Re: Highjacked, tangential post inspired by Zilla's thread
posted at 3/11/2014 12:37 PM EDT
Let's call these 'value dealbreakers' of some sort or variety.
What happens if you don't pay attention to 'sensational' news (some of us avoid it), b/c it's often ridiculous and/or about 'celebrities' we don't care about, and in some cases, have never heard of? What if you're blissfully ignorant? The news fell through the cracks somehow.
Then, one day a friend tells you, or you hear, out of the blue, that one of your favorite musicians did ... what?! Of course I'd be troubled, as would you, but would I stop listening to the old albums that were produced long before the crime was commited? I don't see any reason to do that, and don't think it means I condone the newly reported crime. But then again, I've never been put in that position.
On the other hand, these dealbreakers happen all the time in politics, sports, and all manner of disciplines where a person or institution may be in the public eye. There are medical mistakes resulting in irreversible damage (oops, the wrong organ was removed with a medical record mix-up).
What about sports? There is a new (not the first) book on Pete Rose called, "Pete Rose: An American Dilemma" by Kostya Kennedy. Is Pete Rose "dead to you" because of what he did 25 years ago, or does he deserve to be given credit for his remarkable career? Here's a short excerpt from the book review (for those interested):
"Kostya Kennedy, assistant managing editor of Sports Illustrated and author of the superb “56: Joe DiMaggio and the Last Magic Number in Sports,’’ wastes no time in getting to the point: “Does Pete Rose belong in the Hall of Fame?” he asks on the first page of “Pete Rose: An American Dilemma.’’
It’s now been nearly a quarter-century since Rose was banned for life from Major League Baseball for betting on games, a span nearly as long as the 24 seasons he spent in the majors starting in 1963.
But the controversy surrounding him remains an open sore in the sport. “[A] moral conundrum,” as Kennedy puts it, “that over the course of its long and changing life has burrowed through every level of the game and expanded far beyond sports talk.”
There have been numerous books on Rose since his banishment, most notably James Reston Jr.’s 1991 “Collision at Home Plate’’ and Michael Sokolove’s 1990 “Hustle: The Myth, Life and Lies of Pete Rose,’’ but “An American Dilemma’’ brings Rose’s story up to date, laying out the cases for and against him better than any
previous account. Looking at Rose as a player, Kennedy presents an air-tight case for his worthiness in the Hall of Fame "
Now, is there a difference because, using the Pete Rose example, his crime was inside baseball, his profession, as opposed to let's say, he was arrested for domestic violence and revealed as a wife beater?
Deal breakers are very hard to pin down.
(as for the book, if you're interested, I read about it in the Globe, but you can find write-ups elsewhere; it's hot off the press, out today):