« sport? | Main | Sex Doll? »
November 6, 2005
Less is usually more
After checking my notes to Aaron & Heather, I had the impression that they were penned by some crabby old guy who doesn't like much of anything; that is simply not the case -- at least not all the time. I enjoy virtually all types of music, but I prefer music that is not electrcially nor electronically enhanced. The type of music I enjoy the least is that which I'm forced to listen to by the driver five cars away when both our windows are shut and his bass is still shaking my car. I don't know what it's called, but I'm sure we've all been forced to hear it. Those tunes simply don't compare to Benny Goodman, or even Tommy Dorsey; if they did, the musicians would not need to rely so heavily on amplification. The idea that if a little volume is good, then more volume is better is simply not true. On the other hand, a little bit of some types of non-amplified music can go a long way. For instance, one barbershop quartet number can fill my listening quota for a year. Similarly, I doubt that I would ever go to a bagpipe recital, but a clansman's funeral is just not complete without the obligatory Amazing Grace played in the distance, much like Taps at a military funeral. I'm sure that part of my musical comfort zone is due to age, but I still like the bands that were popular when I was very young; among these are The Moody Blues, Cream, The Beatles, Steppenwolf, and Credence. Piano players like Elton John, Billy Joel and Jerry Lee Lewis with their bands have remained popular for over thirty years; as have The Rolling Stones -- perhaps the greatest rock band of all time. All these groups rely heavily on electronic amplification; I suppose when you're playing to crowds of 50,000 and more it's necessary, but the electronics are used to enhance the music; it does not become the music -- or the music does not become it; however you want to say it.
Following the same thinking, the less equipment that is needed to participate in a sport, the more human involvement and the more of an actual contest it is -- or so it seems to me. I understand that the automotive and nautical engineers need competition to test their innovations and on some level I can appreciate the need to do so, but it's really the hull design or the engine modification that's being tested, not the sailors and the drivers.
Consider all the padding that football players wear; it would certainly be a different game if players wore only colored jerseys. The game has become the padding in that records are continuously rewitten because players can perform in ways that would have rendered their unarmored predecessors broken or unconcious in a very short time.
Like the engineering that makes the competition in NASCAR, yachting and to smoe extent I suppose bycycling, the technical advancements in football player's padding has enhanced and defined the game.
Conversely, the statistics in baseball are comparable between eras because there has been little equipment modification over the years. Granted, in the twenties the balls began to be machine made, but they still have the same number of stitches. (This new ball is said to account for Babe Ruth's fame, and that may be partially so, but all major leaguers have been swinging at the same ball ever since without quite so much success.) The other major changes in baseball equipment have been what amount to common sense changes. The fingers of the mitts were allowed to be stitched together, (Duh) which didn't affect batting averages all that much, the stitching did however account for fewer errors. Another common sense innovation was the batting helmet introduced by the 1947 Brooklyn Dodgers (think about it and you'll know why this team did it this year) The batting helmet was quickly adopted by all teams, but the helmet doesn't enhance a player's performance; it simply keeps him from getting a concussion. No one leans his head over the plate hoping to get beaned on the helmet for a trip to first. Over the years the bat has remained solid wood. The Designated Hitter rule has allowed pitchers to remain in the game during situations which would have called for a pinch hitter, but that's only the American League, and starting pitchers are normally called on for a hundred pitches. Unless he was enjoying a particularly good day, somewhere between the fourth and sixth innings, the starter was usually replaced by a mid-reliever anyway. Besides, it's not an equipment enhancement, it's a strategy change.
A few weeks ago I watched a rugby game for the first time in several years and noticed a strategy change had occured. It is now permissable to assist the jumper in a line out. Naturally this innovation allows the jumper to get much higher; of course his opponent is being assisted as well, so there is no unfair advantage taken. Rugby is still played with the minimum equipment. In fact it is still true that the only equipment needed to play rugby is leather balls.
Posted by Joseph Lampiasi at November 6, 2005 7:22 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://neovox.cortland.edu/mt/mt-tb.cgi/289