Susan Neiman wrote a book, Left is not Work, that we noted here. Mr. Oseroff-Spicer, familiar to longtime readers as a paragon of crazed wokeness in philosophy, was bound not to like this book. That's not notable. What is notable is that his review falsely accused Professor Neiman of plagiarism! This led the editor to append the following to the review at the end (below the fold):
From the editor: In a previous version of the above review, an accusation of plagiarism was made against Professor Neiman. The accusation has proven to be totally unfounded. Nathan and I have both apologised to Professor Neiman and I will work to improve our review process to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again. Professor Neiman wrote me this letter:
Normally I don’t respond to reviews, but the accusation of plagiarism is not a disagreement but an imputation of a crime. In his review of my book Left is not Woke, Mr. Oseroff-Spicer writes:
Neiman’s book is based on a 2022 talk she gave in Cambridge titled “Why Left is Not Woke”. Much of the content in her book is taken directly from the 2022 talk, with some interesting exceptions..… Neiman received a copy of all the responses to her Cambridge talk, with some of Buxton’s comments incorporated into Neiman’s text, albeit without crediting Buxton. For instance, Buxton’s “I agree with Susan [Neiman], pace Audre Lorde, that sometimes we need the master’s tools” becomes Neiman’s “But pace Audre Lorde, sometimes you need the master’s tools to dismantle the master’s house”…it is my hope that Rebecca Buxton receives at the very least a mention in the acknowledgements if Left Is Not Woke should ever see a second printing.
The implication that I would quote a younger commentator’s ideas without attribution is a serious one. Had the reviewer read more carefully, he might have noticed the fulsome acknowledgement made to the youngest commentator, Samuel Zeitlin, whose suggestions were most helpful, and perhaps concluded that borrowing without acknowledgement is not the sort of thing I do. But it is even more astonishing that Mr. Oseroff-Spicer does not see that his accusation refutes itself. If Buxton writes that she agrees with me, it is clear that she is quoting me – in this case from my original lecture. Is he suggesting that I should have quoted her quoting me?
So many similar misreadings mar this review that it is impossible to answer them all.
Susan Neiman
The passage in question has now been removed. My sincere apologies to Professor Neiman for the shoddiness of our review process on this occasion.
Recent Comments