A Truth in Packaging Issue

[9thdoctor]

it ends with one of the greatest affirmations of life in English literature.

...and yes I said yes I will Yes.

BTW, so far only “1 of 4 people found the following review helpful:”

I could use some yes votes. Paul Beaird has commented, saying I'm lyrical but alas then I stumble. I replied.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1OV76HDWQSML7/ref=cm_cr_pr_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0739127802&nodeID=#wasThisHelpful

[9thdoctor]

By the way State of Fear was a great book.

I read State of Fear, and felt that the kind of criticisms you often hear about Atlas Shrugged, namely that the plot is overly contrived to suit the author’s idealogical agenda, and that the characters are flat and cartoonish, actually do apply to State of Fear. But you have to love the scene with the cannibals and the actor (Martin Sheen?) towards the end. Crichton’s essay afterwards was the most worthwhile part.

We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven't tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it's this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science.

Richard Feynman

Did he forsee AGW?

[Selene]

By the way State of Fear was a great book.

I read State of Fear, and felt that the kind of criticisms you often hear about Atlas Shrugged, namely that the plot is overly contrived to suit the author's idealogical agenda, and that the characters are flat and cartoonish, actually do apply to State of Fear. But you have to love the scene with the cannibals and the actor (Martin Sheen?) towards the end. Crichton's essay afterwards was the most worthwhile part.

We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven't tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it's this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science.

Richard Feynman

Did he forsee AGW?

Yes indeed. I just happen to love arrogant characters like Kenner.

The essay was well worth it. I also enjoyed Jennifer's arrogant destruction of the entire fraud.

I believe, that he did foresee AGW.

Adam

[Robert Campbell]

ND,

Thank you for the link to the Binswanger piece.

All I can think is, they were having a slow week (year? century?) at Capitalism Magazine.

It's the kind of article that, if the author were not identified, could easily be mistaken for a parody of Objectivism.

Boeckmann and Mayhew use adjectives like "lamentable," "bizarre," and "amateurish" for works of which they disapprove.

You could make a case that all three apply to this Binswanger article.

Robert Campbell

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

It's kinda cute that, on the Amazon sales page for Essays on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged (Paperback) - Robert Mayhew (Author), under the heading "Frequently Bought Together," the other two books are Ayn Rand and the World She Made by Anne C. Heller, and Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right by Jennifer Burns, in that order. Price For All Three: $74.09.

That's quite a bundle.

Under "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought" you find Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right by Jennifer Burns, and Ayn Rand and the World She Made by Anne C. Heller in first and second place respectively.

Really interesting is the purchase habits of viewers of the Amazon sales page for Mayhew's book. Under the heading, "What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?", you get the following percentages:

54% buy the item featured on this page: Essays on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged

17% buy Ayn Rand and the World She Made

11% buy Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right

11% buy Atlas Shrugged

In other words, the sales page for this book is stimulating sales for Anne Heller and Jennifer Burns in addition to Ayn Rand.

Heh.

The public speaks.

The ARI squad can try to skew public perception in the reader reviews, but it is much, much harder when actual sales are involved.

I was going to do a screenshot, but I got lazy...

Michael

[Robert Campbell]

Michael,

Yes, I noticed that same 3-book bundle, and the sales data on books bought after viewing the Mayhew item.

Will the ARIans ever realize that the demand for Ayn Rand and the demand for movement Objectivism are very different things?

Robert Campbell

[dan2100]

I just threw my hat in the ring, now there's 4 3-star reviews. I feel like I'm in really good company, too.

Since you brought up the Chambers review, has anyone on this site discussed Tom Bertonneau's "Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged: from romantic fallacy to holocaustic imagination"? It's online at:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0354/is_4_46/ai_n8680946/

[Robert Campbell]

Since you brought up the Chambers review, has anyone on this site discussed Tom Bertonneau's "Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged: from romantic fallacy to holocaustic imagination"? It's online at:

http://findarticles....46/ai_n8680946/

Dan,

It's been mentioned. I don't recall much discussion of the Bertonneau piece on OL, but it may have taken place when I wasn't very active here.

I read the Bertonneau two or three years ago. Would have to reread it to be able to participate in a discussion of it.

Robert Campbell

[Robert Campbell]

Now, after a second comment by Doug Rasmussen, Allan Gotthelf has weighed in with a comment.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R7WDGE94LMEWG/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&cdMsgNo=8&cdPage=1&store=books&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx35BGTX2WYJRO5#Mx35BGTX2WYJRO5

That's pretty heavy traffic for a few reader reviews on amazon.

Robert Campbell

[merjet]

The Product Description says:

"This is the first scholarly study of Atlas Shrugged, covering in detail the historical, literary, and philosophical aspects of Ayn Rand's magnum opus. Topics explored in depth include the history behind the novel's creation, publication, and reception; its nature as a romantic novel; and its presentation of a radical new philosophy."

Mr. Beaird defends this, seeming to emphasize "first." Okay, if a study were scholarly, but didn't deal with such aspects, what aspects would it deal with? This non-scholar is curious. (Disclosure: I haven't read the books by Mayhew, Gladstein, or Younkins.)

[dan2100]

Since you brought up the Chambers review, has anyone on this site discussed Tom Bertonneau's "Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged: from romantic fallacy to holocaustic imagination"? It's online at:

http://findarticles....46/ai_n8680946/

Dan,

It's been mentioned. I don't recall much discussion of the Bertonneau piece on OL, but it may have taken place when I wasn't very active here.

I read the Bertonneau two or three years ago. Would have to reread it to be able to participate in a discussion of it.

Robert Campbell

Maybe it's worth creating a separate topic somewhere on this site. I have been in contact with Bertonneau for a while now and it might be interesting if he also answered criticisms.

[Dragonfly]

As long as it isn't critical, it's unlikely to be scholarly.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Now, after a second comment by Doug Rasmussen, Allan Gotthelf has weighed in with a comment.

Robert,

The kind of remarks I read from him leave me frustrated. All this hairsplitting over what "scholarly" means as if this is going to mean anything to anyone.

Surely the ARI people know that if you get a bunch of scholars together to write academic essays on a topic, you have a "scholarly" work by any standard on earth.

Good friggin Keriiiiist!

Mayhew screwed up with that product description for whatever reason. More ARI history rewriting? The zealot's exaggeration? Just plain old vanilla-flavored screw-up. Who knows? It doesn't matter to the big picture. It's a screw-up. That's the bottom line. And that's what it's going to be called in history, too.

Michael

[Robert Campbell]

Now, after a second comment by Doug Rasmussen, Allan Gotthelf has weighed in with a comment.

Robert,

The kind of remarks I read from him leave me frustrated. All this hairsplitting over what "scholarly" means as if this is going to mean anything to anyone.

Surely the ARI people know that if you get a bunch of scholars together to write academic essays on a topic, you have a "scholarly" work by any standard on earth.

Good friggin Keriiiiist!

Michael,

Allan Gotthelf is seen by the ARIans as one of them (and he basically is) but he tries to maintain some vestige of cred with non-ARIan Rand scholars.

He could give Skip Gates a lesson in talking out of both sides of his mouth.

Bob Mayhew's rash claim about his book (which Lexington Books took up and used in its publicity) is a screw-up. Not his first, either. But the ARIans can't admit it, apply a quiet patch, and move on.

Instead, several middle-level functionaries are jumping in. Tore Boeckmann is flaming on about the Younkins book, and Ed Cline has reappeared with a review. Even Greg Salmieri is now represented (far from the worst I have seen from him, but also trying to emulate his mentor, Dr. Gotthelf).

Robert Campbell

[9thdoctor]

I got a little ticked at Boeckmann’s comments, so I've chimed in again

"The first printing of Ed Younkins' book on Atlas Shrugged was withdrawn because of a bunch of bad copyediting that neither Dr. Younkins nor the other contributors knew anything about before they saw printed copies."

No, this is a lie spread by contributors to that book (whether it originates with Younkins himself I do not know). For one example (there are more) of why Ashhgate actually had to recall the book, see the account of Ayn Rand's editing of Atlas Shrugged, on page 2 of the Introduction of the recalled edition. The words and ideas are presented as the editor's own. But compare with the new edition, which I understand actually gives the true source for these ideas. It's not Younkins.

There is a word for this kind of thing, and it's not "bad copyediting."

What evidence do you have that Younkins (or whomever) is lying about copyediting problems? You refer to an unavailable printing of the book, don’t describe the problem in sufficient detail, and then descend to innuendo. What is the word we are to imagine? Your posts make me think not of one, but four: Ma gavte la nata.

“It’s Turin dialect. It means, literally, ‘Be so kind as to remove the cork.’ A pompous, self-important, overweening individual is thought to hold himself the way he does because of a cork stuck in his sphincter ani, which prevents his vaporific dignity from being dispersed. The removal of the cork causes the individual to deflate, a process usually accompanied by a shrill whistle and the reduction of the outer envelope to a poor fleshless phantom of its former self.”

Umberto Eco, Foucault’s Pendulum, pp 494-495

[9thdoctor]

The saga continues:

I would like to avoid innuendo, so let me be perfectly clear. Upon publication, Younkins' collection was found to contain numerous cases of plagiarism from the work of ARI-affiliated scholars. Upon the demand of these scholars, the book was recalled and revised. (I have given one specific example, concerning the work of Shoshana Milgram.) This is not a copyediting issue. Clear enough?

True, false, spun beyond recognition?

[Robert Campbell]

The saga continues:

I would like to avoid innuendo, so let me be perfectly clear. Upon publication, Younkins' collection was found to contain numerous cases of plagiarism from the work of ARI-affiliated scholars. Upon the demand of these scholars, the book was recalled and revised. (I have given one specific example, concerning the work of Shoshana Milgram.) This is not a copyediting issue. Clear enough?

True, false, spun beyond recognition?

ND,

I never heard a word of these allegations before.

Mr. Boeckmann has implied that that there were no copyediting problems with the book, and any suggestions that there were is some kind of cover story.

That, I can tell you from my own experience, is bullshit.

When the first printing came out, in May 2007, my chapter was messed up: there were quotes that didn't close where they were supposed to close, stretches of quoted dialogue where all the single quotes inside the double quotes were gone, apostrophes replaced with single quotes, italics gratuitously dropped, and a swarm of lesser errors introduced in the copyediting stage. I had some work to do to clean it up for the corrected printing.

I got an email from Ed Younkins asking me whether my chapter had typos in it. He said he'd already heard complaints from authors of other chapters.

I heard complaints from other contributors to the volume. I read 9 other chapters after I discovered the errors in mine; many of the others were in worse shape.

The Introduction to the book (pages 1-5) had no citations, no footnotes, and no reference section in the first printing. Shoshana Milgram isn't the only author who wasn't cited.

In the corrected version, the Introduction has several citations, including one to Dr. Milgram on p. 2. It has one footnote, mentioning other books that have discussed Atlas Shrugged, including Mayhew's forthcoming volume. It has a reference section with works by 5 authors in it.

If Ed Younkins was trying to rip off Shoshana Milgram, it looks like he was also trying to rip off Ayn Rand (her published Journals), Leonard Peikoff, Robert Hunt, and Mimi Gladstein. The last two, needless to say, are not ARI authors—and Mimi Gladstein was one of the contributors to the volume.

Boeckmann doesn't mention that the first printing had 38 chapters and the corrected version has 36. While the corrections were being made, Ed took out a chapter of his own that he wasn't satisfied with. He also received a request from Michelle Fram Cohen to remove her chapter.

Ms. Cohen had undergone a noisy conversion to ARIanism in the course of which, among other things, she made the public charge that Chris Sciabarra had surreptitiously published the fateful one-paragraph reply by Andrew Bernstein without getting Dr. Bernstein's permission. (Bernstein himself has never made this allegation. It is a complete fabrication.) She told Ed that she didn't want her essay to appear in a volume in which she found "a few" of the chapters to be "offensive."

I don't know whether Ms. Cohen was Mr. Boeckmann's source for these charges. I will ask him.

Robert Campbell

[9thdoctor]

If Ed Younkins was trying to rip off Shoshana Milgram, it looks like he was also trying to rip off Ayn Rand (her published Journals), Leonard Peikoff, Robert Hunt, and Mimi Gladstein. The last two, needless to say, are not ARI authors—and Mimi Gladstein was one of the contributors to the volume.

Beautiful. Here's my reply to Boeckmann:

Yes, that was a great improvement in communications. You claim there were numerous instances of plagairism, however copyediting errors could easily explain the lack of a proper citation in the one case you mention. Were the only errors they corrected these omitted citations of “ARI-affiliated scholars”? I don’t expect you to have done a page by page comparison of the two versions, but if the first printing was a mess, there should be other errors beyond whatever material sparked complaints from your quarter. Absence of such would make your case very persuasive.

Ms. Cohen had undergone a noisy conversion to ARIanism

Has there ever been a conversion to ARIanism that wasn’t noisy? Not to nitpick, but perhaps the adjective isn’t necessary in the context.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Ninth Doctor

[Robert Campbell]

ND,

Yes, I've actually heard of cases where people converted to ARIanism without rending their garments, bemoaning their past iniquities, and issuing public denunciations of their former friends and colleagues.

They do seem to be in the minority, though.

Ms. Cohen's conversion took place partly in the pages of the old SOLOHQ. She also backed out on a speaking commitment at a TAS event. I'd say "noisy" in the right adjective in her case.

Robert Campbell

[9thdoctor]

I've actually heard of cases where people converted to ARIanism without rending their garments, bemoaning their past iniquities, and issuing public denunciations of their former friends and colleagues.

Yes indeed, I was just teasing. I’m looking forward to asking Boeckmann about attribution of the term “psycho-epistemology” in ARI-affiliated literature. If he keeps up with the plagiarism accusations.

I find chatting on Amazon more than a little annoying, each review has it’s own comment thread. Too much clicking around.

[Robert Campbell]

I find chatting on Amazon more than a little annoying, each review has it's own comment thread. Too much clicking around.

True.

I've noticed some bozos copy the same comments onto three or four threads.

To be fair, the designers couldn't have expected the comment function on reviews to get this level of use.

Robert Campbell

[Robert Campbell]

Get a load of Ed Cline's review of the Mayhew book:

http://www.amazon.co...=cm_cr_rdp_perm

Mr. Boeckmann noted that "Dr. Rasmussen specifically cites Edward Younkins' collection of essays, which falls in this category, let me simply mention that the publishers had to recall the first printing of that book when the editor's breaches of the most elementary scholarly standards were pointed out to them." Yet Dr. Rasmussen, after having read this, still insists that Younkins' book deserves attention and presumably respect. More likely the Younkins book shares company with "Dr." Pellegrine's "Last Train from Hiroshima," found out too late by Henry Holt, the publisher, to contain numerous errors, mispresentations, and anecdotes from fictive persons concernng the bombing of Hiroshima, and all copies of it recalled by Holt.

You just can't make this stuff up.

Robert Campbell

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Maybe someone can get in touch with the publisher of Edward Younkins's book and get a statement?

If there are people publishing on Amazon that they issue plagiarized books, it seems to me that they should be interested in saying something.

Michael

[Chris Grieb]

Let me be a minority of one. I like both the Mayhew book and Younians book. I found good things in both.

[Robert Campbell]

Chris G,

As I said when the hullabaloo started, the Mayhew book's on my wish list.

I expect many of the chapters to be good.

Robert C