Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Incoming -- A new book on the split by John Oreovicz

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Got my copy in the mail today.
    Chicago Cubs 2016 World Series Champions

    Comment


    • #77
      This just in...

      20210510_133826.jpg
      "Each day well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness and every tomorrow a vision of hope. Look well therefore to this one day for it, and it alone, is life"
      ~ Sanskrit poem attributed to Kalidasa, "Salutation to the Dawn"


      Brian's Wish

      Comment


      • #78
        Got mine yesterday, started reading it this morning.
        I'll see YOU at the races!

        Comment


        • #79
          Found it to be informative about the USAC-CART split. As for what followed after that......I haven't much to say because Oreovicz's promise to be "objective" doesn't come off here as this is the split told from a CART fan perspective and it shows (I had to chuckle when he couldn't get the details of the Fiitipaldi OJ incident right). Get set for a lot of "Tracy was robbed in 2002 because of politics" ranting among other things. If you were on that side of the split you'll love it, but for me it was a swing and a foul ball at the plate. The four part series on the split on YT by nascarmanhistory was a lot more informative on the deeper reasons for a split that Oreovicz never touches on (escalating costs in the late 80s and early 90s).

          Comment


          • #80
            [QUOTE=Eric Paddon;n6773169]Found it to be informative about the USAC-CART split. As for what followed after that......I haven't much to say because Oreovicz's promise to be "objective" doesn't come off here as this is the split told from a CART fan perspective and it shows (I had to chuckle when he couldn't get the details of the Fiitipaldi OJ incident right). Get set for a lot of "Tracy was robbed in 2002 because of politics" ranting among other things. If you were on that side of the split you'll love it, but for me it was a swing and a foul ball at the plate. The four part series on the split on YT by nascarmanhistory was a lot more informative on the deeper reasons for a split that Oreovicz never touches on (escalating costs in the late 80s and early 90s).[/QUOTE

            I'm sure opinions will vary on the book and I respect that. However, your take is not a surprise. Since many of the principles in what was truly the split are no longer available, there was little chance Oreo could do this correctly and be objective.
            "For in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's future, and we are all mortal".

            John Kennedy at American University 1963

            "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power"

            A. Lincoln

            Comment


            • #81
              Why should one be objektive. It is clear what was with the split. And since the beginning we have said how history will write it.

              Comment


              • #82
                Sometimes that depends on who gets to write the history and what they bring to the table with their own particular brand of biases in terms of how they choose to write it.

                I'll be honest, the much-maligned Whitaker book was not a good read per se in terms of narrative writing, but it was ultimately more informative as a reference guide than this book was.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by RS2 View Post
                  Why should one be objektive.
                  Because if you're writing the history of an event it should be objective. Otherwise false narratives and outright falsehoods get perpetuated over and over.

                  If you're just writing an opinion book it should be portrayed that way and not as a factual narrative.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Question: How do posters out here, who have read "The Indy Car Wars" by Sigur E. Whitaker rate that book?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      https://www.trackforum.org/forum/mot...k-on-the-split

                      The author is a member here.
                      There's really no such thing as Gary the Moose, Sybil.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        I usually listen to this podcast series on defunct sports teams or things that have vanished from sports over the decades. An interview with Oreovicz is their latest installment.

                        https://goodseatsstillavailable.com/...-john-oreovicz

                        An older podcast interviewed Dave Lockton about Ontario Speedway.

                        https://goodseatsstillavailable.com/...ton?rq=Ontario

                        UPDATE-I just listened to the Oreovicz interview. It is the kind of program that is aimed at casual race fans and on that level he is clear and articulate. But he of course like in his book leaves out the critical problem of skyrocketing costs in CART in the 80s and he fails to address the fact that an *imbalance* in road/street races to ovals was something many had a problem with.

                        Where I think Oreovicz really comes off looking bad is when the host asks him about how the TV situation worked out with the competing races in 1996 and he says he can't answer that because he was at Indy and didn't know. I find it shocking that Oreovicz didn't bother to do his homework to just know a simple basic fact that ABC did Indy and ESPN did the US 500 which was the only thing the guy was asking for clarification on how the TV situation was handled.
                        Last edited by Eric Paddon; 05-24-2021, 12:23 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          (1) Why should one be objektive. It is clear what was with the split. And since the beginning we have said how history will write it.

                          (2) Sometimes that depends on who gets to write the history and what they bring to the table with their own particular brand of biases in terms of how they choose to write it.

                          I'll be honest, the much-maligned Whitaker book was not a good read per se in terms of narrative writing, but it was ultimately more informative as a reference guide than this book was.

                          (3) Because if you're writing the history of an event it should be objective. Otherwise false narratives and outright falsehoods get perpetuated over and over.

                          If you're just writing an opinion book it should be portrayed that way and not as a factual narrative.

                          (4) Question: How do posters out here, who have read "The Indy Car Wars" by Sigur E. Whitaker rate that book?
                          There seems to be "auto racing history" and then there is, well, the history of automobile racing/motor sport.

                          These two similar and somewhat familiar quotes might touch upon some of the problems that "auto racing history" and "auto racing racing historians" tend to have:

                          "Every man has the right to an opinion but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts. Nor, above all, to persist in errors as to facts."[1] – Bernard Baruch.

                          "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."[2] – Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

                          Given the generally wide berth that academic historians -- even sports historians -- have tended to give the topic of motor sport history, it is fortunate that a number of very talented hobbyist historians and journalists -- along with a small cohort of independent scholars/researchers who have graduate degrees in history -- have provided a number of very good to excellent works regarding the history of the sport. Of course, there are a significant number of works on "auto racing history" that makes one truly sad that trees were sacrificed for its printing or that electrons were wasted for its being posted somewhere. In recent years, one of the books that has been used in research classes for grad students in history tackles the issue of "objectivity" is Peter Novick's That Noble Dream: The "Objectivity Question" and the American Historical Profession (Cambridge University Press, 1988). Suffice to say that grad students quickly learn that History is complicated, nuanced, and a lot more challenging than they realize. Not only must a professional historian master the art and techniques of scholarly research, there is also the need to master historiography -- literally the history of history, that is how interpretations have evolved over the years.

                          As professional historians, we deal in facts and how to analyze and interpret those facts. Contrary to what some here and elsewhere in racing fandom might think, interpretations are not opinions, but literally how the research to gather facts and then the analysis of those facts leads one to literally develop an interpretation regarding how those facts relate to saying something about the past "as it really happened." Needless to suggest, uncovering additional facts or analyzing them within a different context or perhaps shifting the focus may lead to changes in the interpretation of the past.

                          Professional and good hobbyist historians, for example, do not use invented quotations, a common problem for many "auto racing historians" it would seem. Not to mention that to the maximum extent possible, professional and good hobbyist historians provide their sources using footnotes or endnotes and bibliographies.

                          I always told my students something that Barbara Tuchman stated in an address to students at Radcliffe College in 1963: "Research is endless seductive, writing is hard work." Putting together a plethora of facts into a coherent framework, figuring out what it all about, sorting out the facts, and then trying to convey it to an audience is far more difficult than it looks. History is not static. Nor is it immune to "politics" -- however one might wish to interpret that term. Not to mention that history quite often challenges how some view the past, as well as the roles that legend, established folklore, and mythology all play. Along with ideology, of course.

                          Full disclosure: I know Sigur Whitaker and reviewed her book. Other than a few of the inevitable things that somehow always seem to slip past during the editing process, I thought it quite good.

                          My copy of the Oreovicz book has yet to arrive, so I have no idea what he has actually written. From my own research into The Split, I have developed some ideas regarding it and its possible evolution.

                          In closing, I keep the Baruch quotation in mind whenever I am told or read that, say, Ralph De Palma is a two-time AAA National Champion, or that the national championship dates to 1909, much less when there are still sources insisting that the 1920 national champion was Tommy Milton, not Gaston Chevrolet.


                          [1] “Baruch Upholds U.S. Atom Plan; Hits at Wallace,” The Galveston Daily News, 9 October 1946, 1.

                          [2] Daniel P. Moynihan, “More Than Social Security Was at Stake,” The Washington Post, 18 January1983, A17.



                          And so we beat on, boats against the current, drawn back ceaselessly into the past ... F. Scott Fitzgerald
                          Ever have the feeling that the rest of the world is a tuxedo and you're a pair of brown shoes? ... George Gobel

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Since i'm the kind of person that when I have a tooth that hurts, I find myself constantly flicking that tooth with my tongue, I purchased this book today. Anyone read it yet?
                            All Roads Lead to Indy...

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              I’m in chapter 5. Amazing the resistance to change and the Offy, originally developed as a marine engine hung on for 5 decades.
                              Chicago Cubs 2016 World Series Champions

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I've read the whole book, overall not bad, and at least the story is all in one place. I enjoyed it mostly up through the early 90's era, it was a good review of things that I had forgotten and it seemed to be handled evenly IMHO, after that less so.
                                I'll see YOU at the races!

                                Comment

                                Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X