The Goffman Saga Continues

The New York Times Magazine will have an article on "The Trials of Alice Goffman" on Sunday, January 17.  It is already posted on line here, although it may be behind a paywall.

Paul Campos has responded here and here.

I will probably post something about this on Monday.

Comments

[Captian Hurska Carswell, Continuance King]

Hopefully, my CBR will arrive in the mail today so I can boogie down to Barnes and Noble and purchase her book. The last time I purchased a book because it generated "publicity" was in 1989. It was entitled "The Satanic Verses." I waited in line at Kieser's Bookstore in Omaha, Nebraska after they telephoned that they received a shipment. The line stretched around the block in freezing cold and snow. I only read the first three pages; it was lousy, actually. It has a place of honor on my bookshelf today.

[Matthew Reid Krell]

Is...is that Donald Trump commenting at the Lounge?

[Subscriber]

The Times piece is so laughably bad as to make me seriously question the value of retaining my subscription. If this is their idea of reporting, maybe I should just read Buzzfeed for free.

[Captian Hurska Carswell, Continuance King]

Professor Krell,

Who are you calling Donald Trump? I am soliciting Professor Lubet to punch you in nose if you are referring to my comment. I am devastated. I am having my Klonopin increased because of you. We can't criticize a book now? Actually, the Jihadists and I agree, Rusdie's book was terrible. It was the best purchase I ever made, however. With Goffman's book, like Satanic Verses, is a consequence of the Barbara Streisand effect. Additionally, since this is a family friendly, "G" rated blog, I can't really write what I read between the lines of the NY Times piece. She really really "liked" her subjects.

[Captian Hurska Carswell, Continuance King]

Boys, Boys, can't we all just get along? Maybe we can all agree that Ted Cruz is an idiot for his NY statements and shutting down our gub'mint. I had to wait an additional three weeks in 2014 for my tax refund. How about that? Brackets, it's technically "libel." anon, what facts do you have to support your assertions? It very well could be libel if you don't have facts and there is malice. I am curious? I think the viewers to this post would like to be educated?