If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PennLive)   Not News: Historian has three published books out. Holy FARK: He is 15 years old   (blog.pennlive.com) divider line 36
    More: Spiffy, Harrisburg, Wingert, U.S. Naval War College, countries by number of troops, military camp, State Records, historians  
•       •       •

3578 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jun 2013 at 4:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



36 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-22 11:05:35 AM
Brilliant young man!
 
2013-06-22 04:16:30 PM
If the kid actually uses facts as a basis he'll never make it in academia.
 
2013-06-22 04:18:00 PM
TDR is back.
 
2013-06-22 04:19:29 PM
FTA: "Having read the original material upon which other historians have relied, Wingert discovered he sometimes disagreed with those historians' conclusions."

Yup, that's where the money is.
 
2013-06-22 04:19:53 PM
No one wants to read "My First Pube - An Illustrated History" - trust us.
 
2013-06-22 04:20:31 PM
NERD!1!
 
2013-06-22 04:28:44 PM
"Spiffy" indeed!  Good on ya, son!
 
2013-06-22 04:30:29 PM
uh-oh, he's writing about the Civil war... that means he's going to need to ignore facts and vilify people based on geography if he's going to make it.
 
2013-06-22 04:31:03 PM
But what about GIRLS, you man??  GIRLS!

/ Seriously, farkin' awesome work, kid. :)
 
2013-06-22 04:31:38 PM
Or, um... young man, even.
 
2013-06-22 04:32:43 PM
See! THIS is the young success story that all young writers should look up to, unlike the other young success story who is nothing more than a senseless farking HACK!

assets.rollingstone.com
/^Said Hack
 
2013-06-22 04:39:51 PM
I'll tell you the whole history of Americans:
Genocide, theft, and slavery.
 
2013-06-22 04:40:16 PM
I was going to stop by to make fun, but actually having read the article, it's pretty good. Interesting how a field trip to Gettysburg can just throw some switch in a kid and get him interested in history. I guess the only snarky remark I can make would be about his probable lack of a girlfriend, but that's kind of weak. Smart kid.
 
2013-06-22 04:41:44 PM

pippi longstocking: I'll tell you the whole history of Americans:
Genocide, theft, and slavery.


Let me tell you the whole history of the world.

Genocide, theft, and slavery.

Get the fark over it.
 
2013-06-22 04:47:54 PM
Army War College sounds awesome
 
2013-06-22 04:48:13 PM
i can't wait till this lad gets laid, the kama sutra is going to be considered a beginners book after he knocks out his three volume set.
 
2013-06-22 04:54:26 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-06-22 04:58:35 PM
Just what the world needs:   another author of fuel for butthurt.

Those who ignore history, repeat it.  Unfortunately, so do those who study history.
 
2013-06-22 05:00:09 PM
There's a Holy Fark?  Is that between TotalFark and UltraFark or is it even higher up the ladder than Ultra?
 
2013-06-22 05:08:04 PM

Charles_Nelson_Reilly: FTA: "Having read the original material upon which other historians have relied, Wingert discovered he sometimes disagreed with those historians' conclusions."

Yup, that's where the money is.


Yes, he's immersed himself in old newspapers and government records as part of his money-making scheme.

/no 2 historians agree on everything
 
2013-06-22 05:09:49 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Just what the world needs:   another author of fuel for butthurt.

Those who ignore history, repeat it.  Unfortunately, so do those who study history.


That does explain Civil War II and III.
 
2013-06-22 05:09:53 PM
That journalist ought to be sacked. Here's how his reporting process went: "say, son, what are the titles of your books? Ok, got it. That's about enough about that."
 
2013-06-22 05:35:56 PM
[Vader voice]

Impressive.

Most impressive.

[/Vader voice]
 
2013-06-22 05:38:34 PM
As a trained historian who has dedicated copious amounts of money and time to the study of dead (primarily white male) people, I have a few thoughts.

First, at twelve he used the word "vanguard" in the title of a (not-peer-reviewed) work. That's hint number one I have that something's fishy. Second, he got his books published by a relatively brand-new publisher in the UK; if he was so brilliant, why didn't any of the major American publishers pick it up?

But the biggest problem I have is that he "wrote" some books. That's great...except that anyone can write a book and get it published. Bill O'Reilly has proven that with his "Killing..." series. What will mark this kid as a respectable historian, though, is when he gets a peer reviewed article in one of the big-name journals (the AHA's, for example).

Also, I wonder if this kid will take history on as a major in college. He will then quickly learn that his methods probably don't mean shiat.
 
2013-06-22 05:47:55 PM
15? He looks middle aged. Kid, don't throw away your youth.
 
2013-06-22 05:48:17 PM

Ilmarinen: Charles_Nelson_Reilly: FTA: "Having read the original material upon which other historians have relied, Wingert discovered he sometimes disagreed with those historians' conclusions."

Yup, that's where the money is.

Yes, he's immersed himself in old newspapers and government records as part of his money-making scheme.

/no 2 historians agree on everythinganything


FTFY

/Wonder if the books are actually good
//Or just "Remarkable for a 15 year old"-good
///Like those 9 year old violin screechers who get to the second round in talent shows because they are so young
 
2013-06-22 05:49:55 PM
Not only does he sound legit enough, he's not Southern.
 
2013-06-22 05:54:16 PM
in the age ôf Wikipedia, it's great for some one to go back to source material.
 
2013-06-22 06:15:28 PM
Demosthenes?
 
2013-06-22 06:16:57 PM

maram500: As a trained historian who has dedicated copious amounts of money and time to the study of dead (primarily white male) people, I have a few thoughts.

First, at twelve he used the word "vanguard" in the title of a (not-peer-reviewed) work. That's hint number one I have that something's fishy. Second, he got his books published by a relatively brand-new publisher in the UK; if he was so brilliant, why didn't any of the major American publishers pick it up?

But the biggest problem I have is that he "wrote" some books. That's great...except that anyone can write a book and get it published. Bill O'Reilly has proven that with his "Killing..." series. What will mark this kid as a respectable historian, though, is when he gets a peer reviewed article in one of the big-name journals (the AHA's, for example).

Also, I wonder if this kid will take history on as a major in college. He will then quickly learn that his methods probably don't mean shiat.


1:  It might be a quote or reference, in which case I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.
2:  I've dealt with two different major university presses in the last decade.  There's always a little bit of institutional inertia behind them; they don't like to take risks that might jeopardize their reputation.  This means that occasionally a good book falls through the cracks.  I've known someone offer both UNC and U of Florida Presses a very good text on battlefield archaeology, but both declined to take the project (I think it was eventually published by Texas A&M).
3:  He may have had a lot of help from a ghostwriter.  He may have been getting advice on methodology from that person.

In summary, I think your concerns are completely valid, but I'll add the caveat that there's a lot of material out there on this subject that reads like it was written by an untrained 15-year-old (Bill O'Reilly and Charles DiLorenzo come to mind).
 
2013-06-22 06:28:33 PM

UNC_Samurai: maram500: As a trained historian who has dedicated copious amounts of money and time to the study of dead (primarily white male) people, I have a few thoughts.

First, at twelve he used the word "vanguard" in the title of a (not-peer-reviewed) work. That's hint number one I have that something's fishy. Second, he got his books published by a relatively brand-new publisher in the UK; if he was so brilliant, why didn't any of the major American publishers pick it up?

But the biggest problem I have is that he "wrote" some books. That's great...except that anyone can write a book and get it published. Bill O'Reilly has proven that with his "Killing..." series. What will mark this kid as a respectable historian, though, is when he gets a peer reviewed article in one of the big-name journals (the AHA's, for example).

Also, I wonder if this kid will take history on as a major in college. He will then quickly learn that his methods probably don't mean shiat.

1:  It might be a quote or reference, in which case I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.
2:  I've dealt with two different major university presses in the last decade.  There's always a little bit of institutional inertia behind them; they don't like to take risks that might jeopardize their reputation.  This means that occasionally a good book falls through the cracks.  I've known someone offer both UNC and U of Florida Presses a very good text on battlefield archaeology, but both declined to take the project (I think it was eventually published by Texas A&M).
3:  He may have had a lot of help from a ghostwriter.  He may have been getting advice on methodology from that person.

In summary, I think your concerns are completely valid, but I'll add the caveat that there's a lot of material out there on this subject that reads like it was written by an untrained 15-year-old (Bill O'Reilly and Charles DiLorenzo come to mind).


Assuming for a moment that he had significant help from a ghostwriter, what makes him so remarkable?

I've dealt with LSU Press before (and more intimately with the University of Louisian-Lafayette Press), and while the occasional good book is rejected, by and large the "remarkable" ones make it through because the guy at the top wants the prestige. In this case, that prestige would be "Yeah, that guy? We published his first book when he was 15."

This whole thing just sounds so fishy that I have a hard time believing it.
 
2013-06-22 08:52:43 PM
He looks 40.
 
2013-06-22 09:08:33 PM
Not bad. Small UK press that specializes in historical publications, especially local history, rumored to low-ball authors for submissions - doesn't somehow invalidate the achievement, to be honest, especially if he's the one that actually did the legwork. (That's the real PITA for historical publication - the writing's the end result. It's like technical publication in that regard - all the hard work is done before the draft's completed.)

Disclaimer: I'm an internationally published technical author, with two books (my first was translated into eight languages) to my credit as author and two books to my credit as technical advisor.
 
2013-06-22 10:20:30 PM
There are a lot of loose publishers when it comes to Civil War History. There are a great deal of armchair historians who produce materials that some of the seedier publishers are only to happy to market.  The worst offender is McFarland. They will almost literally publish ANYTHING that gets submitted to them. On top of that they rip their authors off with a 90-10 movie rights split THEIR FAVOR!.  This is exactly OPPOSITE of EVERY OTHER publisher on the planet! One of their books is, I kid you not, "Jewish Chess Masters On Postage stamps."  How large a market is there for that book? 10 copies world wide?
 
2013-06-22 10:37:53 PM

maram500: I've dealt with LSU Press before (and more intimately with the University of Louisian-Lafayette Press), and while the occasional good book is rejected, by and large the "remarkable" ones make it through because the guy at the top wants the prestige. In this case, that prestige would be "Yeah, that guy? We published his first book when he was 15."

This whole thing just sounds so fishy that I have a hard time believing it.


Delawheredad: There are a lot of loose publishers when it comes to Civil War History. There are a great deal of armchair historians who produce materials that some of the seedier publishers are only to happy to market.


Yeah, my opinion is, the kid's written a couple of books that are local history with enough diligence that they're good gift shop fodder without being complete garbage, but likely not quite stringent enough for peer review.  And like maram500 said, I'll be curious to see if he publishes anything when he becomes a college student.
 
2013-06-23 07:06:42 PM
Precocious brat.
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report