The Mailer Review/Volume 2, 2008/Fighters and Writers: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:
Patterson, Torres himself, and Mike Tyson.“[Ali] is not a good fighter, so says
Patterson, Torres himself, and Mike Tyson.“[Ali] is not a good fighter, so says
D’Amato, much less a great fighter. But he is champion of the world.Which,
D’Amato, much less a great fighter. But he is champion of the world.Which,
believing Cus, and I do, makes Ali a genius....” He continues, in virtually the
believing Cus, and I do, makes Ali a genius....” He continues, in virtually the same words he spoke to me decades after the 1971 book appeared:
same words he spoke to me decades after the 1971 book appeared:




Line 29: Line 28:
gym to gym and are the nearest thing we have to our own culture.... We have a man who does not have the physical greatness of the greatest men of other times, yet no professional has been
gym to gym and are the nearest thing we have to our own culture.... We have a man who does not have the physical greatness of the greatest men of other times, yet no professional has been
able to beat him.... The explanation is simple. Muhammad Ali
able to beat him.... The explanation is simple. Muhammad Ali
is a genius.... Don’t watch Ali’s gloves, arms or legs when he’s
is a genius.... Don’t watch Ali’s gloves, arms or legs when he’s fighting. Watch his brains
fighting. Watch his brains.</blockquote>
</blockquote>


Other writers have made similar claims in connection with other fighters.
Other writers have made similar claims in connection with other fighters.
Line 36: Line 35:
dodges used by an inventive mind in going through the logical operations of
dodges used by an inventive mind in going through the logical operations of
a mathematical problem are really not very different from the ring-craft displayed by a well-trained body.” A. J. Liebling, who composed numerous entertainingly digressive, erudite articles on boxing for The New Yorker in the
a mathematical problem are really not very different from the ring-craft displayed by a well-trained body.” A. J. Liebling, who composed numerous entertainingly digressive, erudite articles on boxing for The New Yorker in the
1950s and early 1960s, distinguishes between “the ruffian approach” and that
1950s and early 1960s, distinguishes between “the ruffian approach” and that of “the reasoner inside the ring.”
of “the reasoner inside the ring.”


Part of boxers’ “culture,” in the view of Torres and his fellow thinkers, is
Part of boxers’ “culture,” in the view of Torres and his fellow thinkers, is
Line 150: Line 148:


Newfield changes tack when relating his own work to that of boxers, who
Newfield changes tack when relating his own work to that of boxers, who
then become paragons. For instance, in Somebody’s Gotta Tell It, the story of
then become paragons. For instance, in ''Somebody’s Gotta Tell It'', the story of
his life as a newspaperman, Newfield, following Mailer’s example, finds
his life as a newspaperman, Newfield, following Mailer’s example, finds
fighters worth emulating, but at the keyboard rather than the gym. Boxers’
fighters worth emulating, but at the keyboard rather than the gym. Boxers’
Line 162: Line 160:
indication of the respect he has for athletes who, like Sisyphus, persevere
indication of the respect he has for athletes who, like Sisyphus, persevere
through ultimately pointless endeavors. He also transmutes physical combat into the equivalent of a matter of language, viewing a fight as though it were an argument. Fighters’ representative capabilities—their amply
through ultimately pointless endeavors. He also transmutes physical combat into the equivalent of a matter of language, viewing a fight as though it were an argument. Fighters’ representative capabilities—their amply
documented tendency to be regarded by spectators as the embodiment
documented tendency to be regarded by spectators as the embodiment of a race, an ethnicity or a nationality—offers writers plenty of material to work with beyond mere athleticism. Camus explains how, for those inattendance at a fight he witnessed in Algeria between Amar from Oran and Pérez from Algiers, the boxers became stand-ins for their respective cities and how their bout became an extension of an ongoing rivalry between the
of a race, an ethnicity or a nationality—offers writers plenty of material
to work with beyond mere athleticism. Camus explains how, for those in
attendance at a fight he witnessed in Algeria between Amar from Oran and
Pérez from Algiers, the boxers became stand-ins for their respective cities
and how their bout became an extension of an ongoing rivalry between the
two places. “Thus a page of history is unfolding in the ring. And the tough
two places. “Thus a page of history is unfolding in the ring. And the tough
Oranese, backed by a thousand yelling voices, is defending against Pérez a
Oranese, backed by a thousand yelling voices, is defending against Pérez a
40

edits