Barry Bonds and enhancement's strike zone
The second half of the major league baseball season starts tonight and so continues Barry Bonds' pursuit of the career home run record (he needs four more to tie Hank Aaron). Normally such a chase would prompt enthusiastic attention, but in this case fans and media members are somewhat ambivalent. Even baseball's commissioner seems conflicted. The reason, of course, is the widespread belief that Bonds has used illegal steroids. And if he has, does that mean one of baseball's most hallowed records will soon mean less? It's a question worth thinking about for us all -- sports fan or not -- as we enter the age of widespread enhancement.
The situation surrounding Bonds is difficult to figure for a few reasons. First and foremost, it's never been officially determined what the slugger did or did not take, though there is a mountain of accusation and evidence. Secondly, it's very possible that Barry Bonds could have piled up all those homers without pharmaceutical help. He's a freak of nature, with almost otherworldly hand-eye coordination. And even before he started bulking up, people were talking about him as one of the sport's all-time best. So, could steroids have helped him be even better? It's certainly possible, but there's no way to know for sure.
That question of where "natural" ability stops and "artificial" enhancement picks up, and the implications, will almost surely make its way into other parts of our culture. It's not hard to see a near future that features focus inducers, creativity prompts and arousal multipliers. Should we view Jimmy's perfect SAT score differently if he was on the juice? Is it his "real" score? Does it count? What about the painting composed with the help of a pill? (OK, there's history for this one.) Is it still a masterpiece? And what about the sexual encounter that starts with a puff on an inhaler -- is that romantic?
As it is now, the thought of juiced-up SAT takers probably makes people uncomfortable. Uncomfortable enough for us to require screening? Or maybe we can be fine with it, as long as there's disclosure. Sure, Jimmy was on the juice, but that's OK because when his scores get sent to colleges they'll carry an asterisk.
That asterisk option is actually something people are considering if conclusive proof ever surfaces that Barry Bonds did take steroids. Not that it might matter for very long. Baseball watchers are already speculating that another current player, Alex Rodriguez, will eventually pass Bonds. And A-Rod has a clean rep when it comes to steroids. Or, at least, he does right now.
-Greg Dahlmann
contribute a comment
Comments have been closed for this post.
comments
If conclusive evidence surfaces, I think he should be removed from the Hall of Fame. Stars in all professions are role models and kids do not need any more examples of people "winning" through deceit. It may be true that others have done the same thing and not gotten caught. If five people run the red light and you become number six, you can argue with the policeman who stops you, but you will get a ticket, though the other five escaped unscathed.
Onehealthpro
- by Onehealthpro on Jul 13, 2007 at 10:20 AM | link
Onehealthpro, you're right... the cheating part of all this is hard to get past. Though baseball does tend to be lenient about cheating sometimes. The spitball is against the rules, but people in the game also seem to have a certain fondness for it.
OK, let's throw a curve in there. What if at some point steroids (or some other kind of pharmaceutical enhancement) becomes legal in major league baseball? Would we have to go back and reassess Bonds and the other probable steroid takers?
- by gd on Jul 13, 2007 at 6:03 PM | link
steroids = cheating.
- by emily sheffer md on Jul 15, 2007 at 6:18 AM | link