Jul 13, 2010, 3:15 PM EST
This morning I said “I’m not a believer in whitewashing things when someone dies because the
last thing we should be doing when we lose someone is telling lies that
push their true essence further away from us.”
I really mean that. There are damn few saints in this world. Even fewer who become billionaire businessmen. George Steinbrenner wasn’t a saint. I suspect he’d be the last person to even suggest it. Watching the day’s coverage unfold on ESPN and on the Internet, however, and the Big Stein has grown more saintly by the hour.
If you read Bud Selig’s statement about Steinbrenner you’d think that the guy was the salt of the Earth. Rather than mere niceties at the time of one’s passing — which I understand — it’s actively deceptive. Maybe Selig and Steinbrenner were friendly on a personal level, but the fact is that Selig’s entire rise to power as Commissioner was premised on his and a group of like-minded small-market owners’ opposition to Steinbrenner’s financial largess. Indeed, the story of baseball labor relations between the advent of free agency and the 1994-95 strike cannot be understood without reference to the battle between big clubs led by the likes of George Steinbrenner and small clubs led by the likes of Bud Selig.
But Bud Selig is, at his essence, a politician, so I understand why such flavor doesn’t make it into his official statements. But how, then, do we account for the numerous talking heads who have shown up on my TV screen today painting, however unwittingly, an inaccurate or, at the very least, incomplete portrait of the man?
No, I don’t expect people in the Yankees family, widely defined, to offer up unvarnished truth about their patriarch on a day like today, but could ESPN or MLB Network have found someone today who could shed some insight into — as opposed to making mere footnotey mentions of — his felony conviction for illegal campaign contributions and obstruction of justice? Or how about Steinbrenner paying Howie Spira $40,000 to dig up dirt on Dave Winfield so Steinbrenner might find a way to get out from under the ten-year contract he gave him? And rather than merely use his parade of managers in the 1980s as a wide brush with which to paint color on The Boss, could someone be found who could point out that Steinbrenner’s erratic behavior in the 1980s probably did more to cost the Yankees championships than anything else that happened that decade?
I’m not suggesting that these uglier parts of the Steinbrenner legacy should be the lead story. The man died just this morning for crying out loud. But if you weren’t Steinbrenner’s family or his close friend, or if you didn’t work for or passionately root for the Yankees, it seems to me that you’re obligated to be thorough and balanced when it comes to covering his death. The hagiography-to-news
ratio on the Death of George Steinbrenner is growing increasingly larger as the day progresses, however.
I stand by what I said about George Steinbrenner this morning. He was a great figure in baseball in general and for the Yankees in particular. His impact was massive and any true understanding of the game in 2010 is impossible without first understanding George Steinbrenner and his legacy. The words “titan” and “icon” are thrown around too much when major figures pass, but they are entirely appropriate in the case of Big Stein.
But he was more than that. In fact, he was a lot of things. The term “a real piece of work” probably describes him best, but under that very large umbrella lies rogue, champion, rake, father, felon, firebrand, leader, fighter and about dozen others I could think of. I may even go so far as to say that the guy was — in the best sense of the term — a bit of a
sonofabitch too. I bet he’d agree with me.
In light of that, I’m growing a bit distressed as the day goes on and King George starts to look more and more like Saint George. It kind of galls me, really. Not because I have a thing against Steinbrenner — I really don’t — but because, when I die, I want people to remember me for what I truly was not for what they feel comfortable saying I was. To do otherwise is to whitewash and to whitewash is to paint over.
And once we’re painted over? We simply disappear.
UPDATE: Charles Pierce at the Globe managed to work in the sonofabitch angle. The New York Times now has something with a color other than white as well. And now Dave Brown at Big League Stew has a great post as well. The lesson: I write too damn fast sometimes. Next time I’ll wait for the backlash to come to me.
- Yasmany Tomas signs a six-year, $68.5 million deal with the Diamondbacks 86
- No, the Red Sox signing Pablo and Hanley is not proof that baseball needs a salary cap 162
- Red Sox announce four-year, $88 million deal with Hanley Ramirez, DFA Juan Francisco 35
- The Cubs have offered Jon Lester “north of $135 million” 68
- Pablo Sandoval’s deal: five years, $98 million plus an option 43
- Kyle Seager, Mariners close to $100 million extension 26
- The 2015 Hall of Fame ballot is out — Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez are new on the ballot 286
- So what would the Red Sox look like with Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval? 49
- The 2015 Hall of Fame ballot is out — Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez are new on the ballot (286)
- No, the Red Sox signing Pablo and Hanley is not proof that baseball needs a salary cap (162)
- More Hall of Fame ballots like Adam Rubin’s please (138)
- Report: Pablo Sandoval chose the Red Sox over the Giants because he felt disrespected (136)
- UPDATE: The Pablo Sandoval-Red Sox deal is done, pending a physical (133)