Today’s
discussion concerning the number thirteen and the bad luck in the infamous game
got me thinking about the presence of superstition in the game of
baseball. Let’s look at the most
recent phenomenon that has occurred in the game, Phil
Humber’s perfect game. A
perfect game is possibly the most random event in all of baseball. Great pitchers go entire careers
without one and bad pitchers are remembered for nothing other than one. All in all, there have been only
twenty-one perfect games in the history of the game.
So,
let’s have some fun with the perfect game that occurred this Saturday. It was the twenty-first perfect game
ever pitched; it was the twenty-first of the month. Humber’s record was 11 and 10 before the start- add them and
you get twenty-one. While watching
the Yankees-Sox game, they gave updates on the perfect-game-in-motion during
the fifth and seventh innings, finally switching over to the game in the ninth
for the historical moment. Add
those inning numbers up and you get twenty-one. Humber was born on the 21st of a month. And perhaps strangest of all, a good
friend of mine turned 21 on that day.
So,
obviously I managed to do the same thing Delillo does in the novel, possibly
pointing to the conclusion that this superstition applied following an event
means absolutely nothing. But
maybe that is not what we are pointing to. The idea of coincidence versus fate is present throughout
the novel and in a way I feel that it is not just coincidence that leads to
these events. We cannot change the
past, and in a strange way, that means that whatever happens is meant to
be. The story of this universe and
Earth is nothing more than a long narrative in some sense. If we accept the idea that since these
things happened and we cannot change them, that they had to happen, then
perhaps the constructed superstition around them had to happen as well. And perhaps that gives the superstition
actual meaning and validation.
Maybe all these things really do make sense, but since we cannot predict
the future, we cannot see the pattern before it occurs (as that would be
foresight as well). The simple
matter is that these constructed patterns exist in some sense, and if they
exist they are real. An event
exists and the pattern exists, I can't argue with that.
I have always been so interested in the way that sports and superstitions seem to go hand and hand, and it certainly seems like that's even more true when it comes to baseball. Just look at all of the different curses, myths, and legends that surround the different teams. You don't even have to be an avid baseball fan to know about the curse of the Bambino or to know you're not supposed to talk about a no-hitter while it's happening. It's the part of the game that at times seems so absolutely ridiculous and at other times so necessary. After all, how would Boston have survived all those years without a World Series title if they didn't have the curse to lean on as a crutch, an excuse?
ReplyDeleteR. Bigelow, I cannot agree more with your observational dynamitude. Great word that I just made up. It means a stance or attitude that has an untraditional approach to it. But, anyhow, the real question here is, is superstition an inherent feature to the game, or is it the result of the game? Can it be both? Hey, off topic, but fun fact...this is my first comment for this class(worth five percent of our total grade)- and it's on my own blog- not great, I would assume.
DeleteAnyhow, let's take Boston for example and see what we can do with it. Before the twenty-first century, the last time they won the series was 1918 (all hail the great bambino). And then they won in 2004 and 2007...so what can we make of that? Well, obviously, if I was from the twenty-second century and the Sox HAD NOT WON SINCE THEN, then obviously the curse of the Bambino would still live on. You see, 2007 minus 2004 is Babe's number... and obviously that three created by that fluke of two series was just a divine device to keep Boston in the game.
Anyways, I suppose part of that is what is keeping me in the game. Unfortunately, I cannot accept that there could be a world of baseball without curses and luck. The curse of the Bambino was real. My grandpa died without the Sox winning- if you looked within the confines of his lifetime, then the Sox never won, and there was an underlying reason for it. The Curse was real for him. So if I live another 60, 80, hundred years, without the Sox winning, then this curse will be real for me to. And if two months after I die, the Sox win it, then so be it.
It's not that they were never meant to win, it's just that a curse becomes real based on the context. Let's say baseball comes to South Africa, and by 2333 it is the only place in which the sport is still played...then it's American history won't matter so much. New legends will be formed and what happened here won't matter for much.
It will not matter. And if it does not matter then, it does not matter now. I don't know, I guess I'm just saying that everything is looked at through the lens of our time and outside of that, it is seen very differently. What looks like "this" now might look like "that" then. And if it is the same thing with interchangeable reason and meaning throughout time, then there is an infinitude of explanation behind it. Maybe a curse for 86 years will look like a joke...or maybe it will be inexplicable.
I cannot help but think that superstions are merely fabricated by fans to create meaning or buzz around a certain occurance. Sure, coincidences happen. But the very fact that you can set out looking for a pattern and find one proves that if one were to go looking for a pattern, they will find or create it themselve. Whether intentional, or subconcious, I cannot be sure. However, people are always looking for connections, reasons and answers, which they can find (or fabricate) through superstition, coincidence, or a higher power. In this case and in the case of DeLillo, I feel like the patterns were created to become meaningful or to explain the unexplainable. Now, the curse of the bambino on the other hand... .
ReplyDelete