Our favorite librarian today makes yet another impassioned plea for “open access“: a euphemism for forcing scientists and researchers to turn their work over to libraries for free dissemination instead of to evil for-profit journals and publishers, in order to bypass both the involvement of (supposedly) filthy lucre and (supposedly) snobbish, elitist, and stifling peer review, in favor of (supposedly) altruistic academic librarians who are of course naturally and inherently the appropriate gate-keepers of human knowledge and the all-knowing fully-informed arbiters of all scholarly discourse:
“A world where many more people have unfettered access to much more research and scholarship …. We have the (largely US- and Europe-based) for-profit publishers, who hate and fear open access to the point of telling flat-out lies about it.”
Never mind that any researcher that wants to put their work on the Web for free can already do so without the “help” of a librarian, thank you very much. They have to be forced to do so, because… well, because.
Well, in the spirit of good-for-the-goose-good-for-the-gander, I’d like to remind everyone that her husband’s book remains only closedly accessible, at just $49.95 from its greedy university press publisher. The proceeds from which surely do not land in her own pocket, of course.
Open access: it’s only for the stuff other people write, you see, not what Dorothea can make a buck from.
Our favorite librarian loves to raise the specters of the suppression of the free speech of librarians and their patrons by the Dept. of Homeland Security, and of librarians being hunted down and rounded up by John Ashcroft, and further to portray herself as being subversive and brave merely by being a librarian.
So, let’s count the tally, shall we? Librarians (subversive or otherwise) hunted down, rounded up, charged, sued, or removed from employ, by Mr. Ashcroft? The big goose egg. Librarians charged with “sexual harassment” by a university for (truly) subversively recommending conservative books not approved of by their uniformly “liberal” dept. faculty and staff? One (so far).
Dorothea’s silence on this is as deafening as it is both hypocritical and predictable.
Pat and I have both been too busy working on the new issue of Parma Eldalamberon to write blog posts, so I’m just going to put up some links to some good reading to tide this blog over.
First, a cogent and adult view of the reasons we’ll almost certainly be going to war with Iran soon:
“Has Ahmadinejad Miscalculated?” by Victor Davis Hanson
Second, some clear-eyed evaluations of the so-called “Gospel” of Judas (which I’ve read, BTW, and hope to comment on myself later — suffice to say for now that it is entirely of a piece with the Nag Hammadi texts, and just like those texts 1) fascinating and invaluable for the history of Gnosticism, and b) entirely worthless as evidence for early Christianity, save for what little can be deduced from its polemic against an already established Catholic Church — which of course the leftist media adores and accepts uncritically.
“The Gospel of Judas” by Jimmy Akin
“More on the Gospel of Judas” by Jimmy Akin
Oh, and the best book I’ve read on Gnosticism is The Gnostic Religion by Hans Jonas. Do not trust anything that Elaine Pagels or Bart Ehrman say on the matter without checking it against Jonas’s explication of Gnosticism and the texts themselves: they are both essentially leftist controversialists who have aligned themselves with the polemical nature of the Gnostic texts to denounce Christian orthodoxy — which in their mouths is always a pejorative — and (oh so selectively) present so-called Gnostic Christianity as coeval and equally “valid” forms of Christianity (i.e., equally grounded in the life and teachings of Christ).
Discuss amongst yourselves.
“Protests mark Iraq war’s third year”, say the headlines.
I thank God I live in a free country, where citizens can protest their own government without fear of reprisal.
You know, just like they can now do in Iraq, thanks to us.