Re: The Kirkpatrick vs. Greenblatt argument.
It certainly does not seem to have hurt its chances in the poll. The argument alone seems like it could spark some good discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sun surfer
. . .
It's a wonderful blurb and had me hooked - until I realised that its assertion may not be true, or at least overstated. If I didn't believe that Greenblatt really believed it then I might even call it possibly disingenuous. The best I can make of it, this seems to be a very intelligent and very good writer who hit upon an interesting but flawed idea and with zeal and fervour decided to write a book about it, and perhaps subconsciously employed a selection bias in choosing what to include in the book to support his premise.
However, you make some great points and regardless I think the discussion thread for the book could be very interesting.
|
If true it would not be the first non-fiction book I will have read where the author over stated a point of fact in order to have a compelling core around which to build the entire premise of the book. It is the sort of thing that can turn a dry historical book into an popular bestseller that wins book awards.
