rolling over

[jonathankaplan]

Seems like I have been reading/thinking a great deal the last few months about social injustice. In accord with that, I recently read the book 'Oil!', by Upton Sinclair. It was a worthwhile read, and Sinclair uses words with more skill than most of his peers. Perhaps you were forced to read 'the Jungle' when you were in school, that is his most

Comments

[selfishgene]

People like Sinclair often had great descriptions of social problems. It was their solutions that were useless and often disastrous.
It always amazes me how followers of a famous intellectual often blatantly ignore that intellectual's actual opinions. Ayn Rand is an obvious example. She always emphasized thinking for yourself, yet many followers regard independent thoughts as heresy.

[jonathankaplan]

It is hard to find the human who can both accurately describe a great social problem so very well that almost everyone can empathize (while it is happening, in context) and ALSO has the solution to the problem. It takes more people.

You make me laugh because I recall that I went through a pretty fervent Randian phase, decades ago. I can hardly imagine thinking like that now.

[combinatorial]

I'd just like to note that P.T. Anderson has said repeatedly in interviews that he doesn't even consider his film an adaptation of the Upton Sinclair novel. Obviously the publishers of Oil! were eager to link to the movie since it almost certainly would benefit sales

[jonathankaplan]

Of course, you hit it right on the head, the publishers of Oil! had the most to benefit, more so than the movie side. But still, there was universal discredit here. Anderson, by even connecting the two (as he does in this interview) as ANYthing more than period source material, is rolling Sinclair. He knew they were really unfaithful, yet allowed the book cover to call the movie "inspired" by the book.
Creeps. Guess I shouldn't expect more.