Baseball has been a fixture in America’s past since the early days and one may say is it is America’s pastime. Charles Alexander writes the book, Breaking the Slump: Baseball in the Great Depression Era with that in mind. Alexander has complied a book about what baseball was like during the years when America lived in a time of great poverty and economic troubles. Alexander writes with the aim of writing a chronology of baseball and how it the happenings of the world influenced this sport. Baseball has had a great following and Alexander explains the National pastime in a way that feels like you are right there during the season. Alexander’s style, source base, and focus makes this book a great history of the time. He does miss a few things
…show more content…
The only time that culture is incorporated into the book is when he mentions how the baseball player was affected. This book could have had a more enhanced argument if things were presented with a tie in to the culture of the 1930’s. If Alexander thought about more the player’s lifestyles and the effect they had on baseball, it would have made for developed reasoning on why baseball seasons went the way they did. From previous knowledge most people know the Great Depression caused people to live in a changed lifestyle. They had to watch everything they did with their money and had to choose to fulfill their entertainment in different ways than paid events. This thinking had to have an impact on the reason’s Alexander was trying to draw as why the attendance kept going down. Another thing with the culture that would have helped to exceed the argument Alexander had on why baseball started to turn during the 1930’s would to be to further examine what the New Deal did for baseball. Alexander touched on it in his chapter on the New Deal and how it was created the turning point for things to go on the upswing. A way to outdo just talking about the New Deal is maybe to include more about what the New Deal was and did for things besides baseball. One flaw that could be changed in Alexander’s book is to include more information about the …show more content…
From previous knowledge and research, baseball was still broken down into the white leagues and the Negro leagues. The Depression has to have an effect on that field of baseball also. Alexander fails to point this out in his writings. He includes very little on the topic of Negro baseball. If this topic would have been included it would have gave it a stronger impact on the writing as whole. It would have done this because it shows more of the Great Depression and baseball as a whole. A flaw that could have been fixed in Alexander’s book would have to include the parts about Negro baseball.
Overall, I think the argument that Alexander presents about looking at baseball is structured fairly will. From the way he goes season by season and backing up all of his facts with sources both primary and secondary creates a strong argument. This book helps the reader look into what baseball was like for the players playing the depression era and how the slump was broken for them. This book would make a great read for anybody looking to examine baseball in the Great Depression more
The only time that culture is incorporated into the book is when he mentions how the baseball player was affected. This book could have had a more enhanced argument if things were presented with a tie in to the culture of the 1930’s. If Alexander thought about more the player’s lifestyles and the effect they had on baseball, it would have made for developed reasoning on why baseball seasons went the way they did. From previous knowledge most people know the Great Depression caused people to live in a changed lifestyle. They had to watch everything they did with their money and had to choose to fulfill their entertainment in different ways than paid events. This thinking had to have an impact on the reason’s Alexander was trying to draw as why the attendance kept going down. Another thing with the culture that would have helped to exceed the argument Alexander had on why baseball started to turn during the 1930’s would to be to further examine what the New Deal did for baseball. Alexander touched on it in his chapter on the New Deal and how it was created the turning point for things to go on the upswing. A way to outdo just talking about the New Deal is maybe to include more about what the New Deal was and did for things besides baseball. One flaw that could be changed in Alexander’s book is to include more information about the …show more content…
From previous knowledge and research, baseball was still broken down into the white leagues and the Negro leagues. The Depression has to have an effect on that field of baseball also. Alexander fails to point this out in his writings. He includes very little on the topic of Negro baseball. If this topic would have been included it would have gave it a stronger impact on the writing as whole. It would have done this because it shows more of the Great Depression and baseball as a whole. A flaw that could have been fixed in Alexander’s book would have to include the parts about Negro baseball.
Overall, I think the argument that Alexander presents about looking at baseball is structured fairly will. From the way he goes season by season and backing up all of his facts with sources both primary and secondary creates a strong argument. This book helps the reader look into what baseball was like for the players playing the depression era and how the slump was broken for them. This book would make a great read for anybody looking to examine baseball in the Great Depression more