Musical Analysis of Baseball

The goal of this FanPost is to highlight the different levels at which we can view a baseball game. Since music is my primary background, many of the analogies are from music theory, but I will try to explain them so you don't have to have taken 5 years of college classes to understand them. So, here goes!

My wife and I are very different. We look nothing alike. Some of our interests are vastly different. She has a degree in biology, I have a degree in music composition. I write stories, poems, and songs, and she is extremely analytical. As such, being married to her, I am learning more and more to see things from a different perspective. After a week of her making me watch a different Disney movie almost every night, I told her that I would get her back during baseball season. Now, she likes watching baseball with me, and will even put Rockies games on in the background when she's doing homework, but she has trouble keeping focus for an entire ninth inning game (she's usually fine until Rafael Betancourt comes in). I, on the other hand, score games from the first pitch to the last out when I watch them. There's nothing wrong with either approach to watching games, they just require a different level of investment.

Anyway, this particular conversation with my wife got me to thinking, and because of my background, my thinking often relates to music in some way. The conclusion I reached is this: that a game of baseball can reasonably be compared to a piece of music. There are a few ways that this comparison makes sense.

1. Music is experiential and is designed to be taken in over time. This makes music different from some other forms of art. Visual arts are designed to exist in the dimensions of space. Painting exists on a two-dimensional canvas, sculpture is in three dimensions. Music, to be experienced as it is intended, must be listened to. Thus, it exists in the dimension of time. While music takes up no physical space, a 4-minute song is meant to take up a 4-minute time-space. Baseball is also meant to be viewed in time. This is part of the narrative of baseball, the drama and the tension built into a game. Some games will have more drama, some will have less. Each game tells a story. We can read about baseball too, and discuss it, and dissect it, and pull numbers out, which leads me to my next point:

2. Music can exist on a sheet of paper, too. I would argue that the score of a piece of music does not define it as "music," but without the score, the musicians will not know what to play. Picture an orchestra. Sitting in the auditorium, your view would have a conductor in the middle of the stage. His music has every single part on it. He knows what each violin should be playing, when the percussionists are supposed to hit their cymbals, when the trumpets are supposed to be resting, and every other nuance of the overall piece. On stage right, you'd have all the violins, each with their own part only. They know what they're supposed to be playing, but they don't have the notes for the flutes. This is the same for every other performer on the stage. The sheet music tells part of the story, but you don't get the full effect unless you experience it. In baseball, the box score is probably the best comparison to the sheet music. You might see that Troy Tulowitzki had an assist in the third inning, but you wouldn't see that he ranged deep into the hole behind the statuesque Ty Wigginton and made a jump throw moving away from the play. This leads to the third point:

3. Music can be heard in different ways, depending on what you are listening for. A guitarist is more likely to listen to guitar music. A singer is more likely to listen to vocal music. If you don't have a musical background, you might listen for what sounds appeal to you. A composer is more likely to listen to how things are written. If you feel like torturing yourself (or expanding your musical knowledge), google Arnold Schoenberg's "Pierrot Lunaire." Listen to part of it. If you don't know anything about it, it's going to sound horrible. If you know how it's written, you will hear extremely ordered music. Each note is chosen specifically because of its order. Baseball, as well, can be viewed as analytically, or as distantly as you so desire. On its most basic level, baseball is about a pitcher, a batter, fielders, runs, and outs. Then you can get into runners, managers, strategies, and details. One of the things I really like about Purple Row is that there was a debate about the effect of catchers and their ability to frame pitches on a pitcher's statistics. I won't get into that argument here, but suffice to say that the casual baseball fan isn't going to care why a pitch is called a ball or strike. They just care whether or not it is.

In one of my Music Analysis classes at Marshall University (hence the username I_Am_Marshall), we talked about something called Schenkerian analysis. The basic premise of Schenkerian analysis is that every single musical piece can be broken down into anywhere from 3-5 notes. The goal of all music, from the Renaissance to the early 1900's was the same: to establish tonality. We would describe it this way: if a song is in the key of C, the goal of the song would be to establish that we are in the key of C. Whatever notes occur in the song, they are all moving toward the end result of making sure that it is in the key of C. According to Schenker, each piece of music, no matter how long, can be stripped away into roughly 3-5 notes.

The application to baseball is that over the course of a season, many games happen. If you look at it in the most basic sense, a team is trying to win games. This is universal for every franchise (except maybe the Cubs and Pirates). When you dig deeper into a season, you can look at how the teams plan to accomplish this. A trade, a free agent signing, a promotion, or really any personnel changes are part of the story. The roles players are put into is another part of the story. This is why we can have debates about whether Chris Nelson or EY2 should be the 25th player on the roster. On a deeper level, you can look at the games themselves - who does what, pitcher wins, batting averages, home runs, UZR, counting stats, etc. You can dig so deep as to notice some of the details, like a player's batting stance, where a catcher calls for a pitch, how well a pitcher hides the ball, or what route an outfielder takes to a line drive in the gap. All of these things work together, and you can view it at whatever level you choose.

So if you are a diehard fan, or a casual fan, a season-ticket holder, or a catch-a-few-games-a-year-on-TV type, appreciate baseball on whatever level you so choose. There's nothing wrong with how you watch games, how you choose to experience them, or what you look for when you watch. Just be aware that not everyone may be watching on the same level as you. And there's nothing wrong with that.

Here's to hoping that the Rockies' 2012 season is a work of art!