It is possible I may have been slighted.

Or at least, my self-perception as a historian has.

Should this entertain me? Or is it a sign of encroaching madness that I cackle like the Wicked Witch of the West at random comments on the internet?

Such knowledge. So history. Wow.

Most entertaining answer wins a prize.

6 thoughts on “It is possible I may have been slighted.

  1. That’s what you get for wasting your time writing reviews when you could be writing a thesis!

    fwiw, I love Weber but the one thing that has often bugged me is “the extent of Weber’s technological exposition detracts significantly from his ability to tell a good story.” I like science and technology to be believable, but I don’t necessarily need to know enough about it to build it myself.

  2. He has yet to meet a reviewer with knowledge of history, because all the smart reviewers know to run in the other direction when he shows up.

  3. He’s right, you don’t have “much” knowledge of history. You’ve got (and here I’m using technical terms of measurement) “a fuckton” of knowledge of history.

    What a twazzock.

  4. @Derek Broughton:

    Yep. If I wanted to know about blast furnaces, I’d read a technical manual.

    @between4walls:

    I think you win the prize.

    @Daniel Franklin:

    A fuckton is still not enough! (Are we talking metric or imperial here? :) )

  5. Imperial clearly – a metric fucktonne is spelled fucktonne :-P

    One wonders what *would* be enough for this guy… or if, when you disagree with him, enough actually exists…

Comments are closed.