[lit-ideas] Academic Puffery and the Blurb
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 17:07:16 +0100 (BST)
--- Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >
> The praise from Mind is hardly surprising, it being the
> in-house periodical of the Oxbridge view of philosophy
> of which P&M are themselves representatives [and Popper is not,
> Mind rejected Pp's 'Poverty of Historicism' for publication; each to his
> own].
> One might be more intrigued by such puffery,
> and more inclined to accept it must have something to it, if it were
> being offered by the Catholic Herald for a marxist-leninist
> translation of the Bible.
This reminds me of the review of Hart's 'The Concept of Law' which is blurbed
afair that the book is to be commended on two counts - it is done well, and
it is right!
Imagine OUP at that time publishing an Oxbridge review saying the same of
'Das Kapital', even 'PI' etc. On the other hand it is matter of record how
people like GE Moore wet their knickers when assessing the TLP as a doctoral
thesis..
Can anyone add to the the list of fatuous blurbs disguised as critical
evaluation? I guess it must be "almost infinite".*
* Quoting Dan Quayle re 'space'.
Donal
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Academic Puffery and the Blurb
