Oh no she dint!

Broadcasting live from Crunch Central, Caleb Stegall quotes yours truly from my comment on the previous post. He writes,

I described the need to preserve, protect, and in some cases, revive, a truly social sphere distinct from either the state or the individual which can create a sense of home — which I hear echoed in the comments about Boston above — that is “not just four walls and a roof” but encompasses “the highways and byways that weave together the strands of memory, church, kin, work, and play into a place of belonging; home in this sense is seen and ought to be experienced as the central focal point of man’s contact with God; with the divine and holy ground of being.” None of this is aimed at fetishizing tradition for tradition’s sake.

Well, around here Fenway Park is certainly "divine and holy ground," and it's interesting to note that when talk of building a new ballpark came up five and six years ago, the real deep fans (i.e. the ones who were there on opening day in 1987) were generally thrilled by the idea of a modern stadium. The "Save Fenway Park" crowd on the other hand was composed mostly of Back Bay anthropology professors and South End real estate agents who, if they ever actually set foot in Fenway, would spend the whole time admiring about the left fielder's butt and whining that you couldn't get a glass of pinot grigio. What gives them the right to claim the mantle of "tradition" over lifelong fans without whose support the institution they claim to love would not exist?