Traditional Book Publishing and Donald J. Trump (45)

So ... POTUS 45 is said to be looking for a book publisher.

This is a traditional thing for ex-President's to do, after all. More so than scheming for some fantasy "reinstatement" under the hidden reinstatement clause of the constitution. [It was written by the founders on invisible ink on the back of unused bamboo ballots. That clause.]

Anyway, COLT 45 wants to sell a book about his presidency. But getting a prestige main-line publisher to sign on is, according to reports, proving to be difficult.

Presidential memoirs are always ghost-written -- heck it can be an assembly-line operation. The Trump organization is up to the task of putting together a book to which he has put his name. They've done it before. But they don't want it to look like a vanity production. And they probably don't want a committed conservative publishing house like Regnery.

Random House published Trump: The Art of the Deal in the '80s. There has been considerable consolidation in the business since. Random House is now "Penguin Random House" and it is part of the Bertelsmann empire. Trump will probably want them. He'd be happy, too, with Simon & Schuster, now a subsidiary of ViacomCBS.

But no such company will touch it. The book will likely be a fact checker's nightmare. A publisher either lets his statements slide, without fact checking, (like "Dominion's machines were used to switch votes against me") and they get on the deep pocketed defendants' list for every libel plaintiffs' attorney in the country, or they do the fact checking and keep going back to the Trumpster assembly line saying "fix this, fix that" and never actually get a book out.

Th project will die the same death as did the project of creating a new and better health care program to replace Obamacare.

Comments

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge. We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave. First, Plato is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability. I only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere. At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

Search This Blog