3 ms·
Nah, you are mistaken, and the article has led you astray. The writer who wrote a few introductory paragraphs to the large book excerpt is not Thomas Frank him
by mturmon 11y ago
Nah, you are mistaken, and the article has led you astray.
The writer who wrote a few introductory paragraphs to the large book excerpt is not Thomas Frank himself. It's not 100% explicit, but the person writing these laudatory words is almost certainly Tom Englehart, the editor of TomDispatch.
I've seen Thomas Frank speak and followed him for many years, since he and others founded the Baffler in Chicago in the late 80s. He's a Midwesterner through and through, grew up in suburban Kansas City, and has the characteristic modesty of the area.
- tzs 11y agoThat does appear to be the case, based on looking at some other reviews. It looks like it works like this, at least for authors who are TomsDispatch regulars: 1. Author Foo writes a book. 2. Tom Englehart writes a review, which consists of introductory material and then a long excerpt from the book. 3. Englehart's review appears on the site, but it says "Posted by Foo" at the top. The only mention of Englehart is that it says "Tom" in italics immediately after the last sentence of the introductory material. 4. At the bottom it says "Foo, a TomsDispatch regular, is the author of <name of book>". 5. At the bottom it says "Copyright <year> Foo". Basically everything on the page except for that lone italicized "Tom" after the introductory material makes it look like Foo wrote the review. In the case where firstname_of(Foo) == "Tom", everything on the page makes it look like Foo wrote the review.