What do you think?
Rate this book
On Boxing
A reissue of bestselling, award-winning author Joyce Carol Oates' classic collection of essays on boxing.
304 pages, Paperback
First published February 20, 1987
119 people are currently reading
2478 people want to read
About the author
Joyce Carol Oates
922 books9,364 followersJoyce Carol Oates is an American writer. Oates published her first book in 1963, and has since published 58 novels, a number of plays and novellas, and many volumes of short stories, poetry, and nonfiction. Her novels Black Water (1992), What I Lived For (1994), and Blonde (2000), and her short story collections The Wheel of Love (1970) and Lovely, Dark, Deep: Stories (2014) were each finalists for the Pulitzer Prize. She has won many awards for her writing, including the National Book Award, for her novel Them (1969), two O. Henry Awards, the National Humanities Medal, and the Jerusalem Prize (2019).
Oates taught at Princeton University from 1978 to 2014, and is the Roger S. Berlind '52 Professor Emerita in the Humanities with the Program in Creative Writing. From 2016 to 2020, she was a visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley, where she taught short fiction in the spring semesters. She now teaches at Rutgers University, New Brunswick.
Oates was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 2016.
Pseudonyms: Rosamond Smith and Lauren Kelly.
Oates taught at Princeton University from 1978 to 2014, and is the Roger S. Berlind '52 Professor Emerita in the Humanities with the Program in Creative Writing. From 2016 to 2020, she was a visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley, where she taught short fiction in the spring semesters. She now teaches at Rutgers University, New Brunswick.
Oates was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 2016.
Pseudonyms: Rosamond Smith and Lauren Kelly.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 170 reviews
July 11, 2024
FLOAT LIKE A BUTTERFLY, STING LIKE A BEE
Mohamed Ali vola come una farfalla e punge come una vespa nell’incontro con George Foreman del 30 ottobre 1974 a Kinshasa, detto anche “The Rumble in the Jungle”. Quella sera Ali dimostrò al mondo che era ancora e per sempre “il più grande”, si riprese titolo e corona di cui era stato depredato sette anni prima.
La boxe si configura come l'immagine di un mondo in cui si è responsabili, dal punto di vista umano, non solo delle proprie azioni ma anche di quelle dirette contro di noi.
E se questo fosse il miglior libro sulla boxe, scritto da una donna e dedicato allo sport maschile per eccellenza (non più!)?!
Io che insieme ai miei fratelli e a mio papà (le donne di casa invece dormivano) ho seguito la radiocronaca (di Paolo Valenti) dal Madison Square Garden di New York nel 1967, in piena notte per la differenza di fuso orario: la sfida mondiale dei pesi medi tra Nino Benvenuti ed Emile Griffith, con il memorabile trionfo del pugile italiano.
Io che sono cresciuto con Cassius Clay, poi diventato Mohamed Ali, ho goduto per le sue vittorie, ho sofferto quando gli strapparono via il titolo a causa del suo rifiuto di andare a combattere in Vietnam, ho sofferto di nuovo quella notte a Kinshasa che all’epoca, 30 ottobre 1974, era la capitale dello Zaire, non del Congo, e mi sento orfano da quando lui se ne è andato, ma Ali si librava come una farfalla e pungeva come un’ape, e quella sera si riportò a casa quello che era suo, il mondiale dei pesi massimi.
Io che, io ho goduto molto questo libro.
Will Smith interpreta Mohamed Ali nel film “Ali” di Michael Mann, 2001.
Joyce Carol fu portata dal padre a vedere un incontro di boxe a Buffalo quando era ancora ragazzina, negli anni Cinquanta, e fu amore a prima vista.
E per Joyce Carol la boxe non è solo divertimento, non è divertimento in senso stretto – e non è uno sport nella sua unica accezione.
La boxe è una metafora della vita.
O meglio, lei mi corregge: la vita è forse una metafora della boxe, la vita è come la boxe per molti e sconcertanti aspetti. La boxe però è soltanto come la boxe.
Denzel Washington e il regista Norman Jewison sul set del film “The Hurricane – Hurricane, Il grido dell’innocenza”, 1999.
Io ho letto questi saggi nell’edizione del 1988 delle Edizioni e/o.
Ora sono ripubblicati, con una nuova traduzione, e quattro saggi per noi inediti, da 66thand2nd.
Oates descrive e racconta alcuni match storici, come quello tra Joe Louis e Max Schmeling nel 1938 quando il pugile nero sconfisse quello bianco che era il campione di Hitler nelle Olimpiadi ospitate a Berlino durante il nazismo.
Come quello cui accennavo sopra, Ali-Foreman nel 1974.
Ma risale anche più indietro ripercorrendo i ‘giochi’ gladiatori dell’antica Roma, il pugilato a mani nude praticato in Inghilterra sin dal Settecento, i combattimenti tra schiavi neri durante la Secessione (Django Unchained docet).
Robert DeNiro è Jake La Motta in “Raging Bull – Toro scatenato” di Marin Scorsese, 1980. De Niro vinse l’Oscar come miglior attore.
1967, Muhammad Ali:
La mia coscienza non mi permette di andare a sparare a mio fratello o a qualche altra persona con la pelle più scura, o a gente povera e affamata nel fango per la grande e potente America. E sparargli per cosa? Non mi hanno mai chiamato negro, non mi hanno mai linciato, non mi hanno mai attaccato con i cani, non mi hanno mai privato della mia nazionalità, stuprato o ucciso mia madre e mio padre. Sparargli per cosa? Come posso sparare a quelle povere persone? Allora portatemi in galera.
E poi diretto ai giornalisti e al pubblico di persone bianche:
Siete voi il mio nemico, il mio nemico è la gente bianca, non i Vietcong i cinesi o i giapponesi. Voi siete i miei oppositori se voglio la libertà, siete voi i miei oppositori se voglio giustizia. Siete voi i miei oppositori se voglio uguaglianza. Voi non mi sosterrete mai in America per il mio credo religioso. E volete che vada da qualche parte e combattere. Ma difenderete mai voi me qui a casa?
https://video.repubblica.it/dossier/a...
Clint Eastwood e Hilary Swank in “Million Dollar Baby”. Il film ha vinto quattro Oscar: lei come migliore attrice, lui come miglior regista e per il miglior film, e poi quello per il migliore interprete maschile non protagonista a Morgan Freeman.
Mohamed Ali vola come una farfalla e punge come una vespa nell’incontro con George Foreman del 30 ottobre 1974 a Kinshasa, detto anche “The Rumble in the Jungle”. Quella sera Ali dimostrò al mondo che era ancora e per sempre “il più grande”, si riprese titolo e corona di cui era stato depredato sette anni prima.
La boxe si configura come l'immagine di un mondo in cui si è responsabili, dal punto di vista umano, non solo delle proprie azioni ma anche di quelle dirette contro di noi.
E se questo fosse il miglior libro sulla boxe, scritto da una donna e dedicato allo sport maschile per eccellenza (non più!)?!
Io che insieme ai miei fratelli e a mio papà (le donne di casa invece dormivano) ho seguito la radiocronaca (di Paolo Valenti) dal Madison Square Garden di New York nel 1967, in piena notte per la differenza di fuso orario: la sfida mondiale dei pesi medi tra Nino Benvenuti ed Emile Griffith, con il memorabile trionfo del pugile italiano.
Io che sono cresciuto con Cassius Clay, poi diventato Mohamed Ali, ho goduto per le sue vittorie, ho sofferto quando gli strapparono via il titolo a causa del suo rifiuto di andare a combattere in Vietnam, ho sofferto di nuovo quella notte a Kinshasa che all’epoca, 30 ottobre 1974, era la capitale dello Zaire, non del Congo, e mi sento orfano da quando lui se ne è andato, ma Ali si librava come una farfalla e pungeva come un’ape, e quella sera si riportò a casa quello che era suo, il mondiale dei pesi massimi.
Io che, io ho goduto molto questo libro.
Will Smith interpreta Mohamed Ali nel film “Ali” di Michael Mann, 2001.
Joyce Carol fu portata dal padre a vedere un incontro di boxe a Buffalo quando era ancora ragazzina, negli anni Cinquanta, e fu amore a prima vista.
E per Joyce Carol la boxe non è solo divertimento, non è divertimento in senso stretto – e non è uno sport nella sua unica accezione.
La boxe è una metafora della vita.
O meglio, lei mi corregge: la vita è forse una metafora della boxe, la vita è come la boxe per molti e sconcertanti aspetti. La boxe però è soltanto come la boxe.
Denzel Washington e il regista Norman Jewison sul set del film “The Hurricane – Hurricane, Il grido dell’innocenza”, 1999.
Io ho letto questi saggi nell’edizione del 1988 delle Edizioni e/o.
Ora sono ripubblicati, con una nuova traduzione, e quattro saggi per noi inediti, da 66thand2nd.
Oates descrive e racconta alcuni match storici, come quello tra Joe Louis e Max Schmeling nel 1938 quando il pugile nero sconfisse quello bianco che era il campione di Hitler nelle Olimpiadi ospitate a Berlino durante il nazismo.
Come quello cui accennavo sopra, Ali-Foreman nel 1974.
Ma risale anche più indietro ripercorrendo i ‘giochi’ gladiatori dell’antica Roma, il pugilato a mani nude praticato in Inghilterra sin dal Settecento, i combattimenti tra schiavi neri durante la Secessione (Django Unchained docet).
Robert DeNiro è Jake La Motta in “Raging Bull – Toro scatenato” di Marin Scorsese, 1980. De Niro vinse l’Oscar come miglior attore.
1967, Muhammad Ali:
La mia coscienza non mi permette di andare a sparare a mio fratello o a qualche altra persona con la pelle più scura, o a gente povera e affamata nel fango per la grande e potente America. E sparargli per cosa? Non mi hanno mai chiamato negro, non mi hanno mai linciato, non mi hanno mai attaccato con i cani, non mi hanno mai privato della mia nazionalità, stuprato o ucciso mia madre e mio padre. Sparargli per cosa? Come posso sparare a quelle povere persone? Allora portatemi in galera.
E poi diretto ai giornalisti e al pubblico di persone bianche:
Siete voi il mio nemico, il mio nemico è la gente bianca, non i Vietcong i cinesi o i giapponesi. Voi siete i miei oppositori se voglio la libertà, siete voi i miei oppositori se voglio giustizia. Siete voi i miei oppositori se voglio uguaglianza. Voi non mi sosterrete mai in America per il mio credo religioso. E volete che vada da qualche parte e combattere. Ma difenderete mai voi me qui a casa?
https://video.repubblica.it/dossier/a...
Clint Eastwood e Hilary Swank in “Million Dollar Baby”. Il film ha vinto quattro Oscar: lei come migliore attrice, lui come miglior regista e per il miglior film, e poi quello per il migliore interprete maschile non protagonista a Morgan Freeman.
October 1, 2019
No hay tema que no resulte atractivo si es abordado con una buena pluma, esto es cierto incluso para el boxeo, el más envilecido de los deportes, para muchos ni siquiera merecedor de ser ubicado en esta categoría. Si el abordaje del asunto trasciende lo meramente descriptivo y se convierte en un ejercicio literario y filosófico, entonces, estamos ante una inusual joya. Porque textos sobre boxeo existen, pero pocos son tratados con la destreza, agudeza y belleza de estilo que le imprime Joyce Carol Oates. Durante 180 páginas expone su amplio conocimiento sobre el arte del aporreo, dejando entrever la intensidad con la que lo ha estudiado y la pasión que le despierta. Parece que la literatura deportiva es le reducto que les queda a quienes carentes de habilidades para la práctica de un deporte y con sobradas herramientas para la escritura, canalizan sus frustrados deseos por medio de las palabras. Cortázar reconoció haber usado esta vía para la sublimación de su deseo, también lo hizo Galeano con el fútbol. Quizás con la misma motivación, Joyce nos regala esta joyita que disfruté tanto como una buena pelea. Dejo por aquí algunos fragmentos:
Los espectadores de juegos públicos extraen gran parte de su placer al recrear las emociones colectivas de la niñez, pero los espectadores de los combates de boxeo reviven la infancia homicida de la raza.
Considerado en abstracto, el cuadrilátero de boxeo es una especie de altar; uno de esos espacios legendarios donde las leyes de una nación quedan suspendidas: cuerdas adentro, en el transcurso de un asalto de tres minutos oficialmente regulado, un hombre puede morir a manos de su contrincante, pero no puede ser legalmente asesinado. El boxeo habita un espacio sagrado y depredador de la civilización; o, para emplear la frase de D.H Lawrance, antes de que Dios fuera amor. Si ello sugiere una ceremonia salvaje o un rito expiatorio, también sugiere la futilidad de tales gestos. Pues ¿qué posible expiación es el combate librado si ha de ser en breve librado otra vez… y de nuevo una vez más? El combate de boxeo es la mismísima imagen ¬–la más aterradora, por ser tan estilizada– de la agresividad colectiva de la humanidad, de su continua demencia histórica.
Así sucede cuanto más rica y avanzada es una sociedad, más fanático es su interés por cierta clase de deportes. La trayectoria de las civilizaciones hace una curva de regreso sobre sí misma –¿naturalmente? ¿inevitablemente? – como la mítica serpiente que se muerde la cola, para luego adoptar apasionadamente las señales exteriores y los gestos de salvajismo. Si bien es verosímil que hombres y mujeres decadentes necesiten experiencias cada vez más extremas para excitarse, tal vez sea cierto también que el deseo no consiste tan solo en imitar asimismo, mágicamente, en ser brutal, primitivo, instintivo, y por lo tanto inocente. Entonces resulta posible ser una persona para quien la contienda no sea un simple juego de autodestrucción sino la vida misma, y que el mundo no esté en una decadencia espectacular e irrevocable, sino que sea nuevo, fresco, vital, pendularmente aterrador e hilarante, un lugar de prodigios. Es el ser ancestral y perdido lo que se busca, por vanos que sean los medios. Como esos residuos de sueños de la niñez, que año tras año continúan eludiéndonos sin ser nunca abandonados, y mucho menos despreciados.
No hay deporte más físico. Más directo que el boxeo. Ningún deporte despliega tan poderoso homoerotismo: la confrontación en el cuadrilátero –desnudarse– el combate acalorado y sudoroso que es en parte danza, cortejo, apareamiento … la persecución frecuente, urgente de un boxeador al otro en el violento y natural movimiento de combate hacia el knocout: sin duda gran parte del atractivo del boxeo deriva de su imitación de una especie de amor erótico en el que un hombre se impone al otro en una exhibición de fuerza y voluntad superiores.
El tiempo, al igual que la posibilidad de muerte, es el adversario invisible del cual los boxeadores son profunda¬mente conscientes. Cuando un boxeador es noqueado no significa que haya quedado sin sentido o incluso incapaci¬tado; significa, más poéticamente, que ha sido sacado del tiempo.
Cada combate de boxeo es una historia: un drama sin palabras, único y sumamente condesado. Incluso cuando no sucede nada sensacional: entonces el drama es meramente psicológico. Los boxeadores están ahí para establecer una experiencia absoluta, una pública rendición de cuentas de los límites máximos de su ser; ellos saben, como pocos podríamos saber de nosotros mismos, que poder físico y psíquico poseen: de cuánto son capaces. Entrar al ring medio desnudo y para arriesgar la propia vida es hacer de su público una especie de voyeur… el boxeo es tan íntimo. Es salirse de la conciencia de la cordura para entrar en otra, difícil de nombrar. Es arriesgarse, y a veces alcanzar, la agonía (del griego agón, contienda) de la cual es raíz.
Los espectadores de juegos públicos extraen gran parte de su placer al recrear las emociones colectivas de la niñez, pero los espectadores de los combates de boxeo reviven la infancia homicida de la raza.
Considerado en abstracto, el cuadrilátero de boxeo es una especie de altar; uno de esos espacios legendarios donde las leyes de una nación quedan suspendidas: cuerdas adentro, en el transcurso de un asalto de tres minutos oficialmente regulado, un hombre puede morir a manos de su contrincante, pero no puede ser legalmente asesinado. El boxeo habita un espacio sagrado y depredador de la civilización; o, para emplear la frase de D.H Lawrance, antes de que Dios fuera amor. Si ello sugiere una ceremonia salvaje o un rito expiatorio, también sugiere la futilidad de tales gestos. Pues ¿qué posible expiación es el combate librado si ha de ser en breve librado otra vez… y de nuevo una vez más? El combate de boxeo es la mismísima imagen ¬–la más aterradora, por ser tan estilizada– de la agresividad colectiva de la humanidad, de su continua demencia histórica.
Así sucede cuanto más rica y avanzada es una sociedad, más fanático es su interés por cierta clase de deportes. La trayectoria de las civilizaciones hace una curva de regreso sobre sí misma –¿naturalmente? ¿inevitablemente? – como la mítica serpiente que se muerde la cola, para luego adoptar apasionadamente las señales exteriores y los gestos de salvajismo. Si bien es verosímil que hombres y mujeres decadentes necesiten experiencias cada vez más extremas para excitarse, tal vez sea cierto también que el deseo no consiste tan solo en imitar asimismo, mágicamente, en ser brutal, primitivo, instintivo, y por lo tanto inocente. Entonces resulta posible ser una persona para quien la contienda no sea un simple juego de autodestrucción sino la vida misma, y que el mundo no esté en una decadencia espectacular e irrevocable, sino que sea nuevo, fresco, vital, pendularmente aterrador e hilarante, un lugar de prodigios. Es el ser ancestral y perdido lo que se busca, por vanos que sean los medios. Como esos residuos de sueños de la niñez, que año tras año continúan eludiéndonos sin ser nunca abandonados, y mucho menos despreciados.
No hay deporte más físico. Más directo que el boxeo. Ningún deporte despliega tan poderoso homoerotismo: la confrontación en el cuadrilátero –desnudarse– el combate acalorado y sudoroso que es en parte danza, cortejo, apareamiento … la persecución frecuente, urgente de un boxeador al otro en el violento y natural movimiento de combate hacia el knocout: sin duda gran parte del atractivo del boxeo deriva de su imitación de una especie de amor erótico en el que un hombre se impone al otro en una exhibición de fuerza y voluntad superiores.
El tiempo, al igual que la posibilidad de muerte, es el adversario invisible del cual los boxeadores son profunda¬mente conscientes. Cuando un boxeador es noqueado no significa que haya quedado sin sentido o incluso incapaci¬tado; significa, más poéticamente, que ha sido sacado del tiempo.
Cada combate de boxeo es una historia: un drama sin palabras, único y sumamente condesado. Incluso cuando no sucede nada sensacional: entonces el drama es meramente psicológico. Los boxeadores están ahí para establecer una experiencia absoluta, una pública rendición de cuentas de los límites máximos de su ser; ellos saben, como pocos podríamos saber de nosotros mismos, que poder físico y psíquico poseen: de cuánto son capaces. Entrar al ring medio desnudo y para arriesgar la propia vida es hacer de su público una especie de voyeur… el boxeo es tan íntimo. Es salirse de la conciencia de la cordura para entrar en otra, difícil de nombrar. Es arriesgarse, y a veces alcanzar, la agonía (del griego agón, contienda) de la cual es raíz.
December 27, 2011
I am really pissed off, because I spent a long time writing a whole long review of this book but then this fucking website just spontaneously erased it.
But whatever. It wasn't a great review by any means. I'll just write another, similarly mediocre one.
Being as I'm a lady boxing enthusiast who likes to read books, for years I've been vaguely embarrassed about not having ever got around to this. Now I finally have, and I'm not sure how to rate it -- there was stuff I really liked in here, but by the end the essays had become so redundant and uninteresting that I felt my patience and good graces had been tried. Also, while I really enjoyed the On Boxing essay (and the Tyson piece, though in some senses it hasn't aged well and has become much more a historical artifact than an essay in its own right... not that there's anything wrong with that), I did feel it was a bit overwrought and repetitive. Joyce Carol Oates is no Joan Didion; she is not cool, she is not measured, and she doesn't care to be, but personally that might be more my preference (not that it's fair to bring up Joan Didion, but boxing kind of seems like something she'd write about, though to my knowledge she hasn't).
In some respects, I think Oates did nail some very crucial aspects of boxing, but in other ways I think she might be too hung up on its bloody core to the detriment of recognizing other aspects of the sport. Part of this I guess is because she's writing purely as a spectator and not as someone who has ever tried to box herself, and so I think the impulse that makes people want to do it remains very alien -- and thus, glamorized, exoticized, and covered in gore -- to her. I myself am training to box, and though I haven't had any fights yet, I hope to at some point. Yet I'm not black, male, or from the inner city, and while I can relate to some of what Oates says about boxing, I think she leaves out a lot of stuff that is there and is part of the allure of the sport for people. Of course, I'm never going to be heavyweight champion of the world, or even anywhere near the professional level, so she's not really talking about me and it doesn't matter if she ignores things that are relevant to my experience... Still, though. I think she just sees certain parts of boxing, and to me those parts started to make the whole thing sound a little histrionic or at least myopic at times.
All this is not to say though that there wasn't some great stuff in here, because there totally was. Early on, she denies that she can conceive of boxing as a metaphor for anything else, though she concedes that other things -- such as life -- might be a metaphor for boxing: "Life is like boxing in many unsettling respects. But boxing is only like boxing" (p. 4). That's great. I mean, it's great! Also great, the closing lines of her Tyson essay: "This is not all that boxing is, but it is boxing's secret premise: life is hard in the ring, but, there, you only get what you deserve" (p. 180). There is plenty of other great stuff in here, really, and if you like boxing you would like it, though if you don't, you probably wouldn't... Aw man, I don't know... now that I'm flipping through, I gotta say, I did like this book. She has gathered some wonderful quotations and she really writes about her subject with a profound enthusiasm and knowledge that is a lot of fun to read. Plus, it is so rad that she is a chick and a boxing fan!
Still, putting in all these very redundant essays that actually repeat some of the exact same material seemed very lazy, and many of her points were really not strong or interesting enough to withstand that kind of repetition. In short, this guy wrote much better review of this book than I have, and basically I just agree with everything he said.
Still don't know how to rate this, though I'm REALLY PROUD OF MYSELF for writing this whole review without using one SINGLE boxing metaphor! Amazing. Kind of a miracle, really.
But whatever. It wasn't a great review by any means. I'll just write another, similarly mediocre one.
Being as I'm a lady boxing enthusiast who likes to read books, for years I've been vaguely embarrassed about not having ever got around to this. Now I finally have, and I'm not sure how to rate it -- there was stuff I really liked in here, but by the end the essays had become so redundant and uninteresting that I felt my patience and good graces had been tried. Also, while I really enjoyed the On Boxing essay (and the Tyson piece, though in some senses it hasn't aged well and has become much more a historical artifact than an essay in its own right... not that there's anything wrong with that), I did feel it was a bit overwrought and repetitive. Joyce Carol Oates is no Joan Didion; she is not cool, she is not measured, and she doesn't care to be, but personally that might be more my preference (not that it's fair to bring up Joan Didion, but boxing kind of seems like something she'd write about, though to my knowledge she hasn't).
In some respects, I think Oates did nail some very crucial aspects of boxing, but in other ways I think she might be too hung up on its bloody core to the detriment of recognizing other aspects of the sport. Part of this I guess is because she's writing purely as a spectator and not as someone who has ever tried to box herself, and so I think the impulse that makes people want to do it remains very alien -- and thus, glamorized, exoticized, and covered in gore -- to her. I myself am training to box, and though I haven't had any fights yet, I hope to at some point. Yet I'm not black, male, or from the inner city, and while I can relate to some of what Oates says about boxing, I think she leaves out a lot of stuff that is there and is part of the allure of the sport for people. Of course, I'm never going to be heavyweight champion of the world, or even anywhere near the professional level, so she's not really talking about me and it doesn't matter if she ignores things that are relevant to my experience... Still, though. I think she just sees certain parts of boxing, and to me those parts started to make the whole thing sound a little histrionic or at least myopic at times.
All this is not to say though that there wasn't some great stuff in here, because there totally was. Early on, she denies that she can conceive of boxing as a metaphor for anything else, though she concedes that other things -- such as life -- might be a metaphor for boxing: "Life is like boxing in many unsettling respects. But boxing is only like boxing" (p. 4). That's great. I mean, it's great! Also great, the closing lines of her Tyson essay: "This is not all that boxing is, but it is boxing's secret premise: life is hard in the ring, but, there, you only get what you deserve" (p. 180). There is plenty of other great stuff in here, really, and if you like boxing you would like it, though if you don't, you probably wouldn't... Aw man, I don't know... now that I'm flipping through, I gotta say, I did like this book. She has gathered some wonderful quotations and she really writes about her subject with a profound enthusiasm and knowledge that is a lot of fun to read. Plus, it is so rad that she is a chick and a boxing fan!
Still, putting in all these very redundant essays that actually repeat some of the exact same material seemed very lazy, and many of her points were really not strong or interesting enough to withstand that kind of repetition. In short, this guy wrote much better review of this book than I have, and basically I just agree with everything he said.
Still don't know how to rate this, though I'm REALLY PROUD OF MYSELF for writing this whole review without using one SINGLE boxing metaphor! Amazing. Kind of a miracle, really.
December 29, 2008
The first half of this book is outstanding. In a lengthy essay, Oates ruminates on boxing from a number of fascinating angles, discussing issues including idealized masculinity, the appeal of violence, the draw of the sport on writers, and the experience of being a true "other" watching a boxing match. While she sometimes seems to be making overbroad generalizations, even when she swings and misses this is a hugely entertaining and interesting impressionistic take on boxing.
The next portion, a relatively lengthy essay on Mike Tyson is similarly strong. Oates meets Tyson near his (today almost unimaginably high) peak, interviews him, watches tape of his fights, and draws a flattering, though not sugar coated, portrait of a troubled boy who became a genius in the ring. Because of the wealth of negative press coverage concerning Tyson in the past decade (most of which, in fairness, he brought upon himself due to criminal conduct, irrational behavior, and lackluster boxing), it's hard to remember just what a phenomenon he was. I think this section, in which Oates senses the intelligence in the man, and his understanding of his role as an entertainer, a modern gladiator, as well as his historical context, would have made a fine full length book.
However, at the end of this essay, the book starts to come unraveled. The structure of the book (a collection of previously published essays) is part of the problem -- there is a huge amount of repetition from section to section (full quotes and accounts of events are copied and pasted wholesale from one section to the next), and even within each essay. The entire book could do with editing to improve its flow. For example, I'm not sure why the phrase "sui generis" (clearly one of Oates' crutches) has to be used about 6 times in the space of 10 pages.
Oates follows with a lackluster analysis of Muhammad Ali, which for a relatively informed reader brings little new to the table. Oates' profile fails to capture what made Ali so truly unique and special and instead relies on well known anecdotes about the man.
Her section on Jack Johnson is enlightening and makes me want to pick up Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson. Johnson was Ali decades before the latter man was born, and he remains one of the most captivating and controversial figures in sports history.
Finally, Oates includes a review of Beyond Glory, the chronicle of the climatic second fight between Joe Lewis and Max Scheling. Having read Beyond Glory, I can highly recommend it, and I don't think Oates' review adds much of consequence to the subject.
I wanted to love this book, and I did for the first 180 pages, but the patchwork style of the essays and laziness of the editing, as well as the lack of true insight into events and fighters better covered by more significant books make this a three star review.
The next portion, a relatively lengthy essay on Mike Tyson is similarly strong. Oates meets Tyson near his (today almost unimaginably high) peak, interviews him, watches tape of his fights, and draws a flattering, though not sugar coated, portrait of a troubled boy who became a genius in the ring. Because of the wealth of negative press coverage concerning Tyson in the past decade (most of which, in fairness, he brought upon himself due to criminal conduct, irrational behavior, and lackluster boxing), it's hard to remember just what a phenomenon he was. I think this section, in which Oates senses the intelligence in the man, and his understanding of his role as an entertainer, a modern gladiator, as well as his historical context, would have made a fine full length book.
However, at the end of this essay, the book starts to come unraveled. The structure of the book (a collection of previously published essays) is part of the problem -- there is a huge amount of repetition from section to section (full quotes and accounts of events are copied and pasted wholesale from one section to the next), and even within each essay. The entire book could do with editing to improve its flow. For example, I'm not sure why the phrase "sui generis" (clearly one of Oates' crutches) has to be used about 6 times in the space of 10 pages.
Oates follows with a lackluster analysis of Muhammad Ali, which for a relatively informed reader brings little new to the table. Oates' profile fails to capture what made Ali so truly unique and special and instead relies on well known anecdotes about the man.
Her section on Jack Johnson is enlightening and makes me want to pick up Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson. Johnson was Ali decades before the latter man was born, and he remains one of the most captivating and controversial figures in sports history.
Finally, Oates includes a review of Beyond Glory, the chronicle of the climatic second fight between Joe Lewis and Max Scheling. Having read Beyond Glory, I can highly recommend it, and I don't think Oates' review adds much of consequence to the subject.
I wanted to love this book, and I did for the first 180 pages, but the patchwork style of the essays and laziness of the editing, as well as the lack of true insight into events and fighters better covered by more significant books make this a three star review.
March 13, 2017
Me he visto obligado a dar 4 estrellas a este libro porque es un gran ensayo. La autora compone una obra en la que toca todos los puntos (del boxeo profesional americano) desde dos ópticas: entrando de lleno como aficionada acérrima a este deporte y por momentos elevándose hasta captar el resto de la fotografía, lo que ven los detractores. No intenta convencer a nadie, sólo habla de lo que sabe (y evidentemente sabe mucho). Es un libro que puede gustar a todo el mundo en mayor o menor grado a pesar del abuso de datos históricos y estadísticos.
Sin embargo he echado en falta muchas cosas:
Está escrito a finales de los ochenta y se centra en el boxeo profesional americano, y eso me parece insuficiente para hacer un retrato global de este deporte. No habla del boxeo amateur salvo de pasada, ignorando escuelas como la cubana, tan influyentes en la evolución técnica del deporte (y la absoluta importancia de esta modalidad para los regímenes en otro tiempo comunistas). No habla del boxeo europeo (salvo comentarios sobre boxeadores ingleses), ni del latinoamericano más que para nombrar a boxeadores ineludibles como ''Mano de Piedra''Durán.
Establece sus prioridades en calidad pugilística sin hacer un leve esbozo siquiera de porqué prefiere un tipo de boxeadores a otros.
Aunque menciona los dos combates más importantes de la historia, que no los mejores a pesar de la manera en que nos los han vendido (Alí-Foreman y Johnson-Jeffries), no explica ni de lejos la importancia social de los mismos en el terreno de la lucha por los derechos civiles y contra el racismo.
Aunque habla del cambio de normativas en favor de la protección física de los púgiles, no llega a imaginarse el punto en que el boxeo actual contradice dos de sus premisas iniciales sobre el la evolución física en función de la edad y la facilidad, cada vez mayor, de cambiar de peso de los boxeadores hoy en día (mérito de las ciencia deportiva general).
Volviendo al inicio de mi reseña y para que quede claro, el libro me ha gustado, pero no es una obra total. Claro que la obra que a mi me habría gustado encontrarme podría haber llegado a 500 páginas en vez de quedarse en este centenar...
Sin embargo he echado en falta muchas cosas:
Está escrito a finales de los ochenta y se centra en el boxeo profesional americano, y eso me parece insuficiente para hacer un retrato global de este deporte. No habla del boxeo amateur salvo de pasada, ignorando escuelas como la cubana, tan influyentes en la evolución técnica del deporte (y la absoluta importancia de esta modalidad para los regímenes en otro tiempo comunistas). No habla del boxeo europeo (salvo comentarios sobre boxeadores ingleses), ni del latinoamericano más que para nombrar a boxeadores ineludibles como ''Mano de Piedra''Durán.
Establece sus prioridades en calidad pugilística sin hacer un leve esbozo siquiera de porqué prefiere un tipo de boxeadores a otros.
Aunque menciona los dos combates más importantes de la historia, que no los mejores a pesar de la manera en que nos los han vendido (Alí-Foreman y Johnson-Jeffries), no explica ni de lejos la importancia social de los mismos en el terreno de la lucha por los derechos civiles y contra el racismo.
Aunque habla del cambio de normativas en favor de la protección física de los púgiles, no llega a imaginarse el punto en que el boxeo actual contradice dos de sus premisas iniciales sobre el la evolución física en función de la edad y la facilidad, cada vez mayor, de cambiar de peso de los boxeadores hoy en día (mérito de las ciencia deportiva general).
Volviendo al inicio de mi reseña y para que quede claro, el libro me ha gustado, pero no es una obra total. Claro que la obra que a mi me habría gustado encontrarme podría haber llegado a 500 páginas en vez de quedarse en este centenar...
May 23, 2017
ON BOXING is a collection of Oates' essays on the subject of boxing. I did not enjoy it. The title essay, ON BOXING, is the longest piece included in this collection and dominates the book. My principal criticism is that it is not purposeful. Oates offers a good deal of psychological musing on the motives of fighters and fight fans, but not to any end that I could discern.
She is a fine writer. So the prose is crisp and her grasp of the sport is credible. But there is no message. No moral. And in all of sport, boxing is the one we look to most often for its moral teachings. That Oates offers us none is a disappointment.
Oates also overdoes the psychology. Here is an example where she compares modern boxing to gladiatorial Rome: "So it happens that the wealthier and more advanced a society, the more fanatic its interest in certain kinds of sport. Civilization's trajectory is to curve back upon itself -- naturally? helplessly? -- like the mythical snake biting its own tail and to take up with passion the outward signs and gestures of "savagery." While it is plausible that emotionally effete men and women may require ever more extreme experiences to arouse them, it is perhaps the case too that the desire is not merely to mimic but, magically, to be brute, primitive, instinctive, and therefore innocent."
I can make sense of the foregoing, but who knows if she is right? It's just idle assertion. She makes no serious effort to back it up with evidence or a reasoned argument. That is unforgivable in an essay of this character. Without argument, an essay does not engage us and there is no joy in it for the reader.
ON BOXING is highly regarded by many people. I respectfully dissent.
She is a fine writer. So the prose is crisp and her grasp of the sport is credible. But there is no message. No moral. And in all of sport, boxing is the one we look to most often for its moral teachings. That Oates offers us none is a disappointment.
Oates also overdoes the psychology. Here is an example where she compares modern boxing to gladiatorial Rome: "So it happens that the wealthier and more advanced a society, the more fanatic its interest in certain kinds of sport. Civilization's trajectory is to curve back upon itself -- naturally? helplessly? -- like the mythical snake biting its own tail and to take up with passion the outward signs and gestures of "savagery." While it is plausible that emotionally effete men and women may require ever more extreme experiences to arouse them, it is perhaps the case too that the desire is not merely to mimic but, magically, to be brute, primitive, instinctive, and therefore innocent."
I can make sense of the foregoing, but who knows if she is right? It's just idle assertion. She makes no serious effort to back it up with evidence or a reasoned argument. That is unforgivable in an essay of this character. Without argument, an essay does not engage us and there is no joy in it for the reader.
ON BOXING is highly regarded by many people. I respectfully dissent.
June 24, 2019
Joyce Carol Oates is one of my favorite authors (who I oddly enough haven't read that much). I thought this book was a bit too long and could certainly have been shortened. Despite this fact it was a wonderful read and Oates has a way of seeing society through the lens of language which is just... dazzling!
'On boxing' manages to take a critical view of society's changing views on what it means to be a man and what the consequences of those changes are. Manliness is one of my key interests which naturally drew me to this book.
'On boxing' manages to take a critical view of society's changing views on what it means to be a man and what the consequences of those changes are. Manliness is one of my key interests which naturally drew me to this book.
May 14, 2024
«La vida es como el boxeo en muchos e incómodos sentidos. Pero el boxeo sólo se parece al boxeo».
Creo que esta frase define muy bien el ensayo escrito por Joyce Carol Oates. Podemos encontrar muchas similitudes entre la vida y el boxeo, aplicar metáforas propias de este deporte a cualquier circunstancia que podamos vivir, pero no existe nada que se pueda imitar al boxeo. Nada.
En Del boxeo la autora resalta la singularidad de este deporte, llamando así a una disciplina que convierte un diálogo de golpes y reflejos en una especie de danza violenta que es amada y menospreciada con la misma intensidad.
Debo admitir que esperé un ensayo mas filosófico sobre la concepción del boxeo como estilo de vida, pero me encontré con un estudio minucioso sobre la importancia del boxeo en la cultura estadounidense. Por momentos la mención de datos, fechas y nombres me pareció exagerada e hicieron que la lectura se me haga un poco cuesta arriba, pero no por eso dejo de destacar el estilo de la escritora para adentrarse objetivamente en un tema que no deja de ser polémico y apasionante.
Creo que esta frase define muy bien el ensayo escrito por Joyce Carol Oates. Podemos encontrar muchas similitudes entre la vida y el boxeo, aplicar metáforas propias de este deporte a cualquier circunstancia que podamos vivir, pero no existe nada que se pueda imitar al boxeo. Nada.
En Del boxeo la autora resalta la singularidad de este deporte, llamando así a una disciplina que convierte un diálogo de golpes y reflejos en una especie de danza violenta que es amada y menospreciada con la misma intensidad.
Debo admitir que esperé un ensayo mas filosófico sobre la concepción del boxeo como estilo de vida, pero me encontré con un estudio minucioso sobre la importancia del boxeo en la cultura estadounidense. Por momentos la mención de datos, fechas y nombres me pareció exagerada e hicieron que la lectura se me haga un poco cuesta arriba, pero no por eso dejo de destacar el estilo de la escritora para adentrarse objetivamente en un tema que no deja de ser polémico y apasionante.
July 3, 2020
Aunque estoy acostumbrada a leer ensayo, debo reconocer que ‘Del boxeo’ de Joyce Carol Oates me ha sacado de mi zona de comfort. Y me ha sentado muy bien, para qué os voy a engañar.
Partiendo de un desconocimiento absoluto de mundo del boxeo, Oates ha conseguido mantenerme enganchada a lo largo de todo el libro.
Y es que la autora no se limita a describirnos este deporte (o arte), sino que eleva el discurso a casi un ejercicio moral y filosófico.
Con anécdotas de combates históricos desde principios del s.XX hasta los 80, entre figuras como Jack Johnson, Rocky Marciano, Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali, Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, Joe Frazier, etc., Oates toca todas las teclas del boxeo americano: el instinto asesino, las prohibiciones, el papel de la mujer, la raza, la pobreza, la fortaleza mental, el público, la sangre.
Pese a que la autora es una acérrima aficionada a este deporte, no intenta convencer a nadie. No maquilla la crudeza del boxeo, el peligro, la muerte.
En definitiva: no hay tema poco interesante cuando nos lo narra una buena pluma. Y punto.
Partiendo de un desconocimiento absoluto de mundo del boxeo, Oates ha conseguido mantenerme enganchada a lo largo de todo el libro.
Y es que la autora no se limita a describirnos este deporte (o arte), sino que eleva el discurso a casi un ejercicio moral y filosófico.
Con anécdotas de combates históricos desde principios del s.XX hasta los 80, entre figuras como Jack Johnson, Rocky Marciano, Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali, Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson, Joe Frazier, etc., Oates toca todas las teclas del boxeo americano: el instinto asesino, las prohibiciones, el papel de la mujer, la raza, la pobreza, la fortaleza mental, el público, la sangre.
Pese a que la autora es una acérrima aficionada a este deporte, no intenta convencer a nadie. No maquilla la crudeza del boxeo, el peligro, la muerte.
En definitiva: no hay tema poco interesante cuando nos lo narra una buena pluma. Y punto.
August 28, 2017
Reflexionar acerca de un ¿deporte?—no soy yo quien pone en duda si el boxeo es o no un deporte ya que soy una profana; es la propia autora quien dice: «el boxeo no es invariablemente brutal; y no lo considero un deporte»—, por una seguidora y una gran admiradora como es Joyce Carol Oates del pugilismo y mediante un ensayo, es algo que sorprende pero que no extraña para aquellos que hemos leído a esta escritora —en mi caso mucho menos de lo que me gustaría—. De hecho, Del boxeo es una tesis de gran ligereza escrita con una precisión abrumadora —como casi siempre—, incluso para aquellos que no entendemos la magia —para muchos—, de dos personas combatiendo encima de un cuadrilátero. La poliédrica autora lo presenta de esta manera:
«Un brillante combate de boxeo, vertiginoso en sus movimientos, en el que las cosas suceden a una velocidad mucho mayor de la que la mente es capaz de absorber, puede tener la fuerza que Emily Dickinson le atribuía a la gran poesía: sabes que es grande cuando te vuela la cabeza».
Escrito en 1987 y aderezado con imágenes de John Ranard, en Del boxeo... http://www.abrirunlibro.com/2017/08/d...
«Un brillante combate de boxeo, vertiginoso en sus movimientos, en el que las cosas suceden a una velocidad mucho mayor de la que la mente es capaz de absorber, puede tener la fuerza que Emily Dickinson le atribuía a la gran poesía: sabes que es grande cuando te vuela la cabeza».
Escrito en 1987 y aderezado con imágenes de John Ranard, en Del boxeo... http://www.abrirunlibro.com/2017/08/d...
April 9, 2022
No sé nada de boxeo. Tampoco es un deporte que siga cada tanto; de hecho, creo que he visto una o dos peleas en toda mi vida. Creo que nunca me había interesado hasta que Joyce Carol Oates dejó tremenda joya de ensayo en los anales de la literatura sobre deporte. Aquí, la escritora norteamericana se permite ahondar en una afición heredada por su padre: el boxeo, aquel deporte en el que la vida y la muerte se entrelazan en ese clinch que, entre gridos y aullidos de sus espectadores, constituiría nuestra existencia. Seamos o no afines al deporte, en el boxeo yacen respuestas y preguntas fundamentales para nuestra humana condición. Desde la cultura del espectáculo, pasando por la antropología y la filosofía, Carol Oates ahonda en el boxeo y su significación; no sólo para sí, sino para la sociedad norteamericana.
December 16, 2024
Trascendental.
April 8, 2014
This was an interesting read. I love Joyce Carol Oates. I love how she doesn't shy away from any topic. Lots of people kind of assume that the boxing world is owned by men, and that it shouldn't be of interest to women, especially female academics. Of course, Joyce Carol Oates is gonna punch right through that shit.
She always brings a unique perspective to her subject matter. She blends psychology, sociology, history, a her classic literary and poetic insights to the conceptual dichotomies in the world around us. She is amazing. I really liked this book. The first essays talk about boxing in general, what it represents to the boxer, and some of the misconceptions. She talks about a lot of different ways in which boxers relate to the sport, and what it means to them, and what boxing IS or might be.
"It is an act of consummate self-determination - the constant reestablishment of the parameters of one's being. To not only accept but to actively invite what most sane creatures avoid- pain, humiliation, loss, chaos - is to experience the present moment as already, in a sense, past"
"For, contrary to stereotyped notions, boxing is primarily about being, and not giving, hurt."
Once she has addressed the internal aspects of the sport. She delves into the history of it. It becomes a series of snapshots of racism in America, and at times, the world. I found it interesting to hear about how African American boxers oriented themselves in such hostile climates. How they basically had to choose, or were marketed toward being either black-man's boxers or white-man's boxers, and all the variance in between. Class warfare, relating to either the rich or poor, or the insiders vs the outcasts all played a role as well. The quotes from the boxers themselves were always interesting.
I particularly enjoyed the story of Joe Louis vs Max Schmeling, an American vs. a Nazi in 1938. They battled twice. I loved reading about the bouts and then watching them on YouTube. Walking through the famous fights in chronological order was intriguing. Seeing how the style of boxing changed and the way the crowd changed over time was fascinating. When you see Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) box you realize why people found him so charismatic. Here's this huge dude, floating around with this bizarre contradictory style. It gives it more perspective seeing it in its historical context.
The only negative about this book is there is a bit of overlap, since it is a collection of independently written articles. It would be great if this was a really consciously orchestrated history of boxing that gave attention to every decade equally.
Overall, a great read!
She always brings a unique perspective to her subject matter. She blends psychology, sociology, history, a her classic literary and poetic insights to the conceptual dichotomies in the world around us. She is amazing. I really liked this book. The first essays talk about boxing in general, what it represents to the boxer, and some of the misconceptions. She talks about a lot of different ways in which boxers relate to the sport, and what it means to them, and what boxing IS or might be.
"It is an act of consummate self-determination - the constant reestablishment of the parameters of one's being. To not only accept but to actively invite what most sane creatures avoid- pain, humiliation, loss, chaos - is to experience the present moment as already, in a sense, past"
"For, contrary to stereotyped notions, boxing is primarily about being, and not giving, hurt."
Once she has addressed the internal aspects of the sport. She delves into the history of it. It becomes a series of snapshots of racism in America, and at times, the world. I found it interesting to hear about how African American boxers oriented themselves in such hostile climates. How they basically had to choose, or were marketed toward being either black-man's boxers or white-man's boxers, and all the variance in between. Class warfare, relating to either the rich or poor, or the insiders vs the outcasts all played a role as well. The quotes from the boxers themselves were always interesting.
I particularly enjoyed the story of Joe Louis vs Max Schmeling, an American vs. a Nazi in 1938. They battled twice. I loved reading about the bouts and then watching them on YouTube. Walking through the famous fights in chronological order was intriguing. Seeing how the style of boxing changed and the way the crowd changed over time was fascinating. When you see Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) box you realize why people found him so charismatic. Here's this huge dude, floating around with this bizarre contradictory style. It gives it more perspective seeing it in its historical context.
The only negative about this book is there is a bit of overlap, since it is a collection of independently written articles. It would be great if this was a really consciously orchestrated history of boxing that gave attention to every decade equally.
Overall, a great read!
May 26, 2016
This is a collection of essays on boxing. Some have to do with Muhammad Ali, and more revolve around Mike Tyson. I guess these must have been written over a fairly long period of time and then collected in this book. The early essays were good and informative, but there was a lot of redundancy toward the end, and even a few places where the author seemingly contradicted things she'd said earlier. The book was also published in 1994 and there have been huge changes in the boxing landscape since then. I did enjoy most of it, though.
July 26, 2012
Recommended by Stacy Kaye - possibly my favorite book that I've ever read. It's a collection of long essays, and some material does repeat, so be prepared for that. The writing is...beyond beautiful. It's a work of art; 'non-fiction' doesn't begin to describe it. Her observations on masculinity and violence are inflammatory and thought provoking. Her writing about race, poverty, and athletes as entertainment is profound. Really excellent.
September 5, 2020
Quite a bit of repetition across the six or so essays (two of which are more like book reviews) compels me to dock one star, despite the writing itself being extremely engaging. The main reason to read this collection is for the first essay, 'On Boxing', and the second, 'On Mike Tyson', the latter of which is especially interesting given it was written shortly after Tyson destroyed Trevor Berbick for the WBC title (and well before the controversies and idiotic acts in the 90s that would ultimately come to tarnish the baddest man on the planet's legacy as the greatest of the post-Ali heavyweights). The behind-the-scenes conversations between JCO and Tyson in particular are pretty fascinating.
JCO doesn't hold back; she knows a ton about boxing, and talks about everything from the colours the boxers wear to the evolution of the role of the referee to the gladiatorial fights that predated the squared circle by a couple of millennia. She combines Mailer's flair for stylising the physical act of male combat with much more nuanced ruminations on what the sport (if it can even be called that, which is something she discusses) means to different social classes, genders and races, as well as how it is intrinsically linked (especially in the US) with the black civil rights movement, the dismantling of segregation and the reluctant-and-then-eager acceptance of black athletes into hitherto entirely white sports professions. This is not something I have thought much about - and I had no idea how many boxers come from hardship - so this angle alone was worth paying the admission for.
Definitely worth reading for anyone with even a casual interest in boxing. My question now: where are the other famous books/novels about boxing? The Fight, On Boxing, Fat City, The Sweet Science, Dark Trade, Ali: The Life and Times and Four Kings. I don't see many others that have been widely read. Weird how thin on the ground they are for such a dramatic profession.
JCO doesn't hold back; she knows a ton about boxing, and talks about everything from the colours the boxers wear to the evolution of the role of the referee to the gladiatorial fights that predated the squared circle by a couple of millennia. She combines Mailer's flair for stylising the physical act of male combat with much more nuanced ruminations on what the sport (if it can even be called that, which is something she discusses) means to different social classes, genders and races, as well as how it is intrinsically linked (especially in the US) with the black civil rights movement, the dismantling of segregation and the reluctant-and-then-eager acceptance of black athletes into hitherto entirely white sports professions. This is not something I have thought much about - and I had no idea how many boxers come from hardship - so this angle alone was worth paying the admission for.
Definitely worth reading for anyone with even a casual interest in boxing. My question now: where are the other famous books/novels about boxing? The Fight, On Boxing, Fat City, The Sweet Science, Dark Trade, Ali: The Life and Times and Four Kings. I don't see many others that have been widely read. Weird how thin on the ground they are for such a dramatic profession.
August 12, 2025
Jätteintressant kort bok som beskriver boxning på alla möjliga sätt jag aldrig tänkt på det som:
- Din motståndare är ditt skuggjag där dina svagheter är hans styrkor och vice versa.
- Domaren tillåter oss i publiken att frigöra oss från våra vanliga moraliska invändningar genom att ta på sig den rollen.
- Ringen är den enda plats i vårt civiliserade samhälle där en person kan lagligen mördas, och boxningen är den direkta inversen mot en lyckad mordrättegång: istället för att den som begått ett våldsdåd fördöms hyllas den i boxningen.
Dessutom fylld med hur många bra citat som helst från boxare om varför de boxas, vad som driver dem, och hur det är att stå där i ringen. Läs!
- Din motståndare är ditt skuggjag där dina svagheter är hans styrkor och vice versa.
- Domaren tillåter oss i publiken att frigöra oss från våra vanliga moraliska invändningar genom att ta på sig den rollen.
- Ringen är den enda plats i vårt civiliserade samhälle där en person kan lagligen mördas, och boxningen är den direkta inversen mot en lyckad mordrättegång: istället för att den som begått ett våldsdåd fördöms hyllas den i boxningen.
Dessutom fylld med hur många bra citat som helst från boxare om varför de boxas, vad som driver dem, och hur det är att stå där i ringen. Läs!
July 1, 2016
No voy a mentir, este ensayo tenía años ignorado en mi e-reader, pero luego de ver Southpaw sentí la urgencia de leer más sobre el tema. Intuía que en la película había algo muy disrruptivo sobre el ritual del boxeo, tan sutil pero tan presente que hacía que fuera confundida con una trama convencional, cuando en realidad apuesta por ser todo lo contrario. Por fortuna este libro me ayudó a entender más la mística en torno al box.
Aquí la escritora se avienta un ensayo que empieza brutal, renegando inmediatamente de la vocación retórico-literaria del box, para defenderlo como un acto animal, donde las proyecciones y sombras de todos los presentes y el propio peleador se materializan en esa invocación de muerte y sangre que representa cada round.
El libro tiene algunas frases tan dramáticas y emotivas que bien pueden dejarte un nudo en la garganta. Aquí algunas de mis favoritas:
-El boxeador se enfrenta a un contrincante que es una distorsión onírica de sí mismo en el sentido de que sus debilidades, posibilidad de error y de ser gravemente herido, sus desaciertos intelectuales, todo, puede ser interpretado como puntos fuertes pertenecientes al Otro.
-El tiempo, al igual que la posibilidad de muerte, es el adversario invisible del cual los boxeadores son profundamente conscientes. Cuando un boxeador es noqueado no significa, como suele pensarse, que haya quedado sin sentido, o incluso incapacitado; significa, más poéticamente, que ha sido sacado del tiempo.
-El dolor, en el contexto adecuado, es algo distinto al dolor.
-La diferencia obvia entre el boxeo y la pornografía es que el boxeo, a diferencia de la pornografía, no es teatral.
-El boxeo es un deporte tan refinado y al mismo tiempo tan crudo que no hay combate que pueda perderse intencionalmente con éxito.
-La vida es como el boxeo en muchos e incómodos sentidos. Pero el boxeo sólo se parece al boxeo.
15 de los 19 capitulos de este ensayo son brillantes, por desgracia los tres últimos de cierre desinflan el ritmo implacable que llevaba en el resto. Sin embargo es muy disfrutable, y hasta tiene valor nostálgico, ya que fue escrito entre el rush por los días de gloria de Mike Tyson y el estreno de películas sobre el tema como Raging Bull.
Una joya para entender mejor ese encanto.
Aquí la escritora se avienta un ensayo que empieza brutal, renegando inmediatamente de la vocación retórico-literaria del box, para defenderlo como un acto animal, donde las proyecciones y sombras de todos los presentes y el propio peleador se materializan en esa invocación de muerte y sangre que representa cada round.
El libro tiene algunas frases tan dramáticas y emotivas que bien pueden dejarte un nudo en la garganta. Aquí algunas de mis favoritas:
-El boxeador se enfrenta a un contrincante que es una distorsión onírica de sí mismo en el sentido de que sus debilidades, posibilidad de error y de ser gravemente herido, sus desaciertos intelectuales, todo, puede ser interpretado como puntos fuertes pertenecientes al Otro.
-El tiempo, al igual que la posibilidad de muerte, es el adversario invisible del cual los boxeadores son profundamente conscientes. Cuando un boxeador es noqueado no significa, como suele pensarse, que haya quedado sin sentido, o incluso incapacitado; significa, más poéticamente, que ha sido sacado del tiempo.
-El dolor, en el contexto adecuado, es algo distinto al dolor.
-La diferencia obvia entre el boxeo y la pornografía es que el boxeo, a diferencia de la pornografía, no es teatral.
-El boxeo es un deporte tan refinado y al mismo tiempo tan crudo que no hay combate que pueda perderse intencionalmente con éxito.
-La vida es como el boxeo en muchos e incómodos sentidos. Pero el boxeo sólo se parece al boxeo.
15 de los 19 capitulos de este ensayo son brillantes, por desgracia los tres últimos de cierre desinflan el ritmo implacable que llevaba en el resto. Sin embargo es muy disfrutable, y hasta tiene valor nostálgico, ya que fue escrito entre el rush por los días de gloria de Mike Tyson y el estreno de películas sobre el tema como Raging Bull.
Una joya para entender mejor ese encanto.
February 24, 2025
Mi primera vez leyendo a Joyce Carol Oates ha sido al nivel de la expectativa. Aquí, habla sobre el boxeo desde muchas perspectivas, tanto histórica o racial como todos los aspectos que influyen y han influenciado esta práctica. Me quedo con muchas reflexiones y su forma de componerlas.
En su totalidad, este ensayo cubre todo lo que se espera que hable sobre el boxeo con numerosos nombres de boxeadores famosos del siglo pasado. No obstante, si hay un aspecto que brilla por su ausencia. Y es que me hubiera gustado, y esperado, que una autora como ella incluyera algo más de un par de páginas sobre género en el ensayo.
«El escritor contempla a su contrario en el boxeador, que es todo exhibición pública, todo riesgo e, idealmente, improvisación: él conocerá su límite de una manera en que el escritor, como todos los artistas, nunca llega a conocer: pues nosotros, que escribimos y vivimos en un caleidoscópico mundo de valoraciones y juicios en cambio permanente, somos incapaces de determinar si es revelación o supremo autoengaño lo que alimenta nuestros esfuerzos más cruciales.»
En su totalidad, este ensayo cubre todo lo que se espera que hable sobre el boxeo con numerosos nombres de boxeadores famosos del siglo pasado. No obstante, si hay un aspecto que brilla por su ausencia. Y es que me hubiera gustado, y esperado, que una autora como ella incluyera algo más de un par de páginas sobre género en el ensayo.
March 17, 2019
4,4
Un ensayo detallado y bien trabajado. En él, es claro el amor de la autora por el boxeo y la postura crítica que tiene sobre el deporte de los grandes campeones como Robinson, Durán, Tyson, Marciano Y Alí. He aprendido bastante, he puesto en discusión bastantes puntos de vista, y esto, es algo de lo que espero de un libro. Gran lectura.
Un ensayo detallado y bien trabajado. En él, es claro el amor de la autora por el boxeo y la postura crítica que tiene sobre el deporte de los grandes campeones como Robinson, Durán, Tyson, Marciano Y Alí. He aprendido bastante, he puesto en discusión bastantes puntos de vista, y esto, es algo de lo que espero de un libro. Gran lectura.
May 5, 2025
Collecting these essays together can be a little repetitive, but there's fascinating insight into boxing fandom, and Oates seems very clear-eyed about how the Black champions she writes about—Jack Johnson, Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson—were inevitably fighting racism in addition to their opponents.
July 23, 2018
Whatever you may think of boxing, Oates beautifully narrates the layers of the sport: definition of masculinity, race, class, and some writer’s obsession with it.
October 28, 2023
Who knew the first Joyce Carol Oates book I've read would be her non-fiction hommage to her beloved art of boxing!?
Excellent!
Excellent!
November 8, 2024
How did I not know Joyce Carol GOAT wrote an extended essay on boxing, obviously a banger.
July 20, 2025
Awesome essays on boxing. Great, even if you don't like the sport.
March 29, 2025
Ci ho provato a farlo durare di più ma non c’è stato verso.
Un libro magnetico, fortissimo, scritto con amore, competenza e passione. Da leggere anche se non ve ne frega nulla della boxe, perché subito dopo la amerete.
Un libro magnetico, fortissimo, scritto con amore, competenza e passione. Da leggere anche se non ve ne frega nulla della boxe, perché subito dopo la amerete.
October 13, 2013
There is much to be appreciated about this book for those who wish to truly contemplate boxing fully. Oates’ prose is beautiful, and she weaves a narrative which will keep the lover of literature and history stimulated as much as the lover of fighting. Sam Sheridan refers to Oates’ On Boxing many times in his A Fighter’s Heart. I am using Sheridan’s text for the second time in a writing course I am teaching at the college, and I finally broke down and bought the book this week. The first half was amazing, but the book is a collection of essays, was originally published in 1985-86, and it is, in many ways, a historical artifact that gives you a poetic vision of boxing up to that time, but does not age well in its insights into the contemporary heroes of the time, such as Tyson (his doc, which I have shown in part this week, sits on top of my worn copy of A Fighter’s Heart next to me), though, again, they are interesting historically. Her writing on Muhammad Ali is excellent, however, and needs to be read. I cannot entirely praise this book as a complete work, however, for the problem with this being a collection of essays is that the passionate prose style of Oates can just become hyperbolic when the same phrases or theories (the atavistic urge, the warrior primitive man, the sacrificial victim and sacred rite of boxing, the oft-repeated assertion that boxing is “not the most dangerous sport” but seventh, etc.) are used over and over again. And, as a man who has fought all of his life, mostly in the streets, it is hard to read too much from someone who writes “about violence”, but seems to have had no direct life-threatening experience of it herself.
This said, the more you know about the history of boxing, going back to the bare-knuckle days or ancient Greece (and I am currently reading Keirnan’s The Duel in European History, Mee’s The History of Bare Knuckle Prize Fighting, and Gorn’s excellent The Manly Art: Bare-Knuckle Prize Fighting in America), the more you will enjoy this book.
I have to mention that some of the writing on the history of race and boxing is powerful and extremely important, from before Jack Johnson through Ali and Tyson. She covers racism, lynchings, and all of those things that came before, during, and after that intertwine with the history of boxing.
An example of Oates’s prose:
“Where in his feckless youth Ali was a dazzling figure combining, say, the brashness of Hotspur and the insouciance of Lear’s Fool, he became in these dark, brooding, increasingly willed fights the closest analogue boxing contains to Lear himself; or, rather, since there is no great fight without two great boxers, the title matches Ali-Frazier I (which Frazier won by a decision) and Ali-Frazier III (which Ali won, just barely, when Frazier virtually collapsed after the fourteenth round) are boxing’s analogues to King Lear—ordeals of unfathomable human courage and resilience raised to the level of classic tragedy.” (197)
This said, the more you know about the history of boxing, going back to the bare-knuckle days or ancient Greece (and I am currently reading Keirnan’s The Duel in European History, Mee’s The History of Bare Knuckle Prize Fighting, and Gorn’s excellent The Manly Art: Bare-Knuckle Prize Fighting in America), the more you will enjoy this book.
I have to mention that some of the writing on the history of race and boxing is powerful and extremely important, from before Jack Johnson through Ali and Tyson. She covers racism, lynchings, and all of those things that came before, during, and after that intertwine with the history of boxing.
An example of Oates’s prose:
“Where in his feckless youth Ali was a dazzling figure combining, say, the brashness of Hotspur and the insouciance of Lear’s Fool, he became in these dark, brooding, increasingly willed fights the closest analogue boxing contains to Lear himself; or, rather, since there is no great fight without two great boxers, the title matches Ali-Frazier I (which Frazier won by a decision) and Ali-Frazier III (which Ali won, just barely, when Frazier virtually collapsed after the fourteenth round) are boxing’s analogues to King Lear—ordeals of unfathomable human courage and resilience raised to the level of classic tragedy.” (197)
April 16, 2023
Это эссе о боксе, написанное женщиной, которая очень любит метафоры и даже в зрелом возрасте сохраняет хобби своего отца. Здесь нет конкретных описаний тактик и профессиональной терминологии, здесь есть описание некого потустороннего мира со своими собственными правилами, выражениями эмпатии и любви. Этой темой ей удалось заинтересовать обычного читателя художественной литературы, так как в матче она видит древнегреческую метафору, а в интервью боксеров - цитаты философов. Хорошая книга, чтобы узнать о том, что бы ты никогда не решила узнать специально и сама по себе.
March 2, 2013
"Considered in the abstract the boxing ring is an altar of sorts, one of those legendary spaces where the laws of a nation are suspended: inside the ropes, during an officially regulated three-minute round, a man may be killed at his opponent's hands but he cannot be legally murdered. Boxing inhabits a sacred space predating civilization; or, to use D. H. Lawrence's phrase, before God was love."
"The artist senses some kinship, however oblique and one-sided, with the professional boxer in this matter of training. This fanatic subordination of the self in terms of a wished-for destiny.... the sport's systematic cultivation of pain in the interests of a project, a life-goal: the willed transposing of the sensation we know as pain (physical, psychological, emotional) into its polar opposite. If this is masochism--and I doubt that it is, or that it is simply--it is also intelligence, cunning, strategy. It is an act of consummate self-determination--the constant re-establishment of the parameters of one's own being. To not only accept but to actively invite what most sane creatures avoid--pain, humiliation, loss, chaos--is to experience the present moment as already, in a sense, past. Here and now are but part of the design of there and then: pain now but control, and therefore triumph, later."
"Some observers--among them men--believe that boxers are angry because they are men; and anger, for men, is a means of asserting dominance over other men--a tool, one might say, of the manly trade. Yet it is reasonable to assume that boxers fight one another because the legitimate objects of their anger are not accessible to them. There is no political system in which the spectacle of two men fighting each other is not a striking, if unintended, image of the political impotence of most men (and women): You fight what's nearest, what's available, what's ready to fight you. And, if you can, you do it for money."
"The artist senses some kinship, however oblique and one-sided, with the professional boxer in this matter of training. This fanatic subordination of the self in terms of a wished-for destiny.... the sport's systematic cultivation of pain in the interests of a project, a life-goal: the willed transposing of the sensation we know as pain (physical, psychological, emotional) into its polar opposite. If this is masochism--and I doubt that it is, or that it is simply--it is also intelligence, cunning, strategy. It is an act of consummate self-determination--the constant re-establishment of the parameters of one's own being. To not only accept but to actively invite what most sane creatures avoid--pain, humiliation, loss, chaos--is to experience the present moment as already, in a sense, past. Here and now are but part of the design of there and then: pain now but control, and therefore triumph, later."
"Some observers--among them men--believe that boxers are angry because they are men; and anger, for men, is a means of asserting dominance over other men--a tool, one might say, of the manly trade. Yet it is reasonable to assume that boxers fight one another because the legitimate objects of their anger are not accessible to them. There is no political system in which the spectacle of two men fighting each other is not a striking, if unintended, image of the political impotence of most men (and women): You fight what's nearest, what's available, what's ready to fight you. And, if you can, you do it for money."
April 13, 2014
An easy read, that is clear and concise on all of boxing's good and bad historic moments up until the mid 1980s. Oates writes quick and witty essays on Jack Johnson, Muhammad Ali, and even Mike Tyson. Although not in chronological order, the essays give information that seem more factual based and less fictional based which other writers tend to not do (especially in writing about boxing). It seems these 'fictional' tales (that borderline on gossip) of boxing are a sexier sell in the 21st century with more emphasis of the scandalous nature of the sport. Overall the reader gets a good feel for each subject and an overall feeling that boxing is right for all of its problems in and out of the ring.
It would be interesting for Oates to update her book on the last 25 years of boxing. The 21st century would offer essays on Manny Pacquiao, Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield, Roy Jones Jr., Oscar De La Hoya, and the Klitschko brothers. Perhaps some thoughts on how Tyson's career ended, the separation of all the governing bodies of boxing, and the fame/flash of Floyd Mayweather Jr. would offer some darker tales of boxing in the 21st century. These are just some ideas from a boxing fan that would love to read another Joyce Carol Oates book on boxing.
It would be interesting for Oates to update her book on the last 25 years of boxing. The 21st century would offer essays on Manny Pacquiao, Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield, Roy Jones Jr., Oscar De La Hoya, and the Klitschko brothers. Perhaps some thoughts on how Tyson's career ended, the separation of all the governing bodies of boxing, and the fame/flash of Floyd Mayweather Jr. would offer some darker tales of boxing in the 21st century. These are just some ideas from a boxing fan that would love to read another Joyce Carol Oates book on boxing.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 170 reviews