Frank Deford's "Over Time" memoir

[Dave Kindred]

Versatile...we probably agree that Scott Price and Gary Smith today do what Deford once did for SI ... how is it a waste of students' time to study the craftmanship that produced the work of all 3? ... for that purpose, I'd use Tallest Midget before the memoir....

 

[jr/shotglass]

Lapointe's plans for his sports journalism class remind me of Indiana Jones' description of his father. To paraphrase:

"He's a professor of sports journalism. The one the students hope they DON'T get."

Using Deford's autobiography to illustrate the evolution of sports writing? OK, now you've made the students buy a book (one of five, apparently) consisting of what amount to anecdotes of days gone by, people gone by, chronicled by someone whose prime was decades ago in a medium that is falling by the wayside.

You want to illustrate the evolution? Start by having them read Death of a Racehorse. Captures the emotion of sports journalism and the fact that it won't all be watching athletes do amazing things. Also displays a style of writing that is very much of its time. Then move forward from there.

If you insist on tapping Deford, use the SI Vault online archive to find his best work, and distribute that to the students electronically. It's free, and the students will appreciate that not only did you help them avoid spending money on a book, but they'll also know you put forth some effort to do so.

I think that the Best Sportswriting of the Century could offer a nice view of the changes in styles over time. And if I remember correctly David Halberstam's forward offers a really good explanation of the changes that Deford's autobiography does not.

Bingo. Students will understand what makes great sports journalism through consuming these stories. Use the material itself to introduce the ideas you want students to think about. At this point in the evolution of sports journalism, their ideas are much more relevant than Deford's.

Do you really think students will read a book that's covered in one week of class? You better assign a test if you want them to even buy and skim it.

Absolutely. One of five books, and this one will cover "at least a week"? Of, what, 16 weeks? You're asking your students to purchase five books for a single class? Have you considered the fact they have other classes, which will also require a heavy time and money (the price of textbooks is not friendly) commitment?

If I'm them, I pull up Dickey's wikipedia entry and am done with it.

I found it to be a breezy read by one of the best in the business. I'm trying to show students the differences in sportswriting between now and the recent past. The Deford / Sports Illustrated model was the state of the art. They elevated the craft. In a previous class, I used Paul Gallico's "Farewell to Sport" from 1937 and some of the students found that a little too dusty. The course I'm teaching is not a history course but it should have some history in it so the students realize where we've come from before trying to figure out where we're going. But there will be at least five books.

First of all, the "recent past" of the evolution of sports journalism is pretty much the last three or four years. Just in the last decade, styles of writing have changed greatly. Again, if you want to showcase the heyday of SI, by all means. But it's better to do that using the actual articles from their great online archive, instead of asking students to consume the remembrances of someone they would (rightly) perceive as a relic as far as current sports journalism is concerned.

Be aware that students only care so much about "where we were." And they certainly don't care as much as old newspaper men. You spend too much time in the 1960s, you'll lose half the room while the other half go with it because they think there will be an exam. And all will wonder when you're going to teach them how to survive in the current reality.

Although his delivery, per usual, is brusque and irritating, I somewhat agree with his viewpoint.

(In other words, he could have made all those good points without being a deck about it.)

 

[lcjjdnh]

Seeing Joe's work (both in print and in the field) makes me think he knows exactly what he's doing in the classroom.

Not a commentary on Joe, but in my experience, the opposite is true. Great professionals are often the worst teachers*. They frequently fail to appreciate how much skill and effort good teaching requires. The best professors spend hours each year tinkering their lectures to better communicate with students, even if they've lectured on the same topic for years. Maybe, though, this is less true with journalists since some of the skills--such as breaking down a complex topic to a general audience--apply to both professions.

* Although students don't always feel that way. Many love hearing "war stories" because they're more interesting than a real lecture, even though they don't serve any educational value.

 

[Norrin Radd]

It would be interesting to see what the thoughts would have been if Mr. Lapointe was not posting under his own name.

*****
Absolutely. One of five books, and this one will cover "at least a week"? Of, what, 16 weeks?
*****

So you lower the rigor of your class, because of other classes?

I think not.

Not what I said.

I worked with Joe at FanHouse. Someone he teaches will have a leg up.

I should have stopped reading after the first sentence. Knew what the second would say.

FanHouse is NOT the classroom.

Seeing Joe's work (both in print and in the field) makes me think he knows exactly what he's doing in the classroom.

This does not necessarily follow. Have you read his posts in this thread?

Not a commentary on Joe, but in my experience, the opposite is true. Great professionals are often the worst teachers*. They frequently fail to appreciate how much skill and effort good teaching requires. The best professors spend hours each year tinkering their lectures to better communicate with students, even if they've lectured on the same topic for years. Maybe, though, this is less true with journalists since some of the skills--such as breaking down a complex topic to a general audience--apply to both professions.

* Although students don't always feel that way. Many love hearing "war stories" because they're more interesting than a real lecture, even though they don't serve any educational value.

Hit the nail on the head. This is all true.

Although his delivery, per usual, is brusque and irritating, I somewhat agree with his viewpoint.

(In other words, he could have made all those good points without being a deck about it.)

This post doesn't exactly add anything to the dialogue other than attempts at personal barbs. Not sure how this unnecessary rudeness is called for, but I'm sure the Mods will have something to say about it.

Now . . . did anyone want to argue what I actually said? Or is there just gonna be more chorus of "Well, I really like his journalism!"

 

[Moderator1]

I realize FanHouse is not the classroom. I've been at FanHouse and I've been in the classroom. I know the difference.

My point is I know Joe and his ability and his work and I feel pretty confident he'll be a huge help to the students under his tutelage. I would like favorably on someone who has learned under Joe.

And here's what one of the mods says about that post: The point was right. You could have made your points without coming off as nasty as you did.

 

[Versatile]

Versatile...we probably agree that Scott Price and Gary Smith today do what Deford once did for SI ... how is it a waste of students' time to study the craftmanship that produced the work of all 3? ... for that purpose, I'd use Tallest Midget before the memoir....

I'd agree Smith is doing a lot of what Deford once did for Sports Illustrated. He may be the only American sports writer living that life these days. Even Price writes nightly columns from tennis tournaments for the website. The craftsmanship of their work is one thing, though. The path they took ... that path doesn't exist anymore and requires a degree of talent that, if you have a student on that level, he or she needs individual mentoring anyway. A student that good is too far ahead of his or her classmates.

 

[Norrin Radd]

I realize FanHouse is not the classroom. I've been at FanHouse and I've been in the classroom. I know the difference.

My point is I know Joe and his ability and his work and I feel pretty confident he'll be a huge help to the students under his tutelage. I would like favorably on someone who has learned under Joe.

And here's what one of the mods says about that post: The point was right. You could have made your points without coming off as nasty as you did.

What you call "nasty" (for multiple obvious reasons), I call "pointed." I explained myself very thoroughly and never name-called or besmirched Mr. Lapointe. I explained why he may wish to rethink his methods, and I was very clear. In the future, I'll include a line about how wonderful his previous work was, if that will soften the blow.

You've been in the classroom? I'll note here that like most, you said nothing about any of the points I made. It's much more important to assume an individual obviously MUST know what he's doing, simply because of who they are and what they used to do.

 

[Moderator1]

I don't assume that at all, Norrin. I've worked with countless people whose work I like and I wouldn't be as "confident" of their work in the classroom. My point was, working with Joe made me comfortable enough to say I'm confident he'll be a fine teacher and I would look favorably upon those he taught. That's all.

Interesting, though. In my class? We did start with Death of a Racehorse.

 

[Joe Lapointe]

All these comments are very interesting and I've already got some good additional ideas. Along with assigning Deford's memoirs, I'll assign at least a couple of the pieces he wrote and get them from the Vault.

The entire purpose of the class is not to wax nostalgic about the past and SI's glory days. Last time I taught the class, I brought in A.J. Daulerio of Deadspin to talk about running pictures of Brett Favre's penis. (Is that contemporary enough?)

I hope to give students a broad perspective and stress that covering sports sometimes means covering crime (Penn State), labor (lockouts), law (name the arrested athlete here) and medicine (concussions). Sports are our national theatre. Athletes and coaches are our avatars.

They will cover live events, write profiles of people now in the sports journalism industry and they will do "takeouts" as term projects, building them the semester. I also try a few lighter things. Two years ago, during the week of Notre Dame-Army football, we edited Grantland Rice's "Four Horsemen" story. Another day, we read and discussed William Faulkner's coverage of a hockey game for Sports Illustrated. (You can look it up).

I appreciate any tips from those of you who've taught your own sports writing classes or maybe took them in college. Teaching is always a work in progress; and it's fun.

 

[Versatile]

All these comments are very interesting and I've already got some good additional ideas. Along with assigning Deford's memoirs, I'll assign at least a couple of the pieces he wrote and get them from the Vault.

The entire purpose of the class is not to wax nostalgic about the past and SI's glory days. Last time I taught the class, I brought in A.J. Daulerio of Deadspin to talk about running pictures of Brett Favre's penis. (Is that contemporary enough?)

I hope to give students a broad perspective and stress that covering sports sometimes means covering crime (Penn State), labor (lockouts), law (name the arrested athlete here) and medicine (concussions). Sports are our national theatre. Athletes and coaches are our avatars.

They will cover live events, write profiles of people now in the sports journalism industry and they will do "takeouts" as term projects, building them the semester. I also try a few lighter things. Two years ago, during the week of Notre Dame-Army football, we edited Grantland Rice's "Four Horsemen" story. Another day, we read and discussed William Faulkner's coverage of a hockey game for Sports Illustrated. (You can look it up).

I appreciate any tips from those of you who've taught your own sports writing classes or maybe took them in college. Teaching is always a work in progress; and it's fun.

See, that class sounds interesting. You led with the worst part, the memoir from the old sports writer. Teach your kids not to lead with the boring stuff.

 

[Norrin Radd]

The entire purpose of the class is not to wax nostalgic about the past and SI's glory days.

That's not what it sounded like earlier, but OK.

I stand by what I said, that requiring five books is a good way to lose students.

As for having Daulerio speak . . . not sure if it's "contemporary enough!!!!" (though I did appreciate the bit of snot behind that question), but it's certainly an interesting story. Is it representative of "today's sports journalism"? Is it representative of the type of thing any of your students will end up having to do?

The "profiles of someone in the sports industry" aspect is a common assignment, and something I never perceived to have a high value except perhaps as a "networking" opportunity.

Other than that, there's probably an idea of two in your above graph worth considering stealing.

 

[Tom Petty]

Versatile...we probably agree that Scott Price and Gary Smith today do what Deford once did for SI ... how is it a waste of students' time to study the craftmanship that produced the work of all 3? ... for that purpose, I'd use Tallest Midget before the memoir....

yeah, well i was just thinking if i were to teach a class on sports journalism that i'd include dave effing kindred in the required reading ... and look what the dog drags in.

we don't see nearly enough of you around here any longer, DK.

ok, enough man love from TP for the day.