Jackie Robinson: Game One, by Michael Davis – Straight No Chaser #299 | @MDWorld
January 17, 2013 Michael Davis 12 Comments
Illustration by Michael Davis
On April 15, 2013, the film “42” opens.
The film is about the career of Jackie Robinson, baseball’s first Black player.
Which, by the way, is just bullshit.
Jack Roosevelt Robinson was not the first African American to play Major League Baseball. He was the first of the modern era. There were at least fifty or so black players before Jackie Robinson. Baseball as a “professional” sport did not begin segregated.
Segregation started in 1889.
But, I digress (get better soon Peter) — I want to be clear about some things. I have NO idea if the filmmakers will mention that Jackie is not the first Black man to play Major league baseball. I have no idea what kind of narrative the story will take.
I just wanted to go on record so people won’t think I’m ripping off the movie when my graphic novel, “Jackie Robinson: Game One,” hits the bookstores.
I started “Jackie Robinson: Game One” before the movie was even announced. It’s taken me years to finish the script and the art, but that should not take away from the fact that I had the idea first.
Which, by the way, is just bullshit also.
My editor Tom at Full Court Press had the idea first, but I thought it was a great one, so I’m claiming it.
Bottom line — I am NOT ripping off the upcoming Jackie Robinson movie, and I’ve been working on my graphic novel for over three years. Why, you ask, has it taken me so long?
Because I’m anal and I nitpick everything.
So, to recap, I’m not ripping off the Jackie Robinson movie. I was first.
If the movie does gangbusters at the box office and people want to buy my graphic novel because of that, so be it.
If the movie sucks and sales of my graphic novel suffer because of it, then I’m very upset, but it’s not my fault.
That is what we call in Hollywood a win-win.
R. Maheras
January 18, 2013 - 7:41 am
Hope your graphic novel sells out! I’ll be buying a copy — that’s for sure. Robinson was one of the best all-around baseball players ever, and a favorite of mine.
Though I bet neither the film or your graphic novel mention that Branch Rickey was a Republican and a deeply religious man. In short, since he doesn’t fit the current stereotype of a conservative Republican it’ll be glossed over.
Rickey also signed Roberto Clemente to the Bigs.
Rene
January 18, 2013 - 9:59 am
They had to cut that part out. It could stretch credibility for younger people.
“Grandpa, why is it that the Republican guy isn’t acting like a total asshole?”
“Kid, there was a time when a few right-wingers didn’t stand just for rich folks dodging taxes, southern gun-totting manchildren, and xenophobes afraid of illegal browns.”
“You’re making that up!”
R. Maheras
January 18, 2013 - 11:56 am
Lot’s of Republicans I know still have Rickey’s values. They just can’t get through all of the left-wing hype.
Rene
January 18, 2013 - 12:04 pm
Maybe the saner Republicans just can’t get through all of the RIGHT-wing hype.
R. Maheras
January 18, 2013 - 1:35 pm
Could be, but according to many of my lefty friends, there’s no such thing as a sane Republican!
MOTU
January 18, 2013 - 4:34 pm
R. Maheras wrote:
” Though I bet neither the film or your graphic novel mention that Branch Rickey was a Republican and a deeply religious man.”
For you information sir, chapter 4 in my book is called: Branch Rickey was a Republican and a deeply religious man.
So there.
Doug Abramson
January 18, 2013 - 4:57 pm
Russ,
Anytime in the last five years that a sane Republican has tried to use their voice, they’ve had to put up with a wall of negative energy sent their way from the self styled “real” Republicans. The name calling starts with “RINO” and degenerates from there. With the lunatics running the party, the reasonable adults have either been driven out or driven underground; browbeaten into silence to preserve their positions. The pendulum will either swing back towards the middle, like the Democrats did in the 80’s or the Republicans will eventually go the way of the Whigs and be replaced.
Doug Abramson
January 18, 2013 - 5:01 pm
MOTU,
Looking forward to your book and the movie. Robinson was a great man. Anything that perpetuates his story is a good thing. Do you deal with his baseball career only, or do you touch on the bullshit court marshal?
R. Maheras
January 18, 2013 - 5:34 pm
MOTU — lol
🙂
R. Maheras
January 18, 2013 - 5:50 pm
Doug — The Republicans are a spinoff of the Whig Party, so shit happens.
But if you ask me, both parties are run by their extremists. In a discussion we had here not too long ago, I pointed out that in the area of woman’s rights, I mentioned that the ONLY area of woman’s rights that has given me pause is the issue of abortion. Because another life is involved, I don’t think abortion should be unrestricted and used as just another form of birth control. That puts me at odds with most feminists, and thus I am, in their eyes, a “conservative fanatic” who should mind his own business and stop my “war against women.”
Considering there are about one million abortions in this country every year, why does the left froth at the mouth about gun deaths — a tiny fraction of the abortion total — and ignore abortion deaths?
To me, a life is a life.
MOTU
January 18, 2013 - 6:07 pm
Doug,
The book deals with events beyond the scope of baseball.I’d tell you more but then I’ve have to kill you.
That would suck because I like you. 😉
MOTU
January 18, 2013 - 6:11 pm
While I’m at it, I’d like to add this to the Republican Party debate.
The GOP was founded as a anti-slavery party.
Ain’t that a kick in the head?
MOTU
January 18, 2013 - 6:13 pm
Oh and Jackie Robinson was a Republican.
Ain’t that another kick in the head?
Neil C.
January 18, 2013 - 8:31 pm
Who’s publishing it, MOTU?
MOTU
January 18, 2013 - 10:47 pm
Neil,
The company is called The Attainment Company under the imprint ‘Full Court Press.’
Doug Abramson
January 19, 2013 - 1:37 am
Wait, you mean I actually have to BUY the book?!
Mike Gold
January 19, 2013 - 1:53 pm
Sane Republicans? There’ve been plenty, starting with party co-founder Joseph Medill (arguably the last sane person in his family; probably the last truly religious male in his family). More recently, oh, Theodore Roosevelt, Robert LaFollette, Dwight Eisenhower, Tom Dewey (from the “sleezy-but-sane” faction), Everett Dirksen, John Anderson, and Richard Friedman, who’s currently president of the National Strategy Forum and is with the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Law and National Security. I worked with Dick back when he was regional director of HEW, and I would have taken a bullet for him. He was born in 1929, which makes him the youngest Republican on my list.
There’s a reason for that.
Rene
January 19, 2013 - 4:08 pm
Russ, you actually don’t believe that. Few people, even among the truly conservative religious, actually believe abortion is equal to murder. You may use it as a way to accuse the left, as a rethorical weapon, but you don’t believe it.
Because, would you approve of a equal punishment? A life is a life, correct? Why aren’t you campaigning for couples who have abortions to face a life sentence or the death penalty? Would you really want to live in a country where women who have abortions face the electric chair?
If they stopped to think, instead of frothing at the mouth, most conservatives would realize that no, they do not actually consider all lives taken to be “equal”.
I don’t know if there is any country that is not a theocracy where they consider abortion legally the same as murdering a child.
My opinion? Punishing abortion is like punishing a failed suicide. The person is suffering enough already, adding a legal punishment would be redundant.
R. Maheras
January 19, 2013 - 7:37 pm
Rene — I absolutely do believe it, and religion has nothing to do with it. It’s just cold, hard logic. As I said, life is life. I understand it is necessary in certain instances, but the original scope and intent of Roe vs Wade has been expanded to a cold assembly line system that would probably make most who originally supported it cringe.
George Haberberger
January 20, 2013 - 6:40 am
Russ,
I agree. So much has advanced in the science of embryology since 1973 that I don’t believe that the Roe v Wade decision would pass today.
People claim that the second amendment is anachronistic, and there is a case to be made for that with the advance of firearms. So too is the case with the justification for abortion on demand.
Rene
January 20, 2013 - 10:46 am
Answer me directly just this once.
Is a life is a life, and abortion is murder, then do you want people who have abortions to pay with the death penalty in states where there is a death penalty? Do you want women who have abortions to get life sentences? Also the doctors and the men who supposedly are accomplices?
If your answer is “no”, then explain to me the why of it.
Rene
January 20, 2013 - 10:49 am
I just hate it when you guys are disingenuous. I’m not the biggest fan of abortions, morally. But in pratical terms, what is it that you guys want done? Let’s say, Russ and George are given the power to completely rewrite any laws they want. What would you do in the case of abortion? Is abortion murder? Then make people who have abortion pay the same penalty as murderers, right?
Mike Gold
January 20, 2013 - 2:45 pm
“Then make people who have abortion pay the same penalty as murderers, right?”
Yep. And people look at be odd when I snicker every time I hear the phrase “pro-life.”
“I’m PRO-LIFE you fetus-murdering harlot! That THAT!” And then they go bitch about how too few people been murdered by the death “penalty.”
Really. I’ve sat through Johnny Carson shows that weren’t as funny.
Rene
January 21, 2013 - 5:44 am
That’s not quite what I meant, Mike. Yes, I recognize also that there is some absurdity in Pro-Life people defending the death penalty, but that is not what I meant (and I don’t even know if Russ and George actually defend the death penalty).
What I meant was more in the line of “people should follow their own thoughts to their logical conclusions”. If you say that abortion is equal to murder by gun, and a life is a life, then you must believe that women who have abortions must pay the same legal penalty as murderers.
I wondered if Russ and George really think women who have abortions should be sentenced to 30 years to life in prison (or death penalty, in the states who carry it). Also, let’s not forget that their friends and family often are guilt of conspiracy to murder an innocent baby. That’s more people with stiff sentences in jail.
So, the ball is in their court now. Do they really think abortion is equal to murder? Then they should be punished the same. I wish Conservatives had the intellectual honesty to defend life sentences for people who have abortions. Or else admit that “abortion = murder” is a rethorical excess and a cheap debate trick.
Rene
January 21, 2013 - 7:23 am
What bothers me is the cowardice, you know? The GOP platform had some bull about abortion being murder, but they don’t seek to punish the women, no, they’
Rene
January 21, 2013 - 7:24 am
(continuing)
they’re sweethearts, the Republicans. What the fuck? It’s murder, but you don’t want to punish the murderers?
It’s crap. They’re just afraid of alienating women voters even more than they already have.
R. Maheras
January 21, 2013 - 8:51 am
May I remind you that I’m not a member of the GOP, and never have been.
Regarding abortion, I find it interesting you appear to be viewing it in terms of potential punishment, rather than morality. If that’s the case, that’s pretty damn sad.
By the way, i’m writing this as I sit on the ground in the Capital Mall awaiting the 57th presidential inauguration. That’s pretty damn cool!
George Haberberger
January 21, 2013 - 9:55 am
First of all, I cannot speak for R. Maheras. He may have a different opinion about the penalty for abortion.
But first, this: If I am understanding Rene correctly, unless the Pro-Life movement has a tidy consistent solution to every conceivable problem involved with ending abortion on demand, we are hypocrites and disingenuous. I must assume then, that Rene would have opposed the ratification of the 13th amendment that ended slavery in the United States. It said: “Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
Nothing in the amendment mentions where the newly freed slaves would live, how they would find work or support themselves, how they would be educated or that they would be able to vote. Should those oversights been reason to oppose the amendment? No, of course not. Ending slavery was the primary objective. The other concerns had to be addressed later and are still being addressed.
So if punishment for the newly-illegal practice of abortion would be problematic, so be it.
Besides, before Roe v Wade women were never indicted for having illegal abortions. My own position is that the abortionist would be the one arrested and subject to punishment. Stopping the abortionist could save hundreds. Imprisoning the woman who had an abortion is, in my opinion, is not practical.
I agree with this comment by Rene: “Punishing abortion is like punishing a failed suicide. The person is suffering enough already, adding a legal punishment would be redundant.”
Mike, you have fallen back on a very old canard to attempt to paint the Pro-Life faction as hypocrites. No one I know, and certainly not myself, who oppose abortion are pro-death penalty. Opposition to the death penalty is part of the Seamless Garment doctrine of the Catholic Church, one of the most voracious voices in the Pro-Life Movement.”
“Yep. And people look at be odd when I snicker every time I hear the phrase “pro-life.”
And I lament whenever I hear the term “pro-choice”, because every choice that the child may have wanted to make, from the trivial to the profound has been taken from them.
Doug Abramson
January 21, 2013 - 10:27 am
George,
The Catholic Church might be consistent in being against abortion and the death penalty, and more power to them; a great deal of the evangelicals in the country are very much in favor of the death penalty, while being anti-abortion. While the Catholic Church might be one of the most voracious voiced in the anti-abortion movement, in a great deal of the country, these evangelical are the loudest and drive the movement.
Doug Abramson
January 21, 2013 - 10:28 am
Not that abortion has crap to do with Jackie Robinson.
Rene
January 21, 2013 - 10:47 am
George,
Note that my rant was not against everybody that thinks abortion should be restricted. I was just pissed off about people who equate abortion to murder. Because, if it IS murder, then you should punish them the same as murders, correct?
Or is abortion some special kind of murder that deserves less punishment?
It’s not the same with slavery, because as far as I know, if you keep someone working for you against their will, you WILL face prosecution.
Rene
January 21, 2013 - 11:04 am
Russ,
There is little to discuss regarding the morality of abortion, since you believe abortion is evil, and I also believe abortion is evil.
The only point of disagreement seems to be about whether abortion should be legal.
Neil C.
January 21, 2013 - 2:17 pm
Doug,
Don’t you know abortion has to do with EVERYTHING?
George Haberberger
January 21, 2013 - 3:29 pm
Well, actually it does, but I did not bring it up on this thread.
MOTU
January 21, 2013 - 3:46 pm
Hey,
Jackie Robinson!
R. Maheras
January 21, 2013 - 4:28 pm
Can’t wait to read it!
MOTU
January 21, 2013 - 4:38 pm
FUnny you should mention that, Chapter 5 is called: R Maheras couldn’t wait to read this!
R. Maheras
January 21, 2013 - 6:44 pm
On top of everything else, you are a psychic master as well. You humble me, sir!
Neil C.
January 21, 2013 - 6:45 pm
Last baseball comic book I remember was a Mickey Mantle one years ago,
MOTU
January 21, 2013 - 9:15 pm
Neil,
it’s less a book about baseball than it is about the man who played baseball.