Comments on: Bruntlett's jersey is Cooperstown worthy?

By: Travis Ladewig

Travis Ladewig — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 15:08:07 +0000

Aw, this was a really quality post. In theory I’d like to write like this too – taking time and real effort to make a good article… but what can I say… I procrastinate alot and never seem to get something done.

By: Paul McC

Paul McC — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:30:53 +0000

Ah yes, de Tocqueville, Veblen, Galbraith – I remember them playing the outfield for the Brooklyn Dodgers back in the old days…

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:33:03 +0000

Thanks for the compliment. The comments, indeed, are often rather lowest-common-denominator. It's worth striving, sometimes at least, to bring the level up.

In fact, this phenomenon of American acquisitiveness is so commented upon that it might be ripe for debunking. Maybe this is more Americna exceptionalism at work, or something. But, then again, just because we live in an age of debunking doesn't mean everything has to be debunked. I doubt de Tocqueville, Veblen, Galbraith, and so many others were all wrong, at least not in the basics of their theories.

By: The Rabbit

The Rabbit — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:27:44 +0000

I generally dread to read the postings at this site. I’d just like to thank you for your articulate and informative comments.
As you know, Thorstein Veblen described this behavior in several publications in the early 20th century. Other than the expansion of this “norm” to other cultures within our society (which may be due to affluence, “brainwashing”, and/or some type of DNA hardcode that may suggest that this is natural human behavior if circumstances permit), it doesn’t appear that much has changed.

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:35:35 +0000

I was making a reference to contemporary cultural norms. Americans have long been noted for their (likely connected) propensities towards joining associations/clubs and acquisitiveness. I’m talking about acquisitiveness on an individual, not aggregate level. Certainly, the monarchies of Western Europe went through long periods of imperial expansion that involved a great deal of wealth plundering. No one today really disputes that. However, in addition to a large-scale, societal drive towards plunder of others (America long has been and still is an imperial nation), individual Americans have been seen as striving to acquire as much stuff as they can. This has been noted at least since de Tocqueville. In Democracy in America he ascribed this tendency to the unruly society promulgated by the lack of a hereditary aristocracy combined with relatively open political institutions. Other explanations, including a relatively continuous high level of affluence have also been advanced.
You might quibble with this analysis anyway. For instance, the Victorian English middle class was surely as in love with accumulation as its American counterpart. In the last century or so, however, Americans have risen quite above their fellows around the North Atlantic rim when it comes to a reputation for voracious consumption of all kinds of “stuff.” I could be quite wrong, of course, but this is how much of the intellectual discourse sees things. And I doubt it’s all wrong.

By: bergie

bergie — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:12:19 +0000

They should have sent Eric Bruntlett in his jersey to Cooperstown

By: Splint Chesthair

Splint Chesthair — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:44:35 +0000

Hey Grant,
Really? Countries of Europe aren’t acquisitive? That’s funny because I’d like to collect things of value but France, Spain and England, already traveled the world and plundered everything of value from the indigenous peoples they encountered while killing many of them in the process. Seems like a baseball jersey is not the subject to be analyzed.

By: Lawrence A. Herman

Lawrence A. Herman — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:51:20 +0000

Not a whole lot of fans get to see stuff that’s trly historic. Cool but kinda flukey is what most of us live on.
I’d much rather Cooperstown be amuseum of the cool but rather flukey than a half-assed attempt to assess who the greatest players were. When I go to Cooperstown it isn’t the plaques that thrill me. It’s the models of old stadiums, players’ lockers, 50-year-old baseballs and gloves. That stuff is so much more important to me than whether Pete Rose gets in that I can’t even put it into words.

By: Craig Calcaterra

Craig Calcaterra — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:37:16 +0000

That’s the best explanation I’ve heard yet, Grant. Now go out and get that tenured seat!

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:30:25 +0000

It seems to me that Americans have a strong streak of antiquarianism. You are welcome to try to figure out why this is*, but it seems undeniably true. People in the U.S. are very highly disposed to fetishism of objects divorced from real historical context and meaning. Look at Civil War and other styles of reenactment, reconstructed historic houses filled with furnishings from a variety of eras, kitschy roadside attractions like fiberglass hotdogs, and the sports memorabilia industry as a whole.** Americans like to collect, and look at, a bunch of stuff of dubious importance and even provenance. It's just how it is.

*One theory is that, lacking a long and majestic past in the vein of the national history/mythology of, say, France, Americans have to fill up their yearning for shared experience with seemingly random detritus. Another is that Americans are acquisitive in ways that many other cultures aren't, and this extends to historical memory. I'm sure there are other possible explanations. I suppose if you could figure this stuff out there'd be a nice, cushy tenured professorship waiting for you somewhere. That gives me an idea...

**Umberto Eco wrote a wonderful essay about this, actually, entitled "Travels in Hyperreality." I recommend it.