By Steve Sailer
05/21/2021
Earlier: Sailer In TakiMag: Philip Roth vs. John Updike
I recently reviewed the purged biography of novelist Philip Roth, comparing his output to his friendly rival John Updike’s. I noted Updike’s famous 1960 article on slugger Ted Williams homering in his last at bat, and suggested Updike had always been fascinated by career arcs. A reader points out that a critic in 2019 had taken Roth/Updike ballplayer comparison a step further.
From the Hudson Review:
Roth/Updike
by Charles McGrathFall 2019:
… In the end, I think they were mostly grateful for each other, the way that, say, Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer — to use a golf analogy that Updike would have appreciated — were grateful for each other. They raised the other’s game. Roth would have preferred a baseball comparison, so let’s also say they were like Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio, which is maybe even closer to the mark: both of those players were meticulous, even a little obsessive about their craft, more nearly equals than Jack and Arnie, and each set a record that will probably never be equaled. The example of one made the other try harder.[1]
In that last conversation, Roth also said to me, “John had more talent, but I think maybe I got more out of the talent I had.” I think that’s just about right, if we’re speaking novelistically, and set aside for a moment Updike’s achievements as a poet, short story writer, literary and art critic, and all-around man of letters.
DiMaggio was the better fielder and baserunner, Williams the better hitter. Hitting is the most important skill for a player, rather like novels are the single most important field for men of letters, and Williams’ supremacy as a hitter overwhelms the modern statistics-based baseball fan (although Williams’ lack of interest in other aspects of the game tended to annoy baseball fans until late in his career). But most spectators of their era felt DiMaggio the better all-around ballplayer. In his career of only 13 seasons, he went to ten World Series and won nine of them.
But DiMaggio retired at 36 after the 1951 season. Williams spent most of the next two seasons as John Glenn’s wingman in the Korean War, then suffered various health problems. Yet, he came back at age 38 in 1957 to hit .388 with power and walks. Only Barry Bonds has had a similar season at age 38.
So, I’d say Roth was more the Williams, with his concentration on novels and his strong comeback in his 60s, and Updike more the DiMaggio.
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.