How Pure is Baseball?

W.P. Kinsella's novel, Shoeless Joe, is the final novel we read in my senior seminar class. Unfortunately for Kinsella, the four books which preceded it were by some of the most lyrical and talented authors of the 21st century. As a result, this book was compared to other narratives well out of its league and did not fair very well in that comparison. The writing style seemed simplistic and the metaphors clunky. Of course, we were used to Morrison, Updike, Erdrich and O'Brien, so there are not many writers who could follow up satisfactorily. But my issues do not solely rest in style. I take issue with much of the content as well. Most people know this story in the form of the Kevin Costner movie, Field of Dreams. It is a heart warming tale about the purity of the American dream and the value of small town America. I loved the movie as a kid and still can't bring myself to change the channel if I flip to it on cable. That could partly be because I am inexplicably a sucker for Kevin Costner movies, but there is also something seductive about this story.

The movie does take the typical artistic license in its telling of the story. One interesting change which I imagine has something to do with some sort of legal issue is casting James Earl Jones as the author figure rather than including J.D. Salinger as the book does. Besides any legal issue, it may also have been more convenient for the Hollywood story. Instead of Ray having to travel all the way to Boston to find J.D. Salinger like he does in the book, he only has to go to Chicago to find James Earl Jones character. Yet something is definitely lost because the book dwells a lot on the similarities between Holden Caufield and the protagonist of Shoeless Joe, Ray Kinsella. Also the presence of J.D. Salinger connects the narrative to the history of the American novel in a way the fictional author who James Earl Jones plays does not. Yet what is retained is a meditation on the nature of creativity and creation itself. Ray seeks out J.D. Salinger because he believes he has received a divine message that Salinger has a secret pain that needs to be resolved before he can write again. Ray believes Salinger owes it to his many fans to continue to create the narratives which people have identified with and love. That is a belief which Salinger himself greatly resents since it is Salinger's gift to use as he sees fit not because the American public demands more. Despite Ray's conviction that Salinger should write more, he reacts in a similar manner to the author when faced with a similar dilemma. Ray becomes quite upset that Salinger is invited to leave the ballpark which Kinsella built with the ball players. Ray believes it is his right to see what is beyond the corn because he built the venue in which the ghostly ballplayers play. He is forced to realize that the actual act of creation does not guarantee him control over what is created.

One change which Hollywood made which actually improved on the novel was included a more rounded character as Ray Kinsella's wife. The women of the novel are beyond deplorable. They are either completely compliant to their man's desire and beautiful or ugly, disagreeable and highly religious. Ray's wife Annie constantly supports him in whatever he desires and then waits in bed for when he is ready. Ray's identical brother's partner, Gypsy, provides the same unfailing supports as Annie, despite the fact both men could use a hard dose of reality at times. Also Ray's father and Moonlight Graham both give up their dreams centered around baseball to settle in a small town with the women they have met. Their wives are the proverbial ball and chain. As Ray never fails to remind us, it was Annie's idea to rent the farm. Other women such as Annie's mother and Eddie Scissons' daughters, hide behind their religion and care for no one but themselves. There is not a single woman in the entire text who has any authority, input or real voice at all. In the movie version, Annie has some opinions and a little backbone. She is still blind in her support of Ray, but she is still an improvement over the book version.

The poor depiction of women is just one element of what I feel is the biggest failing of the novel. To me, the novel romanticizes a past which is dominated by white men. There are two themes which jump out immediately to the reader, the first is baseball as an allegory for religion and the second is an undercurrent of anti-authority. It pits small town America against corporate, urban America. Despite being set in Iowa, the narrative almost has a North verse South feel. Baseball is not only an allegory for Religion but the true American dream. Baseball is supposed to represent the purity of the American dream, small town American and rural life. Yet that begs the question, how pure is Baseball? That question is particularly relevant in Today's world of steroids and HGH. But it is revisionist to think Baseball was any more pure in the days where only whites were allowed to play. Despite Baseball's elevated status as America's pastime, it has never been an entirely pure or good thing. In this novel in particular, it seems to represent a misogynistic pastime. There is a yearning for a time when things were simple, women obeyed and blacks weren't allowed to play.

I still managed to enjoy this book overall (I still blame my being a sucker for Kevin Costner movies), but there are obviously parts I have take exception to as well. It is a nice story if you can get beyond the sexism (which most of my class could not). There are some really interesting parallels with Religion which have been explored to a great degree. Overall though, I think I'll stick with the movie version.