The 'Jewish' New York player, by Ari Sclar

Following the 1936-37 season, the New York press declared that “eastern basketball lost prestige” due to Stanford’s victory over LIU.  Reports of the game also contained an implicit racial tone.  One member of the New York press argued that LIU’s loss meant that “New York’s fundamental concept of basketball will have to be radically changed if the Metropolitan District is to remain among the progressive centers of court culture in the country.”  In particular, “coaches must cease looking for the smart, shifty player and focus attention on big, nimble athletes who can drive and put the ball through the hoop.”  It remained unclear where this type of player could be found, but “nothing can be done about it as long as home-bred talent tries to play an intellectual game while invaders are forcing the breaks, instead of waiting for them, with terrific speed and hell-for-leather tactics.”[1]

The none-too-subtle coding of the ‘Metropolitan’ player as the ‘Jew’ indicated that New York’s Jewish basketball had not informed the larger athletic ideal.  Commentary on size, stylistic improvements, and the weakened “intellectual game” indicated that some doubted whether the ‘Jew’ could adapt to a changing game.  Coaches needed to find a new type of player who was not just ‘smart’ or ‘shifty.’  The older culture of regional distinctiveness had idealized the basketball Jew in the east.  Nationalization, however, brought the rest of America to Madison Square Garden and revealed the limits of the racially informed ideal.  The sportswriter believed that the entire structure of New York and Jewish basketball would have to change in order to keep up with big, nimble and white athletes.

The Times article did not attach an explicit racial identity to the ‘Metropolitan’ player, but others viewed Jewish basketball through the lens of race.  Sportswriter Paul Gallico explained in 1938 that basketball “appeals to the Hebrew with his Oriental background” as well as “the temperament of the Jews” because it “places a premium on an alert, scheming mind, flashy trickiness, artful dodging, and general smart aleckness.”[2]  Gallico’s representation of ‘the Hebrew’ basketball player, while clearly anti-Semitic, consisted of characteristics remarkably similar to those used by the Jewish press within the discourse of Jewish athleticism.

---

[1] “Pop Knick’s ‘Big Nine’ of Court Sets Mark – Wrong One, though,” New York Evening Post, January 4, 1937; “Stanford, Notre Dame Won Fame as New York Quintets Faltered,” New York Times, December 26, 1937; “Speed Wrecks L.I.U.’s Guile and Accuracy Seals Verdict,” New York Evening Post, December 31, 1936.

[2] Paul Gallico, Farewell to Sport (New York: Knopf, 1938), 324.