‘Diamonds Are Forever,’ but Memories Are Best Left Untested

I’m at the San Diego Museum of Contemporary Art for Thursday’s preview of “Diamonds Are Forever: Artists and Writers on Baseball.”

The museum is trying to shed its hoity-toity image. A while back, it dropped La Jolla from its name in favor of San Diego.

Now it has a traveling show of photographs, artwork and memorabilia that museum director Hugh Davies says is direct from “the intersection of culture and sport.” Not a bad address.

I’ll leave it to my aesthetic betters (there are so many of them) to judge its artistic merits.

But I will venture a guess that the two-month show--which also includes lectures and films--will be very popular. Look for a steady stream of males on Prospect Street with tears in their eyes, memories fully conjured.

It’s a romantic and nostalgic kind of show. A father-and-son kind of show. Rite of passage and getting it right.

My favorite stuff (notice the graceful use of artistic terms) is the oil-on-canvas of Joe DiMaggio and the photos of minor league and sandlot play. And, of course, the Mickey Mantle bat under glass.

Former big-league pitcher Tom Seaver attends the preview luncheon. He’s articulate, poised, affable, the thinking man’s ex-jock. He does public relations for American Express, which is underwriting the show.

After guiding a quick tour, Seaver goes to the baseball field at UC San Diego for a media stunt that is repeated wherever “Diamonds” plays: former fastballer lobs a few pitches at out-of-shape reporters, politicians, etc.

At the last second, I decide to skip it. It doesn’t seem right.

I remember Seaver when he was terrifying and struck out Willie Mays at Candlestick Park. And I remember when I was a moderately competent schoolboy player.

I think I’d rather remember Seaver (and myself) from that long-ago time: younger, less contrived, more capable of a purity of effort.

I’m not sure, but I think that’s what “Diamonds” is all about.

Bernhardt and Red Ink

More trouble for Councilwoman Linda Bernhardt.

As if a recall move isn’t bad enough, City Atty. John Witt this week informed Bernhardt that his office is investigating whether her $90,000 debt from last fall’s campaign violates a city ordinance banning any such debts past 30 days.

Wrote Witt: “The matter is in the hands of Senior Chief Deputy City Atty. Stuart H. Swett for the free exercise of prosecutorial discretion.”

The aim of the 1973 ordinance is twofold: To enable voters to know before an election who is paying a candidate’s bills, not after . And to keep candidates from receiving illegal contributions in the guise of bills for services that are then never paid.

But Witt has long held that the ordinance needs clarification because it does not provide exemptions for small bills that, in the natural course of things, are held for more than 30 days.

In 1981 and 1986, Witt asked the council to adopt clarifying language. Both times, the council told Witt to forget it. Hey, why close a loophole you may want to use yourself someday?

Bernhardt replies that others recently have run campaign deficits and not been prosecuted.

True enough, but Bernhardt’s whopping debt is in a class by itself, still several times as large as any other candidate. It started at $155,000 and was whittled down only by vigorous post-election fund-raising from developers and others.

A good bet around City Hall is that Swett and Witt will decline to prosecute Bernhardt--conviction could mean her ouster from office--but will use her as an egregious example of how deficit campaigning makes a mockery of disclosure laws and contribution limits.

Look for Witt to renew his call for council action.

Born to Wait

Are we having fun yet?

Spotted at Sea World: tourists standing in line for 30 minutes to buy fish (“Mammal Food $1”) to fling to the dolphins.