Salaman, Redcli e, The History and Social In uence of the Potato (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1949).
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 5:27 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "shag carpet bomb" <shag at cleandraws.com>
>>
>> i liked Salt (written by a guy with leftish credentials) - and it was
>> James' response to my commentary on it that got me thinking about
>> these publishing fads.
>>
>> -----
>> Yes. And I was not moralizing. I was simply speculating on what is fueling such fads.
>>
>
> It's an interesting question, and I'm not sure the answer is a simple
> one. It's true that there's been sort of a spate of these sorts of
> books, which are often combinations of natural history and cultural
> history, and often they seem to be about our dependence on natural
> resources we are in the process of depleting. I don't think anyone has
> mentioned the _Cod_ book yet, and there was a recent one on water
> (_The Big Thirst_, although it is much less history than in most of
> the others we're talking about). I do not think, in general, that it's
> a bad thing at all. But why they are hot right now . . . In a lot of
> ways, I suspect the books complicate our understanding of the main
> subject, in part because it turns out to be connected to so many other
> things in ways that may not be immediately obvious.
>
> As for Shag's initial question about the pop philosophy books, I have
> to admit to not having read a single article from any of the "_____
> and philosophy" books, not even The Big Lebwowkski volume. I know some
> people who like Alain de Botton, and I've watched some of his series
> on philosophers and thought it was pretty good, given what it was
> doing.
>
> Honestly, I think the biggest problem with the ____ and philosophy
> books as classroom books is less the philosophy part than the ______
> part. That is to say, take "The Simpsons and Philosophy." If I wanted
> to use that in class, I'd need students who were fairly familiar with
> the Simpsons. I'm teaching a class on Daoism this semester, and I want
> them to read The Tao of Pooh as an example of the western
> processing/appropriation of Daoism. I'll give them a snippet, but the
> hardest part will not be their understanding of Daoism but the fact
> that kids often don't know Winnie the Pooh any more. Of course,
> there's a new movie out this summer, but I haven't seen it and doubt
> that many of my first-years will have.
>
> Generally, in class, I'd rather they grapple directly with Plato.
> Everything else seems to be cheating them of something. Seems like to
> me.
>
> j
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929
530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com