Connect with us

Culture

Five things to watch on the Baseball Hall of Fame ballot: How can Ichiro not be unanimous?

Published

on

Five things to watch on the Baseball Hall of Fame ballot: How can Ichiro not be unanimous?

Woohoo. It’s that time again. Hall of Fame election time.

Baseball’s 2025 Hall ballot was announced Monday — featuring one guy destined for an all-time landslide (Ichiro Suzuki) and 27 other names you know all too well.

We’ll learn who made it — besides Ichiro, that is — in two months. So as the suspense builds, here come Five Things to Watch on the 2025 Hall of Fame ballot.

1. Ichiro’s unanimous decision?


Ichiro won’t need to hold his breath on election day. But will it be unanimous? (Otto Greule Jr. / Getty Images)

Here we go again. From the same group that decided Babe Ruth, Willie Mays and Henry Aaron couldn’t possibly be unanimous Hall of Famers, what the heck are the baseball writers going to do about Ichiro Suzuki?

After nine decades of voting by the Baseball Writers’ Association of America, Mariano Rivera remains the only player elected unanimously. But zero unanimous position players in almost a century? Think how hard it’s been to pull that off. But our esteemed association is innovative like that — apparently.

Advertisement

Just last winter, I thought Adrian Beltré had an outside shot to be unanimous. Nope. He somehow got left off 19 ballots. Nineteen!

Before that, I figured Derek Jeter was almost a lock to be unanimous in 2020. Oh, man. He missed by one vote. Then there was Ken Griffey Jr. in 2016. How could he not show up on every ballot, I thought. But what was I thinking? His name went unchecked on three of them.

So now it’s Ichiro’s turn. Everyone from Topeka to Tokyo knows Ichiro is a Hall of Famer. So come on, people. What reason could any voter possibly have not to vote for a guy who collected a staggering 4,367 hits on two continents — with 3,089 of them coming on this side of the Pacific (all after age 27)?

Or what logical justification would any voter have for not checking the name of the only player in history to spin off 10 seasons in a row with 200 hits and a Gold Glove Award? Nobody else who ever lived even had five seasons in a row like that.

Or how about this: How huge an all-around force was Ichiro? According to Baseball Reference, he finished his big-league career with 84 Batting Runs above average, 121 Fielding Runs above average and 62 Baserunning Runs above average.

Advertisement

Did you know only two outfielders in history had a career remotely like that — with at least 80 Batting Runs, 110 Fielding Runs and 50 Baserunning Runs? One was Ichiro. The other? Willie Mays.

So how is any voter going to explain why he didn’t vote for that guy — a global baseball icon, one of two players in American League/National League history to win MVP and Rookie of the Year awards in the same season and — let’s just mention this again, OK? — the man who got more hits than anyone who ever played baseball in the two greatest leagues on Earth?

History tells us we should always take the “under” if the category is “unanimous Hall of Famer.” But if Ichiro Suzuki doesn’t get there, it’s not just embarrassing. It’s practically an international incident waiting to happen.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Untold stories of Ichiro: Wrestling with Griffey, All-Star speeches and ‘Ichi wings’

2. Billy Wagner: 10 and in or 10 and done?


Close call: Billy Wagner got 73.8 percent of the vote last year. (Mike Fiala / AFP via Getty Images)

Five votes away. That’s where everybody’s favorite diminutive smoke-balling closer, Billy Wagner, stood when the voting dust had settled after last year’s election. Five votes from the plaque gallery. So of course he’s going to round up those five votes this time, right?

Advertisement

Or is he?

Logic would tell us that we’ve put him through enough torture. It’s his 10th (and final) year on the writers’ ballot. So nobody needs to remind him that the climb to the summit of Mount Cooperstown can feel more precarious than a jaunt up Mount Kilimanjaro.

In his first three orbits on this ballot, Wagner never got more than 47 votes in any election. In his last three, he reeled in 201, 265 and 284. That means he has added 158 votes just in the past four elections. So how could he not attract five more votes to reach the necessary 75 percent threshold this time, when everyone knows his Hall of Fame legacy is on the line?

But that’s the logical part of our brains talking. When my fellow voters look at closers, they’ve been known to apply a whole different set of standards. So am I positive that the most unhittable left-handed reliever in history is going to be giving an induction speech next July? No!

On one hand, Wagner’s claims to historic greatness haven’t changed. He still ranks No. 1 in the modern era among all left-handed pitchers in ERA, WHIP, strikeout rate, opponent average and opponent OPS. (Minimum: 900 innings.) Is that Cooperstown-y enough? Seems like it. That’s why I vote for him, anyway.

Advertisement

On the other hand, all those voters who ask, “How’d he do in October?” haven’t gone away, either. They’re stuck on Wagner’s 10.03 postseason ERA, and they can’t get past it.

Look, I get it. October matters. So I’ve taken a deep, game-by-game dive into those outings – and found enough strange stuff in those games to conclude they’re not as disqualifying as that ERA makes them appear.

But that’s me. And I only get to vote once. So while I think Wagner is going to clear this bar — and join Larry Walker, Edgar Martinez and Tim Raines as the most recent members of the prestigious Elected in Their Last Shot Club — nothing would shock me.

As I wrote last January, after he’d just missed getting elected, it’s a good thing this guy was a closer for a living — because nobody knows better than a closer that the last out is always the hardest to get. Can Billy Wagner close this deal? We’ll let you know in two months.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

How a broken arm — and an unbroken spirit — took Billy Wagner to the doorstep of the Hall

Advertisement
go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Billy Wagner reflects on the emotions of just missing the Hall of Fame

3. Is there a third Hall of Famer in the house?


Can Andruw Jones snare enough votes to get elected? (John Iacono / Sports Illustrated via Getty Images)

I know the premise of that question assumes that we’ll even have a second Hall of Famer (Wagner) elected from this ballot. But let’s just go with that – OK? — and look at whether anyone among the remaining 26 candidates has a shot to get to 75 percent.

It feels as if there are only three realistic possibilities: Andruw Jones, Carlos Beltrán and CC Sabathia. Let’s discuss them.

Andruw Jones (61.6 percent — 62 votes short last time)

Hard to believe it’s Jones’ eighth year on the ballot, but it’s true. So you’d think we’d have a clear view of whether he has a safe path to Cooperstown by now, wouldn’t you? But do we? Not from my scenic overlook, we don’t.

The good news is, he got more votes last time than any returning position player. And if you’re a modern-metrics kind of voter, you can’t help but have noticed that, according to Baseball Reference, Jones rolled up more career wins above replacement (62.7) than two of the three guys who got elected in 2024, Todd Helton and Joe Mauer.

Advertisement

But …

Jones’ dramatic decline after age 30 is shaping up as a mammoth roadblock for those 148 voters who still aren’t checking his name. After adding over 200 votes and zooming from under 8 percent to more than 58 percent in just four years (2020-21-22-23), he added only 11 votes last year (and 3.5 percentage points).

Does it seem significant that that was the smallest jump of anyone on the upper tier of the ballot? I think it does.

So can he now flip 62 more “no” votes to “yes” this year after flipping only 11 last year? I’m no Steve Kornacki, but I’m a “nay” on that.

Carlos Beltrán (57.1 percent — 69 votes short last time)

It’s Year 3 of this derby for Beltrán, who is now the answer to this cool trivia question:

Advertisement

Who owns the most career WAR of anyone on this ballot not known as “A-Rod”?

That’s Carlos Beltrán, all right, at 70.1. But now comes a harder question: What did this guy’s first two rides on the ballot tell us?

In Year 1, Beltrán got 46.5 percent of the vote — a clear indication that many, many voters could still hear those Astros trash-can lids banging. But then a funny thing happened in Year 2:

He soared to 57.1 percent. And if you were paying attention, you might have detected that it happened to be the largest jump (10.6 percentage points) of any returning player.

So does that mean he’s now going to be treated like a “normal” candidate? Does it say that lots of voters were just imposing a temporary purgatory on him for that messy (but brief) Houston portion of his career, but now they’re over it? Hey, I don’t know. I just read the tea leaves.

Advertisement

But if those 2024 tea leaves are telling the story I think they’re telling, there’s a Hall of Fame speech in Beltrán’s future.

Over the past 50 elections, five other players have debuted on the ballot at 40 percent or higher and then jumped by at least 10 percentage points the next year. Those five: Jeff Bagwell, Ryne Sandberg, Barry Larkin, Ferguson Jenkins and Catfish Hunter. Want to guess why we mention that?

Yep, it’s because we know how the voters treated all five of those guys after that. Namely … they elected every one of them. So if that’s telling us anything about how they’ll treat Beltrán, I’d pick 2026 as Carlos Beltrán’s Induction Weekend. But we’re just guessing — until this 2025 election tells us how voters really look at him.

CC Sabathia (first year on the ballot)

I can’t wait to see Sabathia’s Year 1 vote total. I wouldn’t be shocked if it’s 76 percent. I wouldn’t be shocked if it’s 46 percent — or pretty much any other number you’d like to pick out of his cap.

That’s because it’s hard to think of any candidate quite like CC.

Advertisement

If you close your eyes and don’t spend any time looking at his Baseball Reference page, he feels like a Hall of Famer. He walks and talks like a Hall of Famer. And he definitely has the spectacular highlight reel of a Hall of Famer.

But does he have the actual numbers of a Hall of Famer? Um, it depends on which numbers you look at.

If you’re a yes, maybe it’s because he’s one of only three left-handed pitchers in the live-ball era (since 1920) in the 250-Win, 3,000-Strikeout Club. The others: Randy Johnson and Steve Carlton.

But if you’re a no, it’s because you’re staring at Sabathia’s 3.74 career ERA. Incredibly, that would be the highest of any left-handed starter in the Hall of Fame (not to mention third-highest overall, behind Jack Morris’ 3.90 and Red Ruffing’s 3.80).

Then there’s also CC’s place on this ballot alongside two other left-handers who blew past 200 wins and had long, distinguished, reliable careers: Andy Pettitte and Mark Buehrle.

Advertisement
Pitcher W-L  ERA+

Pettitte

256-153

117

Buehrle 

214-160

Advertisement

117

Sabathia

251-161

116

(Source: Baseball Reference)

Advertisement

Ooh. So what are we to make of that, huh? Did it feel, as you were watching them, that there was that little separation between those three guys? I’d say no. But there they are, on the same ballot all of a sudden. And who knows what that will mean.

Maybe it boosts Pettitte and Buehrle more than it dings CC. But Pettitte and Buehrle have spent a combined 10 years on this ballot and neither one has come within 150 votes of getting elected. So what about that fact suggests that CC is about to sail in on the first ballot? Not much!

To be clear, I think CC Sabathia is a Hall of Famer. But is he two months from getting elected? That uncertainty explains what he’s doing in this part of the column.

4. How many first-timers make it to Year 2?

Dustin Pedroia

Dustin Pedroia is part of a special first-year class. (Billie Weiss / Boston Red Sox / Getty Images)

Check out these names. They’re all making their debut on the Hall of Fame ballot in this cycle. You’ve heard of them.

Ichiro … CC … Dustin Pedroia … Félix Hernández … Troy Tulowitzki … Ben Zobrist … Ian Kinsler … Curtis Granderson … Hanley Ramirez.

Advertisement

Now … are you ready for a breaking news bulletin that’s almost sure to shock you?

Those nine players make up one of the most historic first-year ballot classes in modern voting history.

So how is that, you ask? Here’s how: Only one other time, in the six decades since Hall of Fame voting became an annual event, have we had that many first-timers with a big enough peak that they had at least two seasons worth 6.0 WAR or more, according to Baseball Reference.

Baseball Reference research whiz Kenny Jackelen checked this out for us, and it’s true. The only other year, under the modern voting system, when nine players like that debuted on any ballot was in 2013, when all these men arrived:

Barry Bonds (16 six-win seasons), Roger Clemens (11), Curt Schilling (five), Mike Piazza (four), Kenny Lofton (three), Shawn Green (three), Craig Biggio (three), Sammy Sosa (two) and Julio Franco (two).

Advertisement

The breakdown this year: Sabathia and Tulowitzki had four 6.0-WAR seasons. Pedroia had three. And everyone else had two. And yes, that includes Ichiro.

But wait. We have an asterisk. And it brings Brian McCann and Russell Martin into the argument.

Those two are also making their ballot debuts. And while Baseball Reference rates them as having zero 6.0-WAR seasons, the FanGraphs version of WAR says Martin had two of those seasons and McCann had four. We think that’s worth noting, if only because there are so many catcher fans who think FanGraphs’ WAR uses a better formula for valuing a catcher’s defensive impact.

So if you also add in someone like Carlos González, who was just short of two 6.0-WAR seasons himself, that’s a dozen new players on this ballot who had a run, for at least a couple of seasons, that made you say: That guy’s a star. Rest assured, ballots like this don’t come along very often.

But nobody’s going to the Hall of Fame based on two or three great years. So here’s the big question: How many of these first-timers have enough volume to make it to Year 2 on this ballot?

Advertisement

It takes at least 5 percent of the vote to pull that off. And for what it’s worth, only two first-timers cleared that bar last year: Chase Utley (28.8 percent) and David Wright (6.2).

I’ll predict that this year’s class beats that — with Sabathia, Pedroia and King Félix all finishing north of 5 percent. And maybe Tulo (who had a six-year run in the Best Player in Baseball conversation) and Kinsler (one of the two second basemen in history with two seasons in the 30-30 Club) join them.

It’s been over a decade since more than three first-timers got enough votes to make it back for another election. (That 2013 class produced six of them.) But if it’s ever going to happen again, this feels like the year.

5. Is there Cooperstown life after the Roaring 20s?


Chase Utley got 28.8 percent of the vote in his first year on the ballot. Jimmy Rollins, who is on the ballot for the fourth time, has an even steeper hill to climb. (Hunter Martin / Getty Images)

Hall of Fame voting would be easy if everyone on the ballot were like Ichiro. We’d just fire a few hundred votes their way and move on to the next living legend.

Except, of course, that’s not how this goes at all. So just in the last eight years, we’ve elected five players who once had vote percentages that were in the 20s — or lower:

Advertisement
Player Year Elected Lowest %

Todd Helton

2024   

16.5

Scott Rolen

2023 

Advertisement

10.2

Larry Walker 

2020 

20.3

Mike Mussina

Advertisement

2019

20.3

Tim Raines

2017 

22.6

Advertisement

Does anyone else find that fascinating? Thought so! It means that voters’ perspectives on all those players evolved so dramatically that every one of them had to (at least) triple their vote total to make it onto that stage in Cooperstown. And you know what — that’s OK with me.

It says we never stop thinking about what a Hall of Famer is and isn’t. Why is there a 10-year window for every player on the ballot? That’s why. Because snap judgments aren’t necessarily the most accurate judgments.

So what does that have to do with the 2025 Hall of Fame ballot? It’s a reason to ask: So who’s next?

Maybe that answer is obvious: Billy Wagner. Like Rolen, he was once as low as 10.2 percent. Nowadays, the ballot isn’t as crowded as it was when he debuted. And it’s possible we view closers through a different lens. So boom, here he is, on the verge of getting elected.

Then there’s Andruw Jones. In his first year on the ballot, he got a mere 7.3 percent! And now he, too, has a shot at election.

Advertisement

But what about the nine players returning to this ballot who got between 6 percent and 29 percent of the vote last year? Are any of them positioned to follow this path? Here are three who could:

Andy Pettitte (Year 7) — I’ve already predicted that Sabathia is headed for Cooperstown one of these years. And we’ve seen, in this very column, how similar Pettitte’s numbers are to CC’s. The road to Cooperstown isn’t supposed to begin with six straight elections in which a player gets 17 percent of the vote or less. But you know what causes voters’ perspectives to change? When a very similar player arrives on the ballot — and winds up in the plaque gallery!

Chase Utley (Year 2) — Here’s another prediction. Utley is going to get elected. He got only 28.8 percent last year, so he was 178 votes away. And his counting numbers (1,885 hits, 259 homers) seemed to act as blinking red lights for the traditionalists in this voting crowd.

But there’s a major voting shift coming, one that’s already begun, in fact — away from those traditional magic counting numbers and toward guys with dominant Hall of Fame-type peaks, who also had a big impact on winning. And you know when that shift will hit home? When Buster Posey (1,500 hits, 158 homers) shows up on the ballot in two years. I can’t think of anyone on this ballot whose candidacy will be helped by Posey more than Utley.

Jimmy Rollins (Year 4) — And you know whose Hall of Fame case should then get a boost from Utley? How ’bout Rollins, his longtime double-play partner in South Philly.

Advertisement

The truth is, Rollins actually has a better Hall case than Utley, even though he got about half as many votes as his former teammate last year. Why? An MVP trophy. A World Series trophy. More than 2,400 hits. Four Gold Gloves. Not to mention 200 homers, 400 steals and 857 extra-base hits. He’s the only shortstop in history who had that career. Plus, he combines a big peak and those traditional counting numbers.

What he lacks is Utley’s huge sabermetric cred. But the last decade of Hall voting is overflowing with examples of how one player’s election can magically elevate another, just by connecting their dots. (Ask Larry Walker and Todd Helton.) So it’s bound to happen again. And you know where we can look for clues?

When those 2025 Hall election results are announced, two months down another Cooperstown road. I don’t know about you, but I can’t wait.


go-deeper

GO DEEPER

The Athletic’s 2025 Baseball Hall of Fame reader survey: Vote for your picks

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

A salute to Ichiro, CC Sabathia and the other 12 newcomers to the Baseball Hall of Fame ballot

Advertisement
go-deeper

GO DEEPER

The case for — and against — each of the Classic Baseball Era Hall of Fame candidates

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Baseball Hall of Fame tiers: Which active players are on course for Cooperstown?

(Top photo of Ichiro Suzuki: Otto Greule Jr. / Getty Images)

Culture

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Published

on

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Literature

‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?

Advertisement

“Romola” was Eliot’s fourth novel, published between “The Mill on the Floss” (1860) and “Middlemarch” (1870-71). If my friends and I didn’t get this particular memo, and “Romola” is familiar to every Eliot fan but us, please skip the following.

“Romola” isn’t some fluky misfire better left unmentioned in light of Eliot’s greater work. It’s her only historical novel, set in Florence during the Italian Renaissance. It embraces big subjects like power, religion, art and social upheaval, but it’s not dry or overly intellectual. Its central character is a gifted, freethinking young woman named Romola, who enters a marriage so disastrous as to make Anna Karenina’s look relatively good.

Advertisement

It probably matters that many of Eliot’s other books have been adapted into movies or TV series, with actors like Hugh Dancy, Ben Kingsley, Emily Watson and Rufus Sewell. The BBC may be doing even more than we thought to keep classic literature alive. (In 1924, “Romola” was made into a silent movie starring Lillian Gish. It doesn’t seem to have made much difference.)

Anthony Trollope, among others, loved “Romola.” He did, however, warn Eliot against aiming over her readers’ heads, which may help explain its obscurity.

All I can say, really, is that it’s a mystery why some great books stay with us and others don’t.

Advertisement

‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

This was an Oprah Book of the Week, which probably disqualifies it from B-side status, but it’s not nearly as well known as Phillips’s debut story collection, “Black Tickets” (1979), or her most recent novel, “Night Watch” (2023), which won her a long-overdue Pulitzer Prize.

Phillips has no parallel in her use of potent, stylized language to shine a light into the darkest of corners. In “Quiet Dell,” her only true-crime novel, she’s at the height of her powers, which are particularly apparent when she aims her language laser at horrific events that actually occurred. Her gift for transforming skeevy little lives into what I can only call “Blade Runner” mythology is consistently stunning.

Advertisement

Consider this passage from the opening chapter of “Quiet Dell”:

“Up high the bells are ringing for everyone alive. There are silver and gold and glass bells you can see through, and sleigh bells a hundred years old. My grandmother said there was a whisper for each one dead that year, and a feather drifting for each one waiting to be born.”

Advertisement

The book is full of language like that — and of complex, often chillingly perverse characters. It’s a dark, underrecognized beauty.

‘Solaris’ (1961) by Stanislaw Lem

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that, in America, at least, the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem didn’t produce any A-side novels. You could just as easily argue that that makes all his novels both A-side and B-side.

Advertisement

It’s science fiction. All right?

I love science and speculative fiction, but I know a lot of literary types who take pride in their utter lack of interest in it. I always urge those people to read “Solaris,” which might change their opinions about a vast number of popular books they dismiss as trivial. As far as I know, no one has yet taken me up on that.

“Solaris” involves the crew of a space station continuing the study of an aquatic planet that has long defied analysis by the astrophysicists of Earth. Part of what sets the book apart from a lot of other science-fiction novels is Lem’s respect for enigma. He doesn’t offer contrived explanations in an attempt to seduce readers into suspending disbelief. The crew members start to experience … manifestations? … drawn from their lives and memories. If the planet has any intentions, however, they remain mysterious. All anyone can tell is that their desires and their fears, some of which are summoned from their subconsciousness, are being received and reflected back to them so vividly that it becomes difficult to tell the real from the projected. “Solaris” has the peculiar distinction of having been made into not one but two bad movies. Read the book instead.

Advertisement

‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

If one of the most significant living American writers had become hypervisible with his 2017 novel, “Lincoln in the Bardo,” we’d go back and read his earlier work, wouldn’t we? Yes, and we may very well have already done so with the story collections “Tenth of December” (2013) and “Pastoralia” (2000). But what if we hadn’t yet read Saunders’s 2013 novella, “Fox 8,” about an unusually intelligent fox who, by listening to a family from outside their windows at night, has learned to understand, and write, in fox-English?: “One day, walking neer one of your Yuman houses, smelling all the interest with snout, I herd, from inside, the most amazing sound. Turns out, what that sound is, was: the Yuman voice, making werds. They sounded grate! They sounded like prety music! I listened to those music werds until the sun went down.”

Once Saunders became more visible to more of us, we’d want to read a book that ventures into the consciousness of a different species (novels tend to be about human beings), that maps the differences and the overlaps in human and animal consciousness, explores the effects of language on consciousness and is great fun.

Advertisement

We’d all have read it by now — right?

‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that Woolf didn’t have any B-sides, and yet it’s hard to deny that more people have read “Mrs. Dalloway” (1925) and “To the Lighthouse” (1927) than have read “The Voyage Out” (1915) or “Monday or Tuesday” (1921). Those, along with “Orlando” (1928) and “The Waves” (1931), are Woolf’s most prominent novels.

Advertisement

Four momentous novels is a considerable number for any writer, even a great one. That said, “Between the Acts,” her last novel, really should be considered the fifth of her significant books. The phrase “embarrassment of riches” comes to mind.

Five great novels by the same author is a lot for any reader to take on. Our reading time is finite. We won’t live long enough to read all the important books, no matter how old we get to be. I don’t expect many readers to be as devoted to Woolf as are the cohort of us who consider her to have been some sort of dark saint of literature and will snatch up any relic we can find. Fanatics like me will have read “Between the Acts” as well as “The Voyage Out,” “Monday or Tuesday” and “Flush” (1933), the story of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s cocker spaniel. Speaking for myself, I don’t blame anyone who hasn’t gotten to those.

Advertisement

I merely want to add “Between the Acts” to the A-side, lest anyone who’s either new to Woolf or a tourist in Woolf-landia fail to rank it along with the other four contenders.

As briefly as possible: It focuses on an annual village pageant that attempts to convey all of English history in a single evening. The pageant itself interweaves subtly, brilliantly, with the lives of the villagers playing the parts.

It’s one of Woolf’s most lusciously lyrical novels. And it’s a crash course, of sorts, in her genius for conjuring worlds in which the molehill matters as much as the mountain, never mind their differences in size.

Advertisement

It’s also the most accessible of her greatest books. It could work for some as an entry point, in more or less the way William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” (1930) can be the starter book before you go on to “The Sound and the Fury” (1929) or “Absalom, Absalom!” (1936).

As noted, there’s too much for us to read. We do the best we can.

Advertisement

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading

Culture

6 Poems You Should Know by Heart

Published

on

6 Poems You Should Know by Heart

Literature

‘Prayer’ (1985) by Galway Kinnell

Advertisement

Whatever happens. Whatever
what is is is what
I want. Only that. But that.

Galway Kinnell in 1970. Photo by LaVerne Harrell Clark, © 1970 Arizona Board of Regents. Courtesy of the University of Arizona Poetry Center

Advertisement

“I typically say Kinnell’s words at the start of my day, as I’m pedaling a traffic-laden path to my office,” says Major Jackson, 57, the author of six books of poetry, including “Razzle Dazzle” (2023). “The poem encourages a calm acceptance of the day’s events but also wants us to embrace the misapprehension and oblivion of life, to avoid probing too deeply for answers to inscrutable questions. I admire what Kinnell does with only 14 words; the repetition of ‘what,’ ‘that’ and ‘is’ would seem to limit the poem’s sentiment but, paradoxically, the poem opens widely to contain all manner of human experience. The three ‘is’es in the middle line give it a symmetry that makes its message feel part of a natural order, and even more convincing. Thanks to the skillful punctuation, pauses and staccato rhythm, a tonal quality of interior reflection emerges. Much like a haiku, it continues after its last words, lingering like the last note played on a piano that slowly fades.”

“Just as I was entering young adulthood, probably slow to claim romantic feelings, a girlfriend copied out a poem by Pablo Neruda and slipped it into an envelope with red lipstick kisses all over it. In turn, I recited this poem. It took me the remainder of that winter to memorize its lines,” says Jackson. “The poem captures the pitch of longing that defines love at its most intense. The speaker in Shakespeare’s most famous sonnet believes the poem creates the beloved, ‘So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, / So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.’ (Sonnet 18). In Rilke’s expressive declarations of yearning, the beloved remains elusive. Wherever the speaker looks or travels, she marks his world by her absence. I find this deeply moving.”

Advertisement

Lucille Clifton in 1995. Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images

“Clifton faced many obstacles, including cancer, a kidney transplant and the loss of her husband and two of her children. Through it all, she crafted a long career as a pre-eminent American poet,” says Jackson. “Her poem ‘won’t you celebrate with me’ is a war cry, an invitation to share in her victories against life’s persistent challenges. The poem is meaningful to all who have had to stare down death in a hospital or had to bereave the passing of close relations. But, even for those who have yet to mourn life’s vicissitudes, the poem is instructive in cultivating resilience and a persevering attitude. I keep coming back to the image of the speaker’s hands and the spirit of steadying oneself in the face of unspeakable storms. She asks in a perfectly attuned gorgeously metrical line, ‘what did i see to be except myself?’”

Advertisement

‘Sonnet 94’ (1609) by William Shakespeare

They that have power to hurt and will do none,
That do not do the thing they most do show,
Who, moving others, are themselves as stone,
Unmovèd, cold, and to temptation slow,
They rightly do inherit heaven’s graces
And husband nature’s riches from expense;
They are the lords and owners of their faces,
Others but stewards of their excellence.
The summer’s flower is to the summer sweet,
Though to itself it only live and die;
But if that flower with base infection meet,
The basest weed outbraves his dignity.
For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.

Advertisement

“It’s one of the moments of Western consciousness,” says Frederick Seidel, 90, the author of more than a dozen collections of poetry, including “So What” (2024). “Shakespeare knows and says what he knows.”

“It trombones magnificent, unbearable sorrow,” says Seidel.

“It’s smartass and bitter and bright,” says Seidel.

Advertisement

These interviews have been edited and condensed.

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading

Culture

Classic and Contemporary Literature From France, Japan, India, the U.K. and Brazil

Published

on

Classic and Contemporary Literature From France, Japan, India, the U.K. and Brazil

Literature

FRANCE

Advertisement

According to the writer Leïla Slimani, 44, the author of ‘The Country of Others’ (2020).

Classic

‘Essais de Montaigne’ (‘Essays of Montaigne,’ 1580)

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Advertisement

“France is a country of nuance with a love of conversation and freedom and an aversion to fanaticism. It’s also a country built on reflexive subjectivity. Montaigne reveals all that, writing, ‘I am myself the matter of my book.’”

Contemporary

‘La Carte et le Territoire’ (‘The Map and the Territory,’ 2010) by Michel Houellebecq

Advertisement

“Houellebecq describes France as a museum, where landscape turns into décor and where rural areas are emptying out. He shows the gap between the Parisian elite and the rest of the population, which he paints as aging and disoriented by modernity. It’s a melancholic and yet ironic novel about a disenchanted nation.”

JAPAN

Advertisement

According to the writer Yoko Ogawa, 64, the author of ‘The Memory Police’ (1994).

Classic

‘Man’yoshu’ (late eighth century)

Advertisement

“‘Man’yoshu,’ the oldest extant collection of Japanese poetry, reflects a diversity of voices — from emperors to commoners. They bow their heads to the majesty of nature, weep at the loss of loved ones and find pathos in death. The pages pulse with the vitality of successive generations.”

Contemporary

Advertisement

‘Tenohira no Shosetsu’ (‘Palm-of-the-Hand Stories,’ 1923-72) by Yasunari Kawabata

“The essence of Japanese literature might lie in brevity: waka [a classical 31-syllable poetry form], haiku and short stories. There’s a tradition of cherishing words that seem to well up from the depths of the heart, imbued with warmth. Kawabata, too, exudes more charm in his short stories — especially these very short ‘palm-of-the-hand’ stories — than in his full-length novels. Good and evil, beauty and ugliness, love and hate — everything is contained in these modest worlds.”

INDIA

Advertisement

According to Aatish Taseer, 45, a T contributing writer and the author of ‘Stranger to History: A Son’s Journey Through Islamic Lands’ (2009).

Classic

Advertisement

‘The Kumarasambhava’ (‘The Birth of Kumara,’ circa fifth century) by Kalidasa

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Advertisement

“This is an epic poem by the greatest of the classical Sanskrit poets and dramatists. The gods are in a pickle. They’re being tormented by a monster, but Shiva, their natural protector, is deep in meditation and cannot be disturbed. Kama, the god of love, armed with his flower bow, is sent down from the heavens to waken Shiva. Never a wise idea! The great god, in his fury, opens his third eye and incinerates Kama. But then, paradoxically, the death of the god of love engenders one of the greatest love stories ever told. In the final canto, Shiva and his wife, the goddess Parvati, have the most electrifying sex for days on end — and, 15 centuries on, in our now censorious time, it still leaves one agog at the sensual wonder that was India.”

Contemporary

Advertisement

‘The Complex’ (2026) by Karan Mahajan

“This state-of-the-nation novel, which was published just last month, captures the squalor and malice of Indian family life. Delhi is both my and Mahajan’s hometown and, in this sprawling homage to India’s capital, we see it on the eve of the economic liberalization of the 1990s, as the old socialist city gives way to a megalopolis of ambition, greed and political cynicism.”

THE UNITED KINGDOM

Advertisement

According to the writer Tessa Hadley, 70, the author of ‘The London Train’ (2011).

Classic

Advertisement

‘Jane Eyre’ (1847) by Charlotte Brontë

“Written almost 200 years ago, it remains an insight into our collective soul — or at least its female part. Somewhere at the heart of us there’s a small girl in a wintry room, curled up in the window seat with a book, watching the lashing rain on the window glass: ‘There was no possibility of taking a walk that day. …’ Jane’s solemnity, her outraged sense of justice, her trials to come, the wild weather outside, her longing for something better, for love in her future: All this speaks, perhaps problematically, to something buried in the foundations of our idea of ourselves.”

Contemporary

Advertisement

‘All That Man Is’ (2016) by David Szalay

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

“Though he isn’t quite completely British (he’s part Canadian, part Hungarian), Szalay is brilliant at catching certain aspects of British men — aspects that haven’t been written about for a while, now updated for a new era. Funny, exquisitely observed and terrifying, this novel reminds us, too, how absolutely our fate and our identity as a nation belong with the rest of Europe.”

BRAZIL

Advertisement

According to the writer and critic Noemi Jaffe, 64, the author of ‘What Are the Blind Men Dreaming?’ (2016).

Classic

Advertisement

‘Memórias Póstumas de Brás Cubas’ (‘The Posthumous Memoirs of Brás Cubas,’ 1881) by Machado de Assis

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Advertisement

“Not only is it experimental in style — very short chapters mixed with long ones; different points of view; narrated by a corpse; metalinguistic — but it also introduces an extremely ironic view of the rising bourgeoisie in Rio de Janeiro at the time, revealing the hypocrisy of slave owners, the falsehood of love affairs and the only true reason for all social relationships: convenience and personal interest. After almost 150 years, it’s still modern, both formally and, unfortunately, also in content.”

Contemporary

Advertisement

‘Onde Pastam os Minotauros’ (‘Where Minotaurs Graze,’ 2023) by Joca Reiners Terron

“The two main characters — Cão and Crente — along with some of their colleagues, plan to escape and set fire to the slaughterhouse where they work under exploitative conditions. The men develop sympathy for the animals they kill, and one of them becomes a sort of philosopher, revealing the sheer nonsense of existence and the injustices of society in the deepest parts of Brazil.”

These interviews have been edited and condensed.

Advertisement

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending