Talk:The March of Folly
Appearance
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why are most of the cited reviews negative?
[edit]Did the book really receive a generally unfavorable reception, or is this a misleading picture? (this was added 27 April 2017 by 2620:0:1045:f:f9d9:d8bf:b984:9993, the SineBot signature was removed for some reason)
- These are the referenced reviews. If someone has alternate referenced reviews they can be added. RJFJR (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
NYRB review: self-contradictory?
[edit]- The New York Review of Books reacted favorably to the book, stating: "Systems and theories therefore should not be imposed on the past. The facts of the past should be allowed to speak for themselves. Why did history have to teach lessons anyway?" etc.
The quotes read more like a criticism, not a "favorable reaction": she DID impose her theory of folly on the past! Wrongly written summary, wrongly chosen quotes, or am I missing smth.? Arminden (talk) 12:05, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Categories:
- Start-Class Book articles
- Book articles without infoboxes
- WikiProject Books articles
- Start-Class history articles
- Low-importance history articles
- WikiProject History articles
- Start-Class Women writers articles
- Low-importance Women writers articles
- WikiProject Women articles
- WikiProject Women writers articles