I enjoyed this book, largely because I enjoyed all of the baseball characters (can't wait to get back to them in the author's sequel). It is historical fiction (1869), and Brock does a good job providing a ton of detail about the time period covered, especially the beginning's of baseball in the US (especially the start of it's professionalization). But he references author Jack Finney in his acknowledgement, and, to be honest,, I don't think he captures the skill that Finney had in capturing the *psychology* of the past (the fact that HOW people thought drastically impacted the world around them). But I still enjoyed the book. And, as others have mentioned, you don't have to be a big baseball fan to enjoy the book. There is A LOT of baseball, but the history is interesting and the story holds its own.
Darryl Brock follows up on his very entertaining time travel / baseball / historical fiction 1989 novel If I Never Get Back with the 2002 publication Two in the Field.In the previous book, his protagonist escapes a lot of domestic and emotional issues in modern day San Francisco and finds himself in 1869 and playing baseball with the Cincinnati Red Stockings. Much of that book’s charm was the innocence of the earlier age and our hero’s interaction with Brock’s exceptional illustration of that time.Two in the Field is still entertaining and well researched and with interesting historic characters – including Mark Twain and George Custer – but some of the earlier charm is lacking. What did it need? More baseball.
What do You think about Two In The Field (2007)?
This is the sequel to “If I Never Get Back”.Pro: 1) A bit more action than the first book, and less of an emphasis on baseball.Con: 1) Again, not focused all that much on time travel or the consequences of time travel per se (as with the first book, it was a device to place the proponent in a particular time period). 2) I did not find the parts concerning Native Americans (i.e., Indians) to be very good. 3) The romance between the main character, Sam, and Caitlin (view spoiler)[ never really develops, and so (hide spoiler)]
—Dan
