I have to say this about Rebecca Solnit, and it will seem petty but I think it tells: she doesn’t get the details right. I opened her book on walking, and stumbled right out of the gate at her characterization of the Marin Nike site as (IIRC) an “ICBM silo.” I’ve never been able to entirely trust her again after that. And in reporting on matters like the climate, the details aren’t merely the details: they are the story. It matters. Make of that what you will. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/26/we-cant-afford-to-be-climate-doomers
@adamgreenfield This is where I am with Graeber/Wengrow, unfortch. Not just details but…load-bearing cherrypicking. Once you see it, you can’t trust the rest.
@adamgreenfield@kissane Yes, file under influencer and possibly also bulshitter, not as serious contributor. Although sometimes they popularise things and I'm glad. See also zizek.
@adamgreenfield@kissane (but I must add that I believe the world needs bullshitters. We just shouldn't take them too seriously and look up to them too much.)
@alan Thanks Alan – I didn’t have the text ready to hand, and I was worried someone would nail me up for my hypocrisy if I (ha!) didn’t get the details right. It’s even worse than I remembered, actually, in that she spins her misconception of what the thing is into a whole lyrical excursion. It’s exactly why I can’t trust her.
@adamgreenfield I've long been a fan of Rebecca, and still deeply admire her. I never caught that inaccuracy in "Wanderlust", but when I saw her retweeting westplaining military "Twitter experts" in the first 48 hours after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I thought "Come on, Rebecca, you know better than that. You do, don't you? [cue Annakin and Padme meme here] DON'T YOU?!"
So, I still read her, but I take her with a couple of kilos of salt. And I haven't read anything climate-related by her, yet.
Add comment