Fenway Park: 5 new books about the beloved ballpark

5 new books to check out about the fabled stadium

5. 'Fenway Park: The Centennial – 100 Years of Red Sox Baseball,' by Saul Wisnia

Among the books featured here, this is the slap-hitting batter of the group. It  succeeds in rapping out a steady, if unspectacular, succession of singles.  The relatively thin volume of 176 pages gives short shrift to Fenway’s nonbaseball history, preferring to concentrate on the trials and tribulations of the park’s diamond denizens. This is a straight-ahead history, accompanied by a DVD documentary hosted by Carlton Fisk, a New Hampshire native who spent the first 11 seasons of his 24-year Hall of Fame career catching for the Red Sox. Saul Wisnia, the book’s author, was born just blocks from Fenway, has written numerous articles on baseball for newspapers, magazines, and books, and still only lives miles from New England’s hardball mecca. Wisnia manages to touch all the high and low points, while also weaving in countless details that provide the sort of “aha” discovery moments that serious fans relish.  Among them:

--The ballpark’s short left-field wall, necessitated by the tight urban landscape, was a nonfactor when built during baseball’s Dead Ball Era. With the introduction of livelier baseballs, however, the wall became an alluring target for batters and a threatening presence for pitchers.

--Journeyman Boston hurler Dave Morehead pitched a no-hitter on Sept. 16, 1965 that was only witnessed by 1,247 Fenway spectators.  Morehead bobbled the ball on one fielding play, but recovered quickly enough to keep his no-hitter alive.

--Struggling mightily to attract fans, the Boston Braves reportedly sought to move out of their less appealing ballpark and share Fenway with the Red Sox in the early 1950s only to be turned down by Red Sox owner Tom Yawkey. As a result, the Braves moved to Milwaukee in 1953. The irony here is that when the Red Sox won the 1915 and 1916 World Series, they were allowed to move their home games from Fenway to Braves Field to take advantage of its far-larger seating capacity. More ticket revenues meant larger bonuses for the players. Of course, this was long before Yawkey bought the Red Sox in 1933, so he had no reason to feel he owed the Braves anything.

5 of 5

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.