Benjamin A. Railton's Blog

October 4-5, 2025: Lou Moore’s Sensational Sports Studying

[50years ago this week, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier met in Manila for theirthird and final professional boxing bout. So this week on the blog I’ve steppedinto the ring with posts on a handful of contexts for that significantsports story, leading up to this tribute to one of our best sportsscholars!]

I’vewritten about LouMoore a few times already in this space, including his now-defunct butreally excellent The Professorand the Pugilist blog. But I wanted to pay tribute to him at the end ofthis week’s blog series for three specific reasons:

1)     His book IFight For a Living: Boxing and the Battle for Black Manhood, 1880-1915 (2017),which is the best scholarly work about boxing and American history I’veencountered;

2)     His next book WeWill Win the Day: The Civil Rights Movement, the Black Athlete, and the Questfor Equality (2017), which provides a vital context for Muhammad Ali’sactivisms;

3)     And the really excellent Story Maps that he shares on hiswebsite, which include ones on the Jack Johnson riots and Muhammad Ali and theBlack press.

There’sjust no better voice on the histories of sports, race, and America than Lou!

Next seriesstarts Monday,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Sports studiers you’d share?

October 3, 2025: The Thrilla in Manila: Part 3s

[50years ago this week, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier met in Manila for theirthird and final professional boxing bout. So this week on the blog I’ll stepinto the ring with posts on a handful of contexts for that significantsports story, leading up to a tribute to one of our best sports scholars!]

Ali andFrazier’s third fight was without question their best, and by some accounts thegreatestboxing match of all time. So for a fun way to end the week’s series, hereare quick thoughts on a handful of other superlative part 3s (not including TheGodfather Part III, obvi):

1)     Returnof the Jedi (1983): I said most of what I’d want to say about my favorite StarWars moment in that hyperlinked post. But even if we set that moment aside, anyfilm that starts with Jabba and ends with the Ewoks is just a banger from startto finish.

2)     The Lord of the Rings: TheReturn of the King (2003): Return might be my thirdfavorite of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, honestly; but that stillmakes it one of my favorite films, and there’s not a moment—of storytelling,performance, score, theme, you name it—anywhere in the trilogy that’s better thanthat hyperlinked one.

3)     TheBourne Ultimatum (2007): I’ve long loved the Jason Bourne characterand film trilogy, as that hyperlinked post reflects; when I had the chance toshare them with my wife earlier this year, they hit even harder than ever (withher I did finally also watch the fourth Matt Damon Bourne film, and it was okay,but I still wish they hadn’t made it). And when that iconic Moby track kicks inover Bourne swimming away in Ultimatum’s final image? C’mon now.

4)     Toy Story 3 (2010): Yes,that whole wonderful final scene. And yes, the whole terrifying and moving sequence with the fire. Butmost of all, most of all, as the Dad of two sons who have gone off to collegein the last couple years, thisfreaking scene. My sons watched this film every day for a whole week whenthey were young, and I cried every single time. Now I can’t even watch thatclip!

5)     Before Midnight (2013): Idon’t think it’s overstating to say that there’s never been a film trilogy likeRichardLinklater’s Before films, and there never will be another. Among themany reasons for that uniqueness is that each is genuinely and entirelydistinct in tone, mirroring and engaging with where the characters, the actorsand filmmakers, and the world are in their respective moments. Midnightis by far the hardest to watch, on purpose; but it’s also a cinematic versionof Bruce Springsteen’s amazing “adult love songs,” andanyone who knows me knows that’s very high praise indeed.  

Tributepost this weekend,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Contexts for this fight or other boxing histories you’dhighlight?

October 2, 2025: The Thrilla in Manila: Joe Frazier and Boxing Villains

[50years ago this week, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier met in Manila for theirthird and final professional boxing bout. So this week on the blog I’ll stepinto the ring with posts on a handful of contexts for that significantsports story, leading up to a tribute to one of our best sports scholars!]

In honorof Joe Frazier, who from what I can tell was just a really good boxer but because of thefascination with Ali became a legendaryboxing villain, a few other instances of such adversaries in boxing andAmerican history:

1)     JimJeffries: As I traced in that post, it was to white former champion Jeffriesthat the lonely eyes of Jack London and other white supremacists turned intheir (unsuccessful) attempts to dethrone world heavyweight champ Jack Johnson.It doesn’t seem to me that Jeffries was himself particularly racist toward Johnson,at least not per extensive coverage of their July 4th, 1910 fightlike that in thispost; but he unquestionably symbolized that white supremacist, villainousvision of the fight, the sport, and the whole nation (as reflected by his Americanflag boxing trunks).

2)     The Two Maxes (Baerand Schmeling):You apparently can’t have an iconic American boxing legend without a notable adversary,and these two Depression-era boxers with the same first name fit that bill fortwo inspiring mid-20th century fighters: Baer was the most famous opponentfor James“Cinderella Man” Braddock; and Schmeling played that role in twofamous fights with JoeLouis. I’m not going to maximize (sorry) my analysis of either in these fewsentences, so I’ll just add that, as with Joe Frazier, I’m quite sure theirstories are much more interesting than can be reflected in these adversarialroles.

3)     Floyd Mayweather:I don’t think I can say the same for Floyd Mayweather Jr., one of the 21stcentury’s most talented fighters but also a thoroughgoing villain who seems to relishthat role (as his full-throated and very much ongoing supportfor Donald Trump would illustrate). I could have put Mike Tyson in thisspot, and Tyson’s convictionfor sexual assault is unquestionably worse than any detail about Mayweatherthat I’m aware of. But there’s societal villains and then there’s sportsvillains—the first are clearly more troubling overall, but the second have aspecial role in the history of boxing, as these fighters exemplify.

FinalThrilla talk tomorrow,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Contexts for this fight or other boxing histories you’dhighlight?

October 1, 2025: The Thrilla in Manila: Marcos and the U.S.

[50years ago this week, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier met in Manila for theirthird and final professional boxing bout. So this week on the blog I’ll stepinto the ring with posts on a handful of contexts for that significantsports story, leading up to a tribute to one of our best sports scholars!]

On twodistinct and equally important ways to AmericanStudy the corrupt leader behindthe fight.

The Wikipedia pagefor “Thrilla in Manila” features a striking sentence: “The president of thePhilippines Ferdinand Marcos sought to hold the bout and sponsor it in order tobring attention to the Philippines from around the world.” It would be a seriousunderstatement to say that that sentence needs more contexts, starting withthis crucial one: in October 1975 the Philippines were just over three years intoan extended period of absoluteand brutal martial law, which Marcos had declaredin September 1972 and which would last until the authoritarian leader wentinto exile in February 1986 (with some slight modifications/superficial gesturestoward democracy in January1981). Marcos and his wife Imeldawere also in the midst of their two-decade long looting of the country, a processwhich began shortly after he ascended to the presidency in 1965, which garneredits own name for the resulting excesses of ostentatious wealth they displayed (Imeldific),and in the course of which they stoleat least $5 billion from the Central Bank of the Philippines.

So thereason why Ali and Frazier’s third fight took place in Manila is a pretty grossone—and also quite tellingly interconnected with American foreign policy duringthe Cold War. For example, when Marcos “won” the first presidential “election” heldin a dozen years in June 1981 (I’m using those scare quotes very deliberately,but obviously I’m no expert on Filipino politics, so if this election was moregenuine than it seems to me feel free to correct me in comments!), VicePresident George H.W. Bush attended his inauguration andtold him “We love your adherence to democratic principles and to thedemocratic process.” Or, for an even more relevant example for this 1975 boxingmatch, between the 1972 declaration of martial law and the mid-1980s the U.S. provided more than $2.5billion in military and economic aid to the Marcos administration. As with somany other dictatorial leaders and regimes around the world in this period, Marcos was seen by the U.S. governmentas a buttress against Communism in the region, particularly when it came to thereach of Communist China, and as they did timeand time again in such cases, the U.S. forgave—and indeed actively encouragedand supported—his extreme excesses to maintain that realpolitikrelationship.

I don’twant to minimize any of that—not any of Marcos’s own dictatorial awfulness, norany of America’s alliances with him and it—but there’s simply no way toAmericanStudy a late 20th century Filipino history without engagingwith the central and destructive role of the UnitedStates toward the islands in the first half of the century. No singlefigure better embodies those histories than does another Filipino leader, EmilioAguinaldo, who as I traced in that post started his political and militarycareers as an American ally and ended them, just a few short years later, leadinginsurgents against the illicit and violent U.S. occupation. I’m not suggestingfor a moment that Marcos was anything like Aguinaldo, as the latter from what Ican tell was very focused on what he could do to help the Filipino people, andthe former just helped himself (in every sense). But as anyone who studies colonialismand postcolonial nations can tell you, those histories inevitably seem to producecorrupt and dictatorial governments as one of their main aftereffects—and topretend that the rise of Ferdinand Marcos was unrelated to the U.S.’simperial presence in the islands for half a century would be hugely disingenuous.  

NextThrilla talk tomorrow,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Contexts for this fight or other boxing histories you’dhighlight?

September 30, 2025: The Thrilla in Manila: Ali’s Evolution

[50years ago this week, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier met in Manila for theirthird and final professional boxing bout. So this week on the blog I’ll stepinto the ring with posts on a handful of contexts for that significantsports story, leading up to a tribute to one of our best sports scholars!]

On what led upto an inspiring 1967 moment, what it changed, and why it still matters.

From the firstmoments of his professionalboxing career in 1960 (when he was only 18 years old), Cassius Clay wasknown as much for his brash and bold attitude and statements as for hisdominating performances in the ring. Apparently inspired in part by afortuitous conversation with professionalwrestler “Gorgeous George” Wagner, Clay consistently used press conferencesand interviews to belittle his opponents and boast of his own prowess. Whilehis 1964 name change to Muhammad Ali was driven by his personal spiritualconversion to Islam and evolving relationship with Elijah Muhammad and theNation of Islam, Ali nonetheless used that occasion to make similarly strikingstatements about American history and society, calling CassiusClay “my slave name” and arguing that “I am America. I am the part youwon't recognize. But get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, notyours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me.” Given thesestatements, Ali’sannouncement two years later, when notified that he was now eligible forthe draft (after having previously failed the army’s qualifying test), that hewould pursue conscientious objector status and refuse to be drafted, and hisremark that “Man, I ain’tgot no quarrel with the Viet Cong,” represented one more step in thisoutspoken life and career.

Yet while that1966 announcement, and Ali’s subsequent April 1967 draftresistance and arrest in Houston, were thus not at all unprecedented, theynonetheless produced significant, lasting shifts in his career and image. Onthe one hand, Ali’s courageous stance cost him four years in the prime of hiscareer and athletic prowess—his boxing licenses were stripped by every stateafter the arrest, and Ali was unable to obtain a license or box professionallyagain until the 1971 Supreme Court decision in Clay v. UnitedStates upheld his conscientitous objector status and overturned hisconviction. Given the relatively short window in which a professional boxer cangenerally stay viable in the sport, it’s difficult to overstate the value(financial and otherwise) of this lost time in Ali’s career. At the same time,Ali shifted much more overtly and fully into the status of an activist andpublic intellectual over those years, giving speeches across the country alongthe lines of his1967 “Black is Best” speech at Howard University (a speech given in supportof the university’s Black Power movement, an alliance that Ali notcoincidentally formed during this same period of his career). I don’t mean tosuggest that such speeches or events in any direct way compensated Ali for hislost time or success as a boxer; instead, it’s more accurate to say that Ali’spublic image and role shifted over these years, and that shift would endurelong after both his 1971 reinstatement and 1981 retirement from thesport.

Ali’s enduringrole as a late 20th and early 21st century publicactivist thus provides one important reason to remember the moment when hebegan to make that shift in earnest. But I would also argue that Ali’s 1967civil disobedience offered a profoundly distinct model of athlete activism thanany that had come before. There had of course been athletes whose very identityand public image represented a challenge to national and white supremacist narratives,such as Ali’s boxingpredecessor Jack Johnson. And there had been those like JackieRobinson whose groundbreaking sports careers themselves became a form ofactivism against the racist status quo. But to my knowledge, Ali’s draftresistance and his statements in support of that position took athlete activismin America to a new, much more publicly engaged level, one far beyond anysports-specific context. A more public form of athlete activism that quitepossibly influenced the following year’s OlympicBlack Power salute in Mexico City, and that certainly is worth linking to acontemporary example such as ColinKaepernick’s ongoing protests and public activisms (and the shocking levelof vitriol Kaepernick has received in response, from withinthe NFL just as much as outside of it). In all those ways, Muhammad Ali’s1967 act of civil disobedience was a watershed moment in American society aswell as its sports culture.

NextThrilla talk tomorrow,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Contexts for this fight or other boxing histories you’dhighlight?

September 29, 2025: The Thrilla in Manila: Boxing and America

[50years ago this week, Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier met in Manila for theirthird and final professional boxing bout. So this week on the blog I’ll stepinto the ring with posts on a handful of contexts for that significantsports story, leading up to a tribute to one of our best sports scholars!]

On whyAmericanStudiers can’t forget the sweet science, and why I wish we could.

If I weregoing to make the case for boxing’s crucial significance in American historyand identity, I would start here: the story of African American life in the 20thcentury can be pretty succinctly told through the sequence of Jack Johnson to Joe Louis to Sugar RayRobinson to MuhammadAli to Mike Tyson (three of whom were focal points for posts in this2019 blog series, not coincidentally). Or maybe I would note how many greatfilms use boxing as a metaphor for American history and identity, from The Champ (1931) to On the Waterfront (1954), Raging Bull (1980) to Cinderella Man (2005), Rocky to Creed(2006), and dozens more besides (a handful of which were alsonon-coincidentally the focus of thisspecial weekend post at the end of that aforementioned series). Or maybeI’d talk about all the resonancesof the Hurricane—the boxer, the song, the movie (and perhaps Denzel’s best performance to date),the history. In any case, as this week’s series will hopefully likewise illustrate,boxing and America seem profoundly and permanently intertwined.

Before Iget into the rest of that series, however, I have to admit that I’ve got a coupleproblems with that association. For one thing, and it’s an obvious thing Iguess but a hard one to get around, boxing is so thoroughly and unavoidablyviolent and destructive. I wrote a post my2014 Super Bowl series on the necessary hypocrisy that comes withwatching football these days, given what we have learned and continueto learn about the sport’s impacts on the bodies and (especially) brainsof those playing it; I went even further in this poston MMA fighting. As with MMA, in the case of boxing such violent impact is notonly part of the sport, it’s the most central and consistent part—and indeed,the point of the sport is for each participant to try to be more violent thanhis or her opponent, to damage that opponent sufficiently that he or she cannotcontinue. To be honest, the nickname “the sweet science” seems tome to exist in part to mask the fundamental reality that boxing is neithersweet nor scientific, but instead (or at least especially) a savage test of whocan sustain the most violence and pain.

It’s hardfor me to argue that such a sport should occupy a prominent role in 21stcentury American society and culture. Of course, it’s also undeniable thatboxing has already lost much of its prior prominence, a change that has beendue not to its violence (since again the even moreviolent Ultimate Fighting is extremely popular at themoment) as much as to the impression that the sportis profoundly corrupt. And that’s my other problem with the role ofboxing in narratives of American history and identity—we may have recentlybecome more aware of the role that corruptpromoters and organizations, judges and paydays, and the like play in theworld of boxing, but as far as I can tell thoserealities have been part of the sport for as long as it has existed. Ofcourse America has always had its fair share of corruption and greed as well,but do we want a nationally symbolic sport that emphasizes those qualities?It’d be the equivalent of the Black Soxscandal being the norm in baseball, rather than a glaring exception. Ican’t deny boxing’s role in our past and identity, but I can’t pretend I don’tfind that more than a little disturbing.

NextThrilla talk tomorrow,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Contexts for this fight or other boxing histories you’dhighlight?

September 27, 2025: Our New Website!

We interruptour regularly scheduled programming with a special and very exciting newbulletin:

Thanks tothe web designing (and penguin drawing) skills of my wife Vaughn Joy, she and Ihave launched our new public scholarly website, Black & White & Read All Over.While this blog will always be archived here as well (and new posts will appearhere until the end of January or so), it has migrated over to that space, alongwith her Review Roulette newsletter, my #ScholarSunday threads, and more. Pleasecheck it out, share your own announcements so we can add them, and see youthere (and here)!

Nextseries starts Monday,

Ben

PS. Any thoughtson the new site? Let us know!

September 27-28, 2025: September 2025 Recap

[A Recapof the month that was in AmericanStudying.]

September1: Fall Semester Previews: Honors Lit: My annual Fall semester previews seriesfocused this year on moments I’m looking forward to amidst, well, everything,kicking off with an opening text in my Gilded Age Honors Lit seminar.

September2: Fall Semester Previews: First-Year Writing: The series continues with afun close reading assignment in my FYW classes.

September3: Fall Semester Previews: American Lit II in Person: A semester-endingconversation that always connects me to so many unfamiliar artists, as theseries teaches on.

September4: Fall Semester Previews: American Lit II Online: How my online studentsdefy stereotypes and really engage with each other in that virtual space.

September5: Fall Semester Previews: The Boys in College!: The series concludes withthe fall semesters I’m definitely most looking forward to!

September6-7: A Preview of My Podcast’s 2nd Season: A weekend follow-up,looking forward to my long-form scholarly project over this academic year.

September8: Comic Strip Studying: The First American Comic: For the 150thanniversary of the first comic strip in an American periodical, a series on themedium kicks off with two publications that help contextualize that groundbreakingcultural work.

September9: Comic Strip Studying: The Yellow Kid: The series continues with two waysin which a short-lived, easily misunderstood comic strip character has lived onfor more than a century.

September10: Comic Strip Studying: Dennis the Menace: Three telling aspects of a longstandingfunny pages troublemaker, as the series draws on.

September11: Comic Strip Studying: Doonesbury: Three interesting evolutions of one ofour longest-running and most influential comic strips.                                                         

September12: Comic Strip Studying: The Boondocks: The series concludes with twocontrasting but complementary ways the turn of the 21st centurystrip broke new ground.

September13-14: Comic Strip Studying: Fellow ComicsStudiers: A special weekendfollow-up, highlighting a handful of the many awesome folks we should all bereading to learn more.

September15: Censorship Histories: The Zenger Case: For the 40thanniversary of the Congressional hearings on music warning labels, a series oncensorship histories kicks off with two distinct but interconnected lessonsfrom a groundbreaking 1730s trial.

September16: Censorship Histories: The Comstock Act: The series continues with oneimportant application of a controversial law, and a far more significantunderlying problem.

September17: Censorship Histories: The Sedition Act: Three frustrating examples of federalcensorship under the authoritarian aegis of a 1918 law, as the series struggleson.

September18: Censorship Histories: Banning vs. Challenging Books: Why the concept of“banned” books isn’t quite as obviously wrong as we might think.

September19: Censorship Histories: The 1985 Hearings: The series concludes with ananniversary post on three pairings that reflect the multiple angles throughwhich the PMRC sought to censor pop music.

September20-21: Challenging Censorship in 2025: I couldn’t write about censorshiphistories without engaging a bit with what’s happening in our own moment, andmore exactly with lessons on how we can challenge these unfolding histories.

September22: Recent Scholarly Reads: Action Without Hope: A series featuring recentreads I’d recommend to all starts with Nathan Hensley’s bracing and vital bookon Victorian literature after climate collapse.

September23: Recent Scholarly Reads: We Now Belong to Ourselves: The series continueswith Arianne Edmonds’ wonderful book that challenges any easy definition ofwhat is and isn’t “scholarly.”

September24: Recent Scholarly Reads: The Rediscovery of America: The first of twobooks that my sons gave me for Father’s Day, this one Ned Blackhawk’crucial indigenousreframing of American history and identity.

September25: Recent Scholarly Reads: Frederick Douglass: And the second of the Father’sDay books, David Blight’s beautiful bio of the legendary American.

September26: Recent Scholarly Reads: Selling Out Santa: The series concludes withthe forthcoming book I’m looking forward to most, my wife Vaughn Joy’s SellingOut Santa!

Nextseries starts Monday,

Ben

PS. Topicsyou’d like to see covered in this space? Guest Posts you’d like to contribute? Lemme know!

September 26, 2025: Forthcoming Scholarly Reads: Selling Out Santa

[It’s beena while since I shared a series on scholarly books I’ve had the pleasure ofchecking out recently, and for this latest iteration I wanted to highlightrecent reads that have offered inspiration in these very tough times!]

I reallyenjoyed and was glad to be able to share each of the books I’ve highlighted inthis week’s series, but I can’t lie, there’s no competition with how excited Iam to share the forthcoming book with which I’m ending the series: my wife VaughnJoy’s SellingOut Santa: Hollywood Christmas Films in the Age of McCarthy (2025). Dueout in just under two months (November 17th, if you want to mark your calendars as you damn well should) and available for pre-order at that hyperlink and whereveryou buy your books (if you can't wait until November, as you damn well shouldn't), Vaughn’s readable and rigorous, historical and timely, vital work offers equally compelling and cruciallenses on an easily dismissed cultural genre, mid-20th centuryAmerican culture and society and politics, and some of the most fraught trends anddebates in our own 21st century moment. It’s also an incredibly well-writtenand engaging book, one that is as fun to read as the ending of It’s aWonderful Life is to watch—but also as bracing and thought-provoking as, y’know,much of the rest of Capra’s film. I hope you’ll get your own copy and that you’llshare your responses here and everywhere else when you do—and you know you’ll be hearing a lot moreabout it, and all of Vaughn’sexceptional work, in this space!

SeptemberRecap this weekend,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Recent reads you’d share?

PPS. Also an important announcement that I'll keep sharing in this space: Vaughn and I have just debuted our new public scholarly website, Black and White and Read All Over. It'll be a home for this blog, my #ScholarSunday threads, Vaughn's wonderful Review Roulette newsletter, and a lot more. & we hope y'all will contribute your own Announcements for that part of the site too. Check it out, watch this space and that space for more, and enjoy!

September 25, 2025: Recent Scholarly Reads: Frederick Douglass

[It’s beena while since I shared a series on scholarly books I’ve had the pleasure ofchecking out recently, and for this latest iteration I wanted to highlightrecent reads that have offered inspiration in these very tough times!]

The otherbook that my sons gifted me for Father’s Day is a bit older, and indeed theonly one in this week’s series that didn’t come out within the last year or so.I don’t really have an excuse for not having already read David W. Blight’smagisterial, Pulitzer-winning biography FrederickDouglass: Prophet of Freedom (2018) other than, well, [gestures ateverything]. But I also don’t know that it would have hit me nearly as hard in2018 as it did in the summer of 2025, and for exhibit A I’ll share these linesfrom the conclusion of Blight’s Introduction: “It is Douglass’s story, though,that lasts and gives and instructs. There is no greater voice of America’sterrible transformation from slavery to freedom than Douglass’s. For all thosewho wish to escape from outward or inward captivity, they would do well to feelthe pulses of this life, and to read the words of this voice. And then go actin the world.” At that point I was thoroughly hooked, and then Blight began hisfirst chapter with a stunning analysis of a bracing and vital speech I knew fartoo little about: Douglass’soration at the April 1876 dedication of Washington, DC’s EmancipationMemorial. Seriously, folks, don’t be like me and let another half-dozen years goby before you read this book.

Last recentread tomorrow,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Recent reads you’d share?