A Choice - September 15, 2008
Is this the person you want to be? Or do you want to be humble and credible and self-aware?

Posted by ryanholiday at 11:35 AM
Print Friendly · Digg it · del.icio.us · StumbleUpon · Netscape
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://cms.rudiusmedia.com/mt-tb.fcgi/2647
Comment Policy:
Anonymous comments are allowed. All anonymous comments and comments from those not registered with TypeKey are moderated. They WILL NOT appear until they are read and approved by a moderator.
It is strongly encouraged that you sign up and login with a TypeKey account. Once you do that, your comments will be immediately posted.
Comments
How the hell did that make it as the front cover blurb?
Posted by: Ilan Bouchard at September 15, 2008 11:46 AM
Gee, I guess Mary doesn't think too highly of herself. Poor girl.
Posted by: Brett Crudgington at September 15, 2008 12:13 PM
But Ryan... Mary Pipher *is* credible and self-aware. See that "Ph.D." after her name? That means credible in Latin.
And apparently she is very aware that she wrote Reviving Ophelia.
Not too sure what humble means.
--Marcus, B.A., Poster on the Internet
Posted by: Marcus at September 15, 2008 01:47 PM
Wow! That is funny.
Posted by: Leon at September 15, 2008 02:04 PM
What a place for shameless self-plugs.
Posted by: Mel at September 15, 2008 03:17 PM
That's cool, I'd want to be a douche like that person. Maybe it is a comedy act like professional wrestling and they are doing it Kurt Engel Style.
Posted by: Steve at September 15, 2008 07:20 PM
I honestly don't understand: she's talking about a book she wrote, which relates to the book on topic, and she happened to be the author of the book she is talking about. Describe a better way of saying what she said. I'm confused because I don't see a problem with that. Redundant, perhaps, to show the book title twice and almost a pointless, vague statement (especially by a Ph.D.), but I'm sure she had little to no say in that specific quote showing on that specific location of the book (I'm serious; no sarcasm).
Call me stupid, but first give an honest re-phrasing or better marketing tools for this. Or explain why I'm confused. I don't see a problem.
(I also enjoy your blog Ryan. Especially your book and article entries.)
Posted by: Sean at September 15, 2008 09:20 PM
Someone asks you to blurb their book. You respond by talking about yourself, laughably overstating your contributions to the field, ultimately say nothing substantive about the book in question and make a fool of yourself in the process.
Is that the person you want to be? It's definitely not the obviously implications I'd like my words to make.
None of this by the way, addresses whether the petty narcissism and lack of tact might make someone unqualified to render social commentary and judgment.
Posted by: Ryan Holiday at September 15, 2008 09:42 PM
What I meant to say - and I'm not sure how many people follow this line of thinking (everyone, probably) - is that that comment struck me similar to comments NFL or NBA coaches make at half time when their rushing back to the locker room to meet with their team but get "sacked" by the reporter wondering (for the camera and everyone watching from their couches), "Hey coach, how are you going to overcome the opponent's defense?" or "What do you plan on doing the second half to keep your lead?" -- "well, we plan on passing the ball more and outsmarting the defense."
Or when athletes, after a game, answer stupid questions ("Can you explain what happened out there tonight?"; "How did last week's events affect your performance?"; etc.) so vaguely and uninspiring and in such a manner that no meaningful information was relayed by, from, or to anyone, and both the reporter and athlete act like they are actually benefiting society through the superficial process. How can anyone be expected to be taken seriously in this world?
I can only assume (or, at the very least, hope) this quote is from a forward or something of some substance, otherwise I see exactly what you're saying. Knowing marketers love customers who hop on the bandwagon, I bet it's more of a marketing ploy than a depiction of the woman's character. I mean, the quote could make sense if it was taken from a forward or critical review, its just marketed quite poorly on that cover. Why couldn't they just have had someone else say those exact words to give it more authority, rather than less?
Posted by: Sean at September 15, 2008 10:23 PM
Maybe she could start reviewing her own books.
I'd love to see that!
Posted by: Luke at September 17, 2008 02:05 AM
Was her book actually influential or is she just full of shit?
Posted by: Ryan Sprute at September 17, 2008 10:17 AM
How is that pompous? If anything it looks like Kimmel is trying to ride off of Pipers success. Piper sure as hell didnt have the final say in what gets put on the cover of someone elses book.
Posted by: jay at September 17, 2008 12:01 PM
What bothers me more is that the publisher decided to use it and display it the way they did. It's pretty safe to say that around half the people in academia are unreasonably smug and rarely have anything worthwhile to say, but the people that designed the cover should have caught it. If they wanted to use the blurb, all they really had to do was remove the "author of Reviving Ophelia".
Posted by: Clutch at September 17, 2008 12:47 PM
That's hilarious. Though even the title "Reviving Ophelia" screams of pretension, so I can't say I'm too surprised.
Posted by: Charlie Murphey at September 21, 2008 11:54 AM
Just saw this today on an old blog post that I was reading. Reminded me a lot of this. Here's how PR shouldn't be done; I doubt talking about yourself in the third person is very effective.
Posted by: Andrew Lynch at November 18, 2008 03:20 AM


