Gary Smith, of SI, is retiring. His reputation is earned, attended to and then some. In addition to what's been written elsewhere, here's what sticks out for me.
Never dug his style too deep but what a reporter. Details, lots of them. The big stuff too: no patches of knowledge--no weird lapses of editorial judgment(*) in these things (SI editors help). With the exception of the Pat Tillman story Rd 1, no no-nos. His work reads soft, but it's not. And it doesn't read that loud, either--if the lens is pink, it's not the pinkest, and the writing is spare. Everything either adds to the tune or advances the story. I don't love his style as much as, I do, say, this or this, but who am I? Exactly. It's just taste, and he checks off every box. No Writering to be found. No cliches--just lines you've read elsewhere. Smith's stuff is like Slint--stick with the genuine artifact and not the cottage industry.**
The second best part behind the reporting and the thing for me is how obscure Smith's subject matter tends to be. I got into sports (professionally, my day job) knowing I'd cover and follow something by definition mainstream. There's only one way to watch a game--on the one channel that broadcasts it--or to wear a jersey or to follow a team. I more or less dug that logic's impact on my career--with only one baseball league, my blinders would be kept on. No danger of winnowing down a Continental Basketball Association*** wormhole, the equivalent of which I do with music, clothing and other ephemera, things which I'll continue to do, but are hard to monetize****. But it's kept the whole business at an emotional remove.
Smith's stories weren't obscure--they're big features in SI--but many of his subjects were. Also-ran coaches, deep-sea divers and Indian athletes rest between Mike Keenan, Agassi and Mike Tyson. Almost like a throwback New Yorker issue where Jack McPhee spends 5,000 words on a canoe maker and Jonathan Schell does the same on nukes. (Or my guy Ian Frazier covers the same subject, albeit somewhere else.) It makes sense since good stories are everywhere, sure. And there's no novelty to obscurity. But only the best publications seem to put that in practice. Few strictly sports operations can afford to do it, or have someone good enough to. It's not something you can pitch. I never got a chance to experience first-hand what a mensch Smith was, either, which cements it all. But from here I dig him making something something by dint of him doing it. You can play around the margins and be the best there is. Bigger isn't always better. Better is better.
* - the linked Esq. story here where the chick dies and he can't get an interview w/her. Come on, man
** No disrespect to the 20 flawless bands that came up before the 20th season of SNL -- imperfect or fleeting music is always worth investing time in. Decent sports journalism, less so.
**** Clothing, I mean. Not music.
turnnoffyourmind
prguitarman
izzy806
origamiaround
blakekathryn
kaledo-art