Howard W. Rosenberg
Published: 2018-05-08
Total Pages: 554
Get eBook
Was or was not Ty Cobb a racist? For three years, there has been an unresolved standoff between two 2015 biographies of the Hall of Fame player. One of the two, as of March 2018, was in the top 25 of baseball bestsellers on Amazon.com: the paperback version of Charles Leerhsen's Ty Cobb: A Terrible Beauty (Simon & Schuster). That book has been publicized well. A five-minute video that Leerhsen commissioned for 2017, as an exclusive to the Web site of conservative commentator Dennis Prager (https://www.prageru.com/videos/calling-good-people-racist-isnt-new-case-ty-cobb), has had around 3.5 million views, according to the link above. Although the paperback edition was issued in early 2016, the conservative news Web site the Federalist named it one of its notable books of 2017 (http://thefederalist.com/2017/12/15/the-federalists-notable-books-of-2017/). The other 2015 Cobb biography is Tim Hornbaker's War on the Basepaths: The Definitive Biography of Ty Cobb (Sports Publishing). One major subsequent try has been made to weigh in on Cobb and his alleged racism: Steven Elliott Tripp's 2016 Ty Cobb, Baseball, and American Manhood: A Red-Blooded Sport for Red-Blooded Men (Rowman & Littlefield). Tripp's book, while a worthy scholarly work, did not explicitly try to reconcile Leerhsen and Hornbaker. Howard W. Rosenberg is the definitive biographer of 19th-century Hall of Famer Cap Anson. That includes being the horse's mouth on Anson's racism (https://howardwrosenberg.atavist.com/racism-bbhistory), especially its alleged impact on the drawing of the sport's "color line" in the 19th century. In Ty Cobb Unleashed, he applies a similar comprehensive approach to Cobb, who is considered among whites the most disliked star white player of pre-steroid times. For weighing in on the two 2015 books, an effort that also includes redoing big parts of the Cobb story, Ty Cobb Unleashed may be among the most impactful baseball books in recent memory. Most previous books are not worth revisiting with the closest of scrutiny. But the two Cobb ones no doubt are, especially because, in media coverage, Leerhsen's more revisionist one has so dominated the other.