Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Alex Callinicos/SWP vs Laurie Penny/New Statesman Facebook handbags

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Cuts, sexism and riots, Laurie Penny's fresh and angry voice captures the moment and the important issues – highly recommended." -- Polly Toynbee ** "Penny is re-inventing the language of dissent, delivering verbal taser-barbs to the left and right, and causing apoplexy among the old men in cardigans who run the British blogosphere." -- Paul Mason, economics editor of BBC's Newsnight In the space of a year, Laurie Penny has become one of the most prominent voices of the new left. This book brings together her diverse writings, showing what it is to be young, angry and progressive in the face of an increasingly violent and oppressive UK government. Penny Red: Notes from the New Age of Dissent collects Penny's writings on youth politics, resistance, feminism and culture. Her journalism is a unique blend of persuasive analysis, captivating interviews and first-hand accounts of political direct action. She was involved in all the key protests of 2010/2011, including the anti-fees demos in 2010 and the anti-cuts protests of spring 2011, often tweeting live from the scene of kettles and baton charges. An introduction, conclusion and extensive footnotes allow Penny to connect all the strands of her work, showing the links between political activism and wider social and cultural issues. This book is essential for understanding what motivates the new generation of activists, writers and thinkers that bring creativity, energy and urgency to the fight against capitalism and exploitation.
Click to expand...

This is her columns book it seems - complete with endorsement from Polly Toynbee (!) and Paul Mason :(
 
Actually, if that review above is correct she has done a Hari, no two ways about it:

I was very surprised to see that quotes on page 62 from Judith Ramirez are identical to those printed in a March 1988 New Internationalist article by Jane Story.

- Is Laurie re-using quotes? If so, I wonder what people think about this?

- If this is true, I wonder why it was not made clear that parts of Meat Market have been previously published – as is usual when this is the case?

- I also wonder why the Judith Ramirez quotes (from 1988, and for your reference Laurie was born in 1986) are presented as if Judith spoke to Laurie, rather than being credited to where they appear to have come from. (Perhaps I'm wrong about this, and Judith did repeat herself verbatim to Laurie during her research for this book.)
Click to expand...
 
I think what Laurie has done is different to Hari, as she is reusing quotes she gathered herself - but she has not been honest that Meat Market is a re-using of her pieces of the past two or three years, nor has she asked at least two of her previous interviewees for their permission to be in Meat Market.
 
Well, true - re Ramirez. Am waiting to see if there is any response from Laurie on this, as the blog post has gone crazy over Twitter etc, and she has been posting on Twitter this morning. She also seems to search for her name on Twitter and respond quickly to those who post bile about her, so am sure she must have seen it. Since I posted this at about 10pm last night, can't believe that nearly 300 people have read it already!! (My blog is only a few weeks old, so this is very out of character for it.)
 
She has sent me 14 DMs on Twitter in the past hour, blaming me for potentially ruining her career... Apparently, it is my fault (as someone who bought her book, read her book, and wrote about it factually and truthfully), that she did not ensure all references were printed in the book, or sources given etc. I pointed out that it is standard practice for publishers to send authors proofs of their books to read and check before it is printed. It is the author and publisher's responsibility to check all sources are included and correct - not the reader's responsibility!!!

She also says the publisher (Zer0) always prints "collections of posts". I looked on their website and could see no reference to this, and asked her for the link. She said "They don't say so - but that's what most of them are." Well, silly me, for not assuming (!).

Apparently, I'm picking on Laurie. I don't see why. She complains I tweeted the link to my blog post several times (just as I would for any blog post - whether a film review, or a drawing or anything), and that I'm attacking a fellow feminist - I pointed out my argument has nothing to do with her feminist views and is entirely related to her unclear referencing, and reusing of old content. She says she made it clear from the start that it was recycled material - but I cannot find any reference to this in the intro to the book, which I just re-read.

And she is attempting to make me feel guilty for potentially "ending her career" - as if to 'threaten' anyone for having a negative response to someone's work.

Extraordinary.
 
MadamJMo said:
She has sent me 14 DMs on Twitter in the past hour, blaming me for potentially ruining her career... Apparently, it is my fault (as someone who bought her book, read her book, and wrote about it factually and truthfully), that she did not ensure all references were printed in the book, or sources given etc. I pointed out that it is standard practice for publishers to send authors proofs of their books to read and check before it is printed. It is the author and publisher's responsibility to check all sources are included and correct - not the reader's responsibility!!!

She also says the publisher (Zer0) always prints "collections of posts". I looked on their website and could see no reference to this, and asked her for the link. She said "They don't say so - but that's what most of them are." Well, silly me, for not assuming (!).

Apparently, I'm picking on Laurie. I don't see why. She complains I tweeted the link to my blog post several times (just as I would for any blog post - whether a film review, or a drawing or anything), and that I'm attacking a fellow feminist - I pointed out my argument has nothing to do with her feminist views and is entirely related to her unclear referencing, and reusing of old content. She says she made it clear from the start that it was recycled material - but I cannot find any reference to this in the intro to the book, which I just re-read.

And she is attempting to make me feel guilty for potentially "ending her career" - as if to 'threaten' anyone for having a negative response to someone's work.

Extraordinary.
Click to expand...

Yep, extraordinary. Surely her claim that she interviewed bindel - "Bindel, when I spoke to her in the process of writing this book" destroys her own claim that she's open about it being recycled material. It demonstrates the exact opposite. That it's being presented as fresh material. Keep digging Penny. You won't win.
 
MadamJMo said:
She has sent me 14 DMs on Twitter in the past hour, blaming me for potentially ruining her career... Apparently, it is my fault (as someone who bought her book, read her book, and wrote about it factually and truthfully), that she did not ensure all references were printed in the book, or sources given etc. I pointed out that it is standard practice for publishers to send authors proofs of their books to read and check before it is printed. It is the author and publisher's responsibility to check all sources are included and correct - not the reader's responsibility!!!

She also says the publisher (Zer0) always prints "collections of posts". I looked on their website and could see no reference to this, and asked her for the link. She said "They don't say so - but that's what most of them are." Well, silly me, for not assuming (!).

Apparently, I'm picking on Laurie. I don't see why. She complains I tweeted the link to my blog post several times (just as I would for any blog post - whether a film review, or a drawing or anything), and that I'm attacking a fellow feminist - I pointed out my argument has nothing to do with her feminist views and is entirely related to her unclear referencing, and reusing of old content. She says she made it clear from the start that it was recycled material - but I cannot find any reference to this in the intro to the book, which I just re-read.

And she is attempting to make me feel guilty for potentially "ending her career" - as if to 'threaten' anyone for having a negative response to someone's work.

Extraordinary.
Click to expand...

Just keep it clear that your criticism is purely on the merits of her work, ignore her emotional response. If you're right you'll be vindicated. If you feel like leaking her correspondence however...
 
Thanks for the replies, guys (and thanks for the welcomes - I did post an earlier reply saying 'hello' back, but don't think it made it on the board). I'll read the whole thread thoroughly and get up to speed ;-)
 
MadamJMo said:
Thanks for the replies, guys (and thanks for the welcomes - I did post an earlier reply saying 'hello' back, but don't think it made it on the board). I'll read the whole thread thoroughly and get up to speed ;-)
Click to expand...

If it had a link in it takes a certain min number of posts before they're accepted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

_Russ_
Penny Mordaunt
2 3
Replies
86
Views
3K
danny la rouge
danny la rouge
Fez909
Japanese attitudes towards immigration vs UK
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
197
Views
5K
krtek a houby
krtek a houby
Kid_Eternity
Collective - new left wing party?
2 3 4 5
Replies
136
Views
4K
Louis MacNeice
Louis MacNeice
Kid_Eternity
New Labour government - legislative agenda
24 25 26 27 28
Replies
833
Views
23K
GarveyLives
G
Bingoman
Alex Chalk time is up
Replies
3
Views
448
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
Back
Top Bottom