things that I've learned about should be in the same conversation. I'm talking about one of the last things Columbus wrote, an oft-ridiculed passage where he muses that the planet isn't spherical, but rather pear shaped--thin in the northern hemisphere and more bulbous in the south.
He got to this conclusion because, up until the end of his life, Columbus was convinced he'd reached the islands off the Indian subcontinent. Having arrived as quickly as he had (rather luckily for his near-starving crew), and knowing how long it took to get get around the southern tip of Africa, led him to reevaluate his understanding.
That's the important part here: (2) Columbus reevaluated his beliefs about the shape of the planet so they would fit the data he encountered. He didn't try to massage the data to fit his beliefs--he changed those beliefs. That's intellectually courageous. Not quiet making up for the wholesale slaughter of the Cubano Arawak, there, Chrissy, but it's an aspect I didn't know before.
This book also inspired the rabbit-hole trip into the history of Germany that I'll be putting into my upcoming "Watching the Gerries" post. Go Riemann!
Riemann ist der Raketenmench!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)