An article that begins with the words ?BOXING IS A COMMUNION with the dead? is an article I want to read?
With the rise of the internet, and the decline of the printed word, writing has been democratized. That might be considered a good thing, now that everyone can have their say. But the bigger the front the bigger the back and there?s a downside when there are no standards.
Consider the state of boxing journalism. The sport that has inspired the finest sports writing known to man has eroded to such an extent that reading has become little more than sifting through words that, however facile, if we?re lucky, are neither poetry nor prose.
Thankfully there are exceptions.
There was a superb piece by Alex Vadukul on former heavyweight champion Riddick Bowe in yesterday?s Irish Times that was as heartfelt as it was literate: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/riddick-bowe-a-fallen-idol-still-searching-for-inner-peace-1.2331323.
It was actually interesting.
Not to be outdone, there was an equally fine article in today?s New York Times titled ?The Ring Cycle: Boxing?s Eternal Cinematic Appeal? by Benjamin Nugent that explores, with intelligence and grace, and a welcome lack of ego, the relationship between boxing and cinema: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/t-magazine/boxing-films.html.
An article that begins with the words ?BOXING IS A COMMUNION with the dead? is an article I want to read. The same cannot be said of the regurgitated press releases and cut-and-paste jobs, the breast-beating by those who presume to write without having taken the time to read.
