THE GIRL WHO LOVED TOM GORDON

“♪♪ Who do you call when your windshield’s busted? ♪♪” Trisha sang softly.
“♪♪1-555-54-GIANT. ♪♪”

THE GIRL WHO LOVED TOM  GORDON by Stephen King © 1999 Scribner. When  ten-year-old Trisha McFarland gets lost in the woods, she has only a boiled egg, a tuna fish sandwich and her Sony Walkman for comfort. She is a huge fan of Tom Gordon, a relief pitcher for the Boston Red Sox, so she listens to the games and he becomes an imaginary character in her mind. I found this book to be a thoroughly enjoyable read and I highly recommended it. Since I pictured Dakota in my mind as the little girl Trisha McFarland, it was a little bit like having a new Dakota film playing in my head. The novel is part spook story and part survival story, with the baseball subtext woven into the fabric of the narrative so cleverly that the imaginary Tom Gordon becomes an integral character. As Trisha becomes more lost and her deprivation becomes more severe, the little girl’s misery descends from tears into abject terror―baseball itself becomes a metaphor for Trisha’s very survival. TOM GORDON is really a lot less of a scare novel than it is a coming-of-age story similar to King’s Stand by me.

     I should preface all my comments by stating emphatically there is no movie there never was any movie and all comments made here are merely the musings and reminiscence of the wishful author.

     In the spring of 2004 there was a substantial rumor that Dakota Fanning was going to be cast in a movie called The Girl who loved Tom Gordon. At first I was horrified, Stephen King, didn’t he write ghost stories and movies about teen-age proms drenched in buckets of blood? Besides, what an absolutely clunky, unmanageable title, I had serious flashbacks to the ‘70’s and another clunky title, The Little Girl who lived down the Lane. There was the cool poster with the little girl beside the grave and spade, it was all spooky. Unfortunately, for Jodie Foster the movie tanked.

     As far as The Girl who loved Tom Gordon, it’s a quick read and comes in at slim 260 pages. The baseball theme is incorporated so seamlessly, so exquisitely that to separate the two would be impossible. I was instantly transported back to my glorious baseball youth: “THE ROAR OF ’84.” The year the Detroit Tigers won the World Series. I truly do remember the power and glory of Milt Wilcox, Alan Trammel and Jack Morris. Who could forget Kirk Gibson’s climatic home run? Baseball has that effect on people. After reading the book, all my childhood baseball enthusiasm came flooding back to me. Stephen King has somehow transformed baseball into the perfect metaphor for Trisha McFarland’s survival. I don’t know how he does it. I guess that’s what great writing is all about. A little girl lost in the woods all of a sudden comes down to a three and two pitch in the bottom of the ninth. I’ve read In to Thin Air, a great survival story if there ever was one. The Girl who loved Tom Gordon  is not so much a great survival story as it is a great baseball story. I’m not a big fan of George Romero. Maybe he’s matured. Maybe this is his own personal coming-of-age picture after reading the book, after reading the book I could think of no other title better than The Girl who loved Tom Gordon.

     The Girl who loved Tom Gordon represents one of the greatest could have been, what if, casting missed opportunities in movie history. Dakota would have been absolutely perfect for the part. At the time, Dakota was ten-years-old, exactly the same age as Trisha the girl in the book. The part of Trisha is very physical, and the scares mostly psychological. Since a great deal of the story’s narrative takes place inside the girl’s head, it was a chance for Dakota to flex her considerable narration skills. Little girl as action hero?  If you think about it, how often are ten-year-old girls really allowed to be brave? Certainly not Penny Robinson, every time a shambling bush monster appeared out of the woodwork all she ever did was scream, run away and fall down. I think that's what I like most about this story, Trisha McFarland is brave. The part of Trisha requires Dakota to hike, climb, and sing. “♪♪ 1-800 GIANT ♪♪” and get slathered in mud (you got to love a girl covered in mud)! Aside from the imaginary Tom Gordon, Trisha McFarland is principally the only other character in the novel. The whole weight of the film was to be on Dakota’s shoulders. I think she’s could have done well in this part.

     There was some controversy about the part. Trisha does indeed resort to some profanity during her ordeal lost in the woods. The obscenities come first during the middle act of the narrative when things for our heroine have gone from bad to worse (what could possibly be worse?) Trisha looses her shoe in the mud, and is desperate to retrieve it. The cursing is well within the context of the story and comes not without moral compunctions. Trisha stands up, still holding the rescued sneaker in her hand, and looked ahead.

“Oh fuck!,” Trisha croaked. It was the first time in her life she had said that
 particular world out loud . . .

     I consider the ramifications of the fact that our ten-year-old Dakota was going to have to use some very naughty words in her screen portrayal of Trisha McFarland. However I feel within the context of the story the dialogue is well justified and not gratuitous. This is not a case of the use of profanity for profanity sake. Trisha is essentially a very good girl. Under normal circumstances she would never talk that way, but Trisha’s circumstances are anything but normal and her use of bad language is used by King to illustrate the profound depth of her decent into misery and despair. The cursing comes at a time when Trisha comes to the full realization of the dire straight in which she finds herself.

     We will never know why this project failed. I suspect that perhaps the director was wrong, George Romero. When it was announced that Dakota was pulling out of the project, the movie remained with out a Trisha and ultimately was never filmed.  I’ve always felt this to be one of the great missed opportunities in movie history.  It is still a great story, a great book and I sincerely hope it is made one day, sadly, just not with Dakota.

(Let me organize a few pitchforks and torches) . . .