"The Rabbit Hunter" critique

Oh Coach Knight, how you've provided us with so many memories.

Back in 1981, Knight gave sports writer Frank Deford a rare glimpse into his world by allowing him to conduct an intimate interview that would result in an article entitled The Rabbit Hunter (appearing in Sports Illustrated that winter).

While the piece made it onto The Best American Sports Writing of the Century, my fellow Sports Reporting and Writing classmates and I came to a similar conclusion while discussing the reading: it really wasn't THAT good. I mean, it wasn't written horribly or anything but something was missing. Then again, we're just young, dumb, naive twenty-somethings, what do we know?

With that said, if I could re-write or re-edit Mr. Deford's story, here are a few things I'd change:

1. Take out creepy quote at the beginning. At the start of the article, separate from the actual lede and opening paragraph and hidden on top of the page alone is this quote:

Success is feminine and like a woman; if you cringe before her, she will override you. So the way to treat her is to show her the back of your hand. Then maybe she will do the crawling. -- William Faulkner

After the initial "what the f***" reaction, the normal thing would be to assume it'd all get tied in at the end. Well, I'm going spoil it for you: it doesn't. This quote doesn't have anything to do with the reading and if anything seemingly takes away from where the reader might believe the story is headed.

It's almost as though the quote is a type of false advertisement and really, there's nothing people dislike more than that. Case in point: Tonight my friend Michele bought a case of beer thinking she'd get a free t-shirt because that is what the sign said. But she didn't because apparently the deal was supposed to mention that she had to buy four cases or something ridiculous for her shirt (which was not clearly stated on the sign). Luckily, through enough complaining she was a happy camper when they just gave her a free "We Have Stones" XL (only size left) shirt.

Moral of the story: Don't put something in your writing that doesn't have anything to do what we're you're trying to say. It'll only confuse your reader and might even leave them angry enough demanding to know why you wasted their time.

2. Where is the creativity? I'm probably the last person that should ever call out someone else creativity because I have my own difficulty in expressing that sometimes. But one thing that irked me a little bit about Deford's piece was how he broke up sections. It's not the fact he broke it up because for how long his article was, breaking it up was definitely the way to go.

He broke up his sections by titling them "Rabbits," "Coaches," "Older People," and "Women." Sounds more like the answer to some Apples to Apples trivia question. Those subheads don't offer anything to a reader. Perhaps by giving those titles a little deeper thought, he could have come up with something such as "Women are just an obstacle that must be overcome..." which is a quote from one of Knight's players used in the section title "women." I think it would have allowed his readers to have more interest in what was to come.

Bottom line: Variety is the spice of life. REALLY!

3. Wait, what happened? The order of segments in the story is a little screwy to me. Going from "Rabbits" to "Coaches" to "Older People" to "Women." Once again, women at the end ... quote about domestic abuse at the beginning ... uhh, is he trying to tell us something? If up to me, I would have went the order of "Rabbits," "Older People," "Women," "Coaches," blah blah blah. I'd rather see the people who shape Bob Knight the person before learning about Bob Knight the controversial coach. After all, wasn't the point of this piece to get a greater understanding of who he is?

Point: Domestic abuse isn't cool. EVER. Oh and if you're going to write a longer piece, think carefully about how you decide to order your sections. It matters.

However, all of this is merely my own opinion for my class. If for whatever reason, Mr. Deford were to ever come across this blog, I'd want him to know I didn't entirely trash his piece. In fact, I very much appreciated the input about Knight's one dimple. As a one-dimpler myself (on my right cheek, folks), it's good to see dimples get some recognition. It's about damn time.

Thanks Mr. Deford!

*Photo from Sports Illustrated and www.NPR.org