1 result for (book:tps5 AND heading:"delet session decemb 1 1980" AND stemmed:critic)
[... 9 paragraphs ...]
Now: any disclaimer would not insult me. The entire idea of the disclaimer is a living example of the book’s thematic material. It shows the elements of the society that we have criticized in action. It becomes almost an exterior extension of the book itself. Certainly it shows why the ideas in the book are so important at this time. I consider such a disclaimer as a mildly amusing case in point: a living example—almost as if indeed you had requested one—a proof of the pudding.
[... 1 paragraph ...]
In other words, the books are considered to have some social life. (Pause.) You are, or we are, certainly criticizing many of the aspects of your society. In that particular book (Mass Events)—rather powerful honored aspects, and criticism will (underlined) meet criticism. At the same time, as the book’s criticism has a good import, so is the disclaimer in its fashion a creative example, again, of the book’s premise, and also would serve for that matter in a way that may not have been anticipated: with the disclaimer the book may well sell more copies by far than it would otherwise (humorously), for people will be curious about what such a volume might contain that will be dangerous to the public good.
[... 3 paragraphs ...]
(Long pause.) Because the book met criticism at Prentice does not mean that you or it were not protected. (Pause.) The word “protection” in this context is interesting, of course, since the disclaimer is supposed to protect Prentice from any court action. It is in its fashion an attempt at protection at that level. The level is one where every bit of preventative protection is needed in a world where people constantly need insurance, preventative medicine, and so forth – again, all issues dealt with in the book.
[... 13 paragraphs ...]