Talk:Bibliography of Ayn Rand and Objectivism

comments

Good idea -- and nice job merging the criticisms section of the Objectivism page.

I think I can probably pull some additional titles out of my literature review and add them here. Alternatively, if somebody else wants to see my review, I'll send it to you on rquest.

Scottryan 22:30, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Some descriptions of the critiques describe their utility, which is very subjective unless one has an agenda to refute Ayn Rand, in which case it's POV. I'm considering removing the judgments of the quality of the articles, unless someone can tell me why they belong there. --24.118.77.253 00:01, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Works by Objectivists vs. Works on Objectivism

Looking at the list of of "Works by other Objectivist writers," there appear to be a number of items that are by authors who may happen to be Objectivists, but which are not about Rand or Objectivism. For example, the first work listed, Martin Anderson's The Federal Bulldozer does not contain the word 'Rand' or the word 'Objectivism' according to Google book search, nor have I ever seen it included on a list of works about Objectivism anywhere except here. Perhaps I'm missing the point of this article, but it is titled "Bibliography of work on Objectivism." I think including works by "Objectivist writers" is only appropriate if the work itself discusses Rand and/or Objectivism. Does anyone disagree? --RL0919 (talk) 19:35, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we need a new title, one that suggests the inclusion of Peikoff's Ominous Parallels and excludes Anderson's The Federal Bulldozer. --Karbinski (talk) 21:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The Ominous Parallels does discuss Objectivism and has an introduction by Rand, so I think it would be included in any list of books by/about Rand/Objectivism. Anderson's book (and some others) seems out of place, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything about the intention of the list. --RL0919 (talk) 22:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Article Divisions

I'd like to solicit input on the current division of the non-Rand works between "Objectivist" and "Critiques." There are POV issues with this arrangement. Some Objectivists would object to (for example) David Kelley's later works being included as the work of an Objectivist. Others might not consider some of the "critiques" to be particularly critical (e.g., Scibarra's Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical). There also doesn't seem to be a place for works by non-Objectivists that are not critiques, such as Mimi Reisel Gladstein's The Ayn Rand Companion (which isn't listed but should be). So my thought is to scrap the division and just list every book except Rand's in an "Other Books about Objectivism" section. Then have separate sections or subsections for other media (periodicals, articles, films, etc.). Thoughts? (I know, I'm not very bold.) --RL0919 (talk) 00:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I decided to take the plunge and reorganize along the lines I discussed above. Because the different lists weren't formatted the same way, the current list is transitional. Stuff to do:

• Switch the entries originally on the "critiques" list to use the same citation format as the other entries.
• Add missing entries.
• Add details (ISBN numbers, etc.) for individual entries.

--RL0919 (talk) 15:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Article Cross-Talk

Use of cross-talk page

There doesn't seem to be much use of the Objectivism cross-talk page lately. I'm the only one who has used it since February. Is it still relevant? --RL0919 (talk) 20:41, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps not. Although I love it, I have to say it now seems like an esoteric feature. Karbinski (talk) 14:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)