Author A writes a book. Author B writes a book that reaches different conclusions than did author A. Author A raises questions about those conclusions (and the questions will always be seen in some quarters as “trashing” author B’s work, which, of course, raised questions about author A’s conclusions). That happens all the time. It’s happened on this blog. It’s happened on my blog. Now, when author B responds by launching a personal attack and not responding to the substance of author A’s criticism, and, upon further inquiry, we find that author B does this all the time … and in print … well, I guess I don’t conclude “a pox on both houses,” and I don’t think that’s a fair conclusion.

That said, it certainly does bear some striking similarities to the mudslinging about what people think of what Wiley Sword wrote about John Bell Hood.

It also does bear repeating that people who hold forth on how unseemly this all is don’t always recall those observations when they find themselves in the middle of such a “discussion.”

One thing is for sure: the advent of the internet will have profound implications for the discussion of historical scholarship.

There is an old addage: “Never let the truth stand in the way of a good story [or movie?].”

> This is a bizarre and indefensible position for a professor of anything to take.

No it isn’t when you think about it from a logical, rational point of view. Is it the job of academia to go about squashing any and all examples of poor scholarship, erroneous conclusions, and bad arguments? Should we extend that into the popular press? Come now, you know that is silly.

What my professor indicated is he felt that if the scholarship was solid and the other person’s work of note, then he should respond by way of a review. And that review should highlight not only the points that the reviewer disagreed upon, but also the redeeming qualities of the work.

On the other hand, if the work was a poor intellectual product, why bother spending the time to elevate it to a false level of acceptance? That’s a lot different than simply ignoring it. From him, a highly respected professor within his field, silence on a matter such as that was quite deafening.

Respectfully,
Craig

>then don’t write the review

This is a bizarre and indefensible position for a professor of anything to take. So, the argument is if the intellectual product is poor, just ignore it?
Isn’t it the responsibility of the academy to inform people about poor scholarship, erroneous conclusions, and bad arguments?

Apparently, this professor never quite got the concept of literary criticism.

Best,
Dan

Perhaps the best bit of advice regarding reviews I’d received in grad school came from a professor of English Lit. His bottom line was, if you think the book poorly written, discount the scholarship, or just don’t like it, then don’t write the review. Don’t give the author the exposure that, regardless of what you say, will lead to wider distribution of what you deem a poor product!