4 ms·

When the author starts their post off insulting David French they lose all credibility in my mind as an arbiter of literature. David French has written an enorm

by yodon 5y ago

When the author starts their post off insulting David French they lose all credibility in my mind as an arbiter of literature. David French has written an enormous number of posts I disagree strongly with, and an equivalent number that I agree strongly with. That's because he thinks and writes about extremely complex matters of morality and does not reduce his views to the "liberal" or "conservative" orthodoxy. He started out as a darling of the religious right, because he played a major role in causes the religious right considered "theirs." When he began to write with equal clarity about how other aspects of the religious right's focus are at odds with those same deeply held principles that led him to do the work the right loved, they turned on him like this. Complex moral issues are exactly that, complex. We need more intelligent people thinking hard about them, not more polarization into "you're either with us or against us" mindsets. I'll be clear here that I'm not interested in judgements on literature provided by someone who frames their worldview as hating one of the few writers willing to address the real complexities of real issues today.

Herodotus38 5y ago
Your reply made me interested in learning more about David French, so I went to his substack and read his post about John Adams Fear, which I enjoyed and thought was pretty balanced. I was wondering, and maybe someone else can chime in, why the author of this article said: "OK, so, there’s this thing where if you write a bunch you hope you eventually build up some trust with your audience. You try to be generally reliable and trustworthy in hopes that they come to believe you are generally reasonable, that you wouldn’t try to trick them, and that you aren’t David French. If any of these three things aren’t true, they rightfully come to distrust you." There is some context I'm missing here, why do you think the author felt tricked by David French?
- ss108 5y ago
  It's a bit of a clumsy joke I think; David French's previous followers turned on him, as explained above. He maintained his moral and intellectual integrity whereas many of his longtime readers and fans betrayed theirs. So it didn't matter that he had built-up trust. He didn't genuflect to Orange Man and go along sheepishly for the ride the Republican Party has decided to take, so they ditched him.
  - UncleOxidant 5y ago
    This is my understanding as well for the criticism of French: He's still very much a conservative, but the definition of "conservatism" has changed to include fealty to an individual instead of (or perhaps in addition to, in some cases) a set of principles. In that context he's maintained his principles and it's led to a lot of criticism from those who have changed theirs in ways they don't seem to be aware of.
- kemayo 5y ago
  The author does answer this question in the comments: https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-best-novel/comment/6291596 https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-b...
  - UncleOxidant 5y ago
    His take seems to assume that French has changed his positions, but it seems (from my reading anyway) that French is still quite conservative. I think this is more about how the definition of "conservative" has changed over the last 5-7 years or so.
haswell 5y ago
I read the comment as a tongue-in-cheek jab, not an insult. The author made no value judgements about French, and it’s hard to deny that part of French’s audience turned on him. The reasons for that are not examined, and in the context of the reviewer’s opening, it serves as nothing more than a way to say “usually, trust can be built over time, David French’s situation notwithstanding”. To conclude that the author hates French is a pretty enormous leap. It strikes me that this comment is guilty of the same thing it complains about.
- kemayo 5y ago
  For what it's worth, I found in the comments to this article a discussion by the author of why he doesn't like David French: https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-best-novel/comment/6291596?s=r https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-b... So I don't know about "hates", but he really does dislike the man.
  - haswell 5y ago
    Interesting, thanks for sharing that. He does follow this up to clarify: > Something like that. Mostly I don't hate him, he just bothers me. I really wish he wasn't the banner-carrier for mainstream Christianity/Conservatism, but I don't wish he'd fall off a cliff or whatever. I'm not sure if the reviewer's issue with French is rooted in French's willingness to explore nuance in a way that makes christians/conservatives uncomfortable, or if it's because French embraces positions that are really not compatible with the 2022 version of conservatism while still aligning himself with that movement. In either case, it seems like a position that isn't particularly relevant to the primary content of the review. I will say it was probably an unnecessary distraction to mention him at all, but I don't think that distraction warrants ignoring everything else the reviewer writes.
  - brimble 5y ago
    Interesting. That appears to explain why the review has a strong, "quirky, 'hip' campus Christian newsletter" vibe.
  - jancsika 5y ago
meetups323 5y ago
The author [1] merely stated many people distrust David French, in a highly tongue in cheek manner meant to hook people into reading the rest of the essay. You're the leaping to terms like "hate" and "you're either with us or against us", perhaps reflect on why you've done that? At the very least, reflect on the immense irony of someone "losing all credibility in your mind" because you perceive them to have a "you're either with us or against us" mentality. [1] who refers to themselves as "Resident Contrarian", to give you an idea of their intended persona
colechristensen 5y ago
I appreciate your viewpoint but it seems to be a strong reaction to a throwaway joke which isn’t at all the point of the article.
fumeux_fume 5y ago
"When the author starts their post off insulting David French they lose all credibility in my mind as an arbiter of literature." Has got to be the funniest comment I have ever read on HN. Only slightly funnier than: "I'll be clear here that I'm not interested in judgements on literature provided by someone who frames their worldview as hating one of the few writers willing to address the real complexities of real issues today." French stans on HN, I love it! Also, I checked out Bois' youtube and really enjoyed Pretty Good episode 10.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

by yodon 5y ago

Herodotus38 5y ago

Your reply made me interested in learning more about David French, so I went to his substack and read his post about John Adams Fear, which I enjoyed and thought was pretty balanced. I was wondering, and maybe someone else can chime in, why the author of this article said: "OK, so, there’s this thing where if you write a bunch you hope you eventually build up some trust with your audience. You try to be generally reliable and trustworthy in hopes that they come to believe you are generally reasonable, that you wouldn’t try to trick them, and that you aren’t David French. If any of these three things aren’t true, they rightfully come to distrust you." There is some context I'm missing here, why do you think the author felt tricked by David French?

ss108 5y ago
It's a bit of a clumsy joke I think; David French's previous followers turned on him, as explained above. He maintained his moral and intellectual integrity whereas many of his longtime readers and fans betrayed theirs. So it didn't matter that he had built-up trust. He didn't genuflect to Orange Man and go along sheepishly for the ride the Republican Party has decided to take, so they ditched him.
- UncleOxidant 5y ago
  This is my understanding as well for the criticism of French: He's still very much a conservative, but the definition of "conservatism" has changed to include fealty to an individual instead of (or perhaps in addition to, in some cases) a set of principles. In that context he's maintained his principles and it's led to a lot of criticism from those who have changed theirs in ways they don't seem to be aware of.
kemayo 5y ago
The author does answer this question in the comments: https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-best-novel/comment/6291596 https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-b...
- UncleOxidant 5y ago
  His take seems to assume that French has changed his positions, but it seems (from my reading anyway) that French is still quite conservative. I think this is more about how the definition of "conservative" has changed over the last 5-7 years or so.

haswell 5y ago

I read the comment as a tongue-in-cheek jab, not an insult. The author made no value judgements about French, and it’s hard to deny that part of French’s audience turned on him. The reasons for that are not examined, and in the context of the reviewer’s opening, it serves as nothing more than a way to say “usually, trust can be built over time, David French’s situation notwithstanding”. To conclude that the author hates French is a pretty enormous leap. It strikes me that this comment is guilty of the same thing it complains about.

kemayo 5y ago
For what it's worth, I found in the comments to this article a discussion by the author of why he doesn't like David French: https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-best-novel/comment/6291596?s=r https://www.residentcontrarian.com/p/nobody-will-admit-the-b... So I don't know about "hates", but he really does dislike the man.
- haswell 5y ago
  Interesting, thanks for sharing that. He does follow this up to clarify: > Something like that. Mostly I don't hate him, he just bothers me. I really wish he wasn't the banner-carrier for mainstream Christianity/Conservatism, but I don't wish he'd fall off a cliff or whatever. I'm not sure if the reviewer's issue with French is rooted in French's willingness to explore nuance in a way that makes christians/conservatives uncomfortable, or if it's because French embraces positions that are really not compatible with the 2022 version of conservatism while still aligning himself with that movement. In either case, it seems like a position that isn't particularly relevant to the primary content of the review. I will say it was probably an unnecessary distraction to mention him at all, but I don't think that distraction warrants ignoring everything else the reviewer writes.
- brimble 5y ago
  Interesting. That appears to explain why the review has a strong, "quirky, 'hip' campus Christian newsletter" vibe.
- jancsika 5y ago

meetups323 5y ago

The author [1] merely stated many people distrust David French, in a highly tongue in cheek manner meant to hook people into reading the rest of the essay. You're the leaping to terms like "hate" and "you're either with us or against us", perhaps reflect on why you've done that? At the very least, reflect on the immense irony of someone "losing all credibility in your mind" because you perceive them to have a "you're either with us or against us" mentality. [1] who refers to themselves as "Resident Contrarian", to give you an idea of their intended persona

colechristensen 5y ago

I appreciate your viewpoint but it seems to be a strong reaction to a throwaway joke which isn’t at all the point of the article.

fumeux_fume 5y ago

"When the author starts their post off insulting David French they lose all credibility in my mind as an arbiter of literature." Has got to be the funniest comment I have ever read on HN. Only slightly funnier than: "I'll be clear here that I'm not interested in judgements on literature provided by someone who frames their worldview as hating one of the few writers willing to address the real complexities of real issues today." French stans on HN, I love it! Also, I checked out Bois' youtube and really enjoyed Pretty Good episode 10.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]