Katha Pollitt Penn State's Patriarchal Pastimes

In 2011, a Penn State scandal was released to the public and baffled sports fans. In Frank Deford’s “Joe Paterno’s Legacy: Protect Players At All costs,”Deford questions Joe Paterno’s legacy because JoePa did not report Jerry Sandusky’s pedophilia to authorities. In Katha Pollitt’s “Penn State’s Patriarchal Pastimes,” she writes about the unfairness in athlete’s education and how far coaches will go to keep their players playing on the football field.

Katha Pollitt and Frank Deford have completely different voices throughout their writings. Pollitt’s voice, bold and unapologetic. For example, she angrily states “cancel the season. Fire everybody involved in the child abuse scandal” in her introductory paragraph (Pollitt 1). On the other

hand, Deford’s voice, subtle, sarcastic, yet disappointed because one of the greats turned out not so great. Deford, sarcastic and angry, states in his opening line, “dying may not have been the worst thing to happen to Joe Paterno this past year ” (Deford 1). His statement meaning, Joepa’s legacy tarnished extremely quick after 46 years of coaching football. Pollitt’s tone establishes her genuine concerns for academics and sports. She writes, “we are telling kids at the bottom that the way out is not to take college classes but to work on their jump shot and their blocking”(Pollitt 2). Her tone comes off as vexed and irritated by the fact that education comes second when compared to sports. Meanwhile, Deford disappointedly writes, “ but that is why Paterno is supposed to have earned a legacy as well as a record, for he was held up as different- as an honest man succeeding in a dodgy enterprise. He was of college football but above it” (Deford 1). Deford’s tone shows that he, a disappointed sports fan like many others, was let him down by Joepa.
Pollitt writes about Mike McQueary witnessing the anal rape of a 10-year-old by a former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky. Surprisingly, JoePa took no action and as life went on more kids suffered abuse. Likewise, later in the article, Pollitt claims, “A federal appeals court declared a Texas cheerleader could be kicked off the squad for refusing to cheer her rapist when he took the field” (Pollitt 3). This situation proves that athletes accused of a sex crime can get away with it and the corruption involved in the sports system. Meanwhile, Deford writes about new allegations- exposed in leaked emails from other Penn State officials that suggest Joepa seemed not as legendary when he did not mention his eyewitnessing to Jerry Sandusky's pedophilia. Also,
The two writers have different and unique approaches when it comes to appealing to the reader’s emotions.

Pollitt tries to get under sports fan’s skin throughout her article like when she states, “maybe cancel college football too. In no other country’s university system, after all, does sports play anything like the central role it does in American academic life” (Pollitt 1). Her intention, simply, to fire up sports fans but appeal to readers who see sports as inferior compared to education. Also, she writes, “they’re hauled through dumbed-down courses in gut majors like “interdisciplinary studies” and “social science by an army of tutors and professors who know the drill: we need this kid, so he’s got to pass”(Pollitt 2). She wants non sports fans to recognize the unfairness of academic system. On the other hand, Deford appeals to sports fans by writing “he (referring to JoePa) was of college football, but above it” (Deford 1). Deford, like many other sports fans, disappointment shows one of the great’s (Joe Paterno’s) legacy is not legendary like many thought. Also, Deford sarcastically states, “When his old assistant was in trouble, that must’ve kicked in. Joe Paterno kept Jerry Sandusky eligible. If he has a legacy, that’s it” (Deford 1). Deford comes off sarcastic yet angry that Joe Paterno does not have much of a legacy now. Referring back to Pollitt’s article, she states, “sports is embedded in the rich, loamy craziness of American popular morality, right down in

there with God, the flag, the military and the family” (Pollitt 2). She implies that sports importance rank as high as God, the flag, the military, and the family which is not how it should be. On the contrary, Deford writes, “hey, boys will be boys. Overlook. Blind eye. Forgive them their trespasses as game day approaches. Keep them eligible” (Deford 1). Deford, extremely sarcastic, clearly does not like the sports system although he understands it is what it is.
Both, Pollitt and Deford have different styles when writing. Pollitt’s tone, having no hesitation, puts her opinions out there; her article gets straight to the point. With no fear she writes about topics on her mind. Meanwhile, Deford takes a while until getting to his point towards the end of his article. Protecting football players at all costs by legal means or none. Because Pollitt displays strong emotion and tone, it makes her the better writer. It seems that Deford tries to hide his emotions and his voice, so subtle, it does not stand out. Pollitt’s writing makes her a more effective writer when defending her point.