Ken Burns Baseball on...

[Peter_Spaeth]

http://cgi.ebay.com/The-Great-War-an...item1c0fddb0d7

[bmarlowe1]

tbob says:
President Bush felt the World War I documentary was actually a veiled pacifistic effort and had an anti-war bent and did his part to see that it was pulled from production on VCR tape and never released on DVD.

Paranoid and delusional beyond comprehension. Peter - you better watch out, they're gonna come and get you for posting that subversive info.

Released in 2005:

[tbob]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

tbob says:
President Bush felt the World War I documentary was actually a veiled pacifistic effort and had an anti-war bent and did his part to see that it was pulled from production on VCR tape and never released on DVD.

Paranoid and delusional beyond comprehension. Peter - you better watch out, they're gonna come and get you for posting that subversive info.

Released in 2005:

Peter- wow, that is incredible! I can not believe a set went for that cheap. I saw one a few months ago sell on either Amazon or Half.com for around $250.

BMarlowe- that picture you posted is not the same documentary as the one I mentioned. I didn't say that I had any specific and first hand knowledge of George and the boys getting in the way of the film's release, only that I had seen many articles attributing the documentary's strange disappearance and failure to be available on VCR or DVD to the Prez and his attitudes toward the film. Maybe akin to his not wanting the nightly news showing coffins coming back, wanting to orchestrate the war effort for the news, etc.
I guess it may be paranoid and delusional to some but what's the old saying, "I may be paranoid but that doesn't mean someone isn't following me."

[mintacular]

But too much of the time Burns seems to think that baeball was invented somewhere between White Plains NY and Brocton MASS, and that anything played outside of the Boston NYC corridor really doesn't count as major league at all.

History is an interpretive and selective presentation of facts and a historian will no doubt choose a narrative and build a story around this. To think that every farmtown minor league team should be covered as equally to the big city NY/Boston squads is very boring history in my book...Ironically, many progressives think a scrappy minimum wage steel-worker in Homestead PA deserves equal coverage to the Titans of Industry Carnegie, Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, et al., well I don't. But now I digress.

As for the minor points about "doctored tapes", and Doris Kearns Goodwin I think those are ticky-tacky criticism....If these criticisms underline a pervasive manipulation of tape/footage then they are worthwhile topics of discussion. If not, then so what? They are minor asterisks in the big scheme of things.

[bmarlowe1]

tbob - you are right - the DVD is a different program.

However the VHS version of the correct program is easily found, and anyway - if any governmental agency tried to stifle PBS content, they would scream bloody murder - you wouldn't have to comb non-mainstream sources to find out. The daily newshour program and the weekly presentations of Frontline and Bill Moyers attest to their independence and get far more viewership (though not alot) than would a WWI documentary on DVD. Hence, giving credence to such an attempt is not rational.

[jlynch1960]

Strange thread to say the least, but here are a few thoughts.

It's been awhile since I watched the entire series (Baseball), but it seems clear that Burns was trying to demonstrate how baseball plays a larger role in American life than simply as a game - in many ways attempting to bring an intellectual bearing to our understanding of the game by placing it in a larger context of who we are as a people.

Since most intellectuals tend to be liberals (Geo. Will notwithstanding) and many conservatives tend to be anti-intellectual (another George comes to mind), it's only natural that the non baseball playing interviewees would have a more liberal bent. In fact, George Will plays into this perfectly because he is one of the few conservatives who has been able to bring some form of higher analysis to the table (e.g., "Men at Work"). I'd be hard pressed to name another conservative commentator who fits this role.

The Burns brothers don't make documentaries that simply recite history as facts and figures -which is what a lot of people posting here seem to want. Their films simply wouldn't be as interesting as they are if they were made as such.

[Theoldprofessor]

Ironically, many progressives think a scrappy minimum wage steel-worker in Homestead PA deserves equal coverage to the Titans of Industry Carnegie, Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, et al.

Both of my grandfathers were "scrappy minimum wage steel workers" in Homestead, PA. That masterful "titan of industry," Mr. Andrew Carnegie, was in part responsible for the 1892 disaster in Homestead, though he ran off to Scotland before the thing came to a head, leaving one Henry Clay Frick to do pretty much what he wanted. Result -- 10 dead and Carnegie's legacy permanently damaged. He returned from vacation after the strike ended. No, I think the more coverage those Titans receive, the better off we all are.

Sorry for the interrruption. Back to baseball. As far as I know, Ford Frick and Henry Clay Frick were not in any way related.

[FrankWakefield]

.

[D. Broughman]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

What Burns DID do with Baseball, is to get a bit of interest rekindled in the minds of some folks. Whether they watched it because of the history of the game, because of the interviewees, because of the examination of the racial barrier... whatever the reason, folks who watched that saw video of Honus Wagner, Ty Cobb, Walter Johnson, Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Joe D, Ted W, Stan M.... it revived interest in the history of the game, it started interest anew in some who watched the series. We may well have a few more collectors of the old stuff because of what Burns did.

I think Frank hit it right on the head. Burns revived interest in baseball.