I think it inevitable that the book you write is not exactly that which we read, just as you have never read the precise book that anyone else has written. But you may have exaggerated the degree to which Tim Noah has misread you, rather than simply having different concerns and interests.
You have a grand narrative arc that runs somethin…
I think it inevitable that the book you write is not exactly that which we read, just as you have never read the precise book that anyone else has written. But you may have exaggerated the degree to which Tim Noah has misread you, rather than simply having different concerns and interests.
You have a grand narrative arc that runs something like this: sometime around 1870, certain parts of the world got really good at baking bigger pies every year than the year before. This change was prefigured by a similar but lesser change in 1820 and an even lesser one in 1500, but the dramatic inflection point is around 1870 and also that is when this pie baking skill began to spread inexorably throughout the world.
Eventually, the degree to which each pie was bigger than the year before began to decline, but the decline came not with a bang but with a fizzle, for we still increase the size of pies faster than we did before 1870. From this perspective, it is difficult to bring your narrative to a satisfactory conclusion.
Within the grand narrative of the long 20th century, there is a sub-narrative of a short 20th century during which we got better at dividing and tasting pies; a bridge between gilded ages, let us say from about 1919 to 1980. Thereafter, we became worse at dividing and tasting pies again, although we have not yet declined to J.P. Morgan's heyday.
You have chosen to bring your grand narrative and sub-narratives to a close simultaneously in 2010 by marking the "exhaustion of the final attempt to find a satisfactory solution" to the conflict inherent in the social changes required to keep increasing the size of pies while also dividing them fairly. It helps that this seems roughly to coincide with a negative inflection point in the rate of pie size increase. But someone, say Tim Noah, may accept both your greater and lesser narrative arcs without accepting that we have indeed exhausted our final attempts at dividing pies. And I do think that the weakest part of your story lies in explaining what was special about the bridge between gilded ages and why it will not come again.
I think it inevitable that the book you write is not exactly that which we read, just as you have never read the precise book that anyone else has written. But you may have exaggerated the degree to which Tim Noah has misread you, rather than simply having different concerns and interests.
You have a grand narrative arc that runs something like this: sometime around 1870, certain parts of the world got really good at baking bigger pies every year than the year before. This change was prefigured by a similar but lesser change in 1820 and an even lesser one in 1500, but the dramatic inflection point is around 1870 and also that is when this pie baking skill began to spread inexorably throughout the world.
Eventually, the degree to which each pie was bigger than the year before began to decline, but the decline came not with a bang but with a fizzle, for we still increase the size of pies faster than we did before 1870. From this perspective, it is difficult to bring your narrative to a satisfactory conclusion.
Within the grand narrative of the long 20th century, there is a sub-narrative of a short 20th century during which we got better at dividing and tasting pies; a bridge between gilded ages, let us say from about 1919 to 1980. Thereafter, we became worse at dividing and tasting pies again, although we have not yet declined to J.P. Morgan's heyday.
You have chosen to bring your grand narrative and sub-narratives to a close simultaneously in 2010 by marking the "exhaustion of the final attempt to find a satisfactory solution" to the conflict inherent in the social changes required to keep increasing the size of pies while also dividing them fairly. It helps that this seems roughly to coincide with a negative inflection point in the rate of pie size increase. But someone, say Tim Noah, may accept both your greater and lesser narrative arcs without accepting that we have indeed exhausted our final attempts at dividing pies. And I do think that the weakest part of your story lies in explaining what was special about the bridge between gilded ages and why it will not come again.