Rating: 
Summary: One of the most interesting books I've read this year.
Review: The Professor and the Madman is one of the most interesting books I've read this year. it tells the bizarre, sad, and compelling story of how the linguistic society put together that monster called The Oxford English Dictionary. If you love dictionaries as I do you'll love all the details and the research into the amount of work and time spent of putting a dictionary together.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent history of the OED
Review: The author knows how to write an interesting book about a subject which prima facie, is not so interesting. However, I thought the author spent a disproportionate amount of time on the history of the OED and not enough on the relationship between the Professor and the Madman.
Rating:
Summary: I wish all books were as gripping as this one.
Review: This is the type of book you hope to end up with after dishing out money at the bookstore, the sort you buy 4-10 copies of to hand out to friends. I simply couldn't put it down once I started it, and am saddened by not having others like it. It is a beautiful work, and will bring sheer joy to other wordsmiths and book lovers. Do yourself a favor--buy this now. You'll understand.
Rating:
Summary: Entertained and edified, yet perplexed
Review: While the fairly spare prose in this book (making for a decidedly quick and easy read--and simplicity in writing is truly a virtue in many, many cases, including this one) differed significantly from that of some of my more treasured reading experiences, this still struck me not only as a profoundly worthwhile subject, but one that truly was for the author a labor of love. That latter aspect I found infectious, and I deeply respect the homage paid by the author to George Merrett, whose death has largely passed by the wayside in history's remembrance while others basked in adulation. I also appreciated the observations relating to the Civil War, especially the note that war machinery had developed in a way that cruelly outstripped that of medical practice.What perplexes me, though, is Mr. M.R.'s ardor in exposing alleged shortcomings in the author's research. (He posts below as MitchNews@aol.com.) I detected no animosity toward the playwright in Mr. Winchester's acknowledgements--and surely, had there been any, it seems unlikely that Mr. Winchester would have failed to share it, as his scathing account of his dealings with the District of Columbia makes clear. I do not wish to be unkind (and in fact I wish him only success), but the lengths to which M.R. goes to point out what he apparently considers to be egregious factual and analytical shortcomings smacks of the impotent frustration felt by one who begrudges another some amount of professional recognition and validation (leaving aside issues of financial gain). I recognize that there should always be room for an open exchange of opinions and facts here and elsewhere, and to his credit, M.R. does not stoop to personal attacks in any way whatsoever. But his abundance of energy in criticizing the author still seems to be too much, and it perhaps proves too much. I do not expect to be allowed inside the thought process of M.R.--and I am aware that this is not a message board, so I do not expect a dialogue to develop here--but I will remain curious as to why M.R., whom Mr. Winchester thanks for "fill[ing] in some details of Minor's later personal life," chooses to lash out so.
Rating: 
Summary: professor & madman : OED : : nouveau riche: old money
Review: I was expecting a more sensational storytelling to accompany what I found to be a sensational title. The tale was sketchily told, with a tendency to become engrossed in the flamboyant use of language that only served, in my opinion, to assist the book in reaching its final length. My curiosity was roused, but not satisfied, by this account. The title really set the level of expectation, and the book fell quite short of delivering the characters it promised. I felt little connection to or sympathy for Mr. Minor and Mr. Murray. It is curious that a fellow researcher of this subject, a playwright who has submitted not one but TWO reviews of this book, refused by his own admission to help Mr. Winchester with his research. Strange that he should make this fact known and yet criticize the author for reporting inaccuracies that he could have rectified pre-publication. Isn't the subject worth telling well?
Rating:
Summary: It is a fascinating biography of one man's incredible life.
Review: What most reviews of The Professor and the Madman miss is that it is not a story of the creation of a dictionary, but a biography of a man's incredible life and the lessons we can learn from it. Spanning over 85 years, PM tells the story of a troubled man (William Minor) whose childhood begins in America, develops in Sri Lanka, and ends back where it began ... just in time for the Civil War. Serving as a medic, Minor sees - and causes - more pain than he was prepared for, and symptoms of mental illness soon emerge. Shortly thereafter, he goes to England to escape his demons. But alas, he cannot run from them, and in a fit of madness he takes the life of a local laborer. The rest of the story, indeed the bulk of it, deals with Minor's attempt to regain his sanity through his voluntary work on the Oxford English Dictionary. Winchester speculates that the OED would not exist without the critical help of Minor. I concur.
Rating: 
Summary: a waste of time!
Review: I completely agree with the critic who suggested that this book would be much better off being a long magazine article. It's boring, it drags on and is not very well written at all. If someone asked me what the book was about, I'd be able to narrate the entire story in 2 minutes and save them the ordeal of actually READING the book!This book really was a waste of my time!
Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable account of the creation of a mundane publication.
Review: It's certain that Mr. Winchester enjoyed researching and documenting the incidents of and about the creation of the Oxford English Dictionary. He's done a terrific job of weaving together the historical, suspenseful, surprising (and sometimes shocking) events surrounding the production of such a cerebral subject.
Rating: 
Summary: The book should have been a long magazine article
Review: The book has suprisingly little information for its 250 page length. Winchester spends a great deal of time describing static scenarios and making inferences because he knows he's short on action. You can burn through it rapidly, but keep your dictionary handy.
Rating:
Summary: Winchester missed some significant information.
Review: The subject of Winchester's book is Sir James A. H. Murray, editor of the "Oxford English Dictionary," and Dr. William C. Minor, the American volunteer who worked on the "O.E.D." for 20 years while an inmate in the Broadmoor Lunatic Asylum for the criminally insane. I am a New York playwright who, in 1995, completed a full-length drama focusing James Murray and William Minor, called "The Dictionary," and whose help Mr. Winchester sought when he was first considering writing his book. (Winchester mentions me in his Acknowledgments.) There is a serious problem with Winchester's book. Mark Rozzo characterizes it perfectly in his "Washington Post" review of "The Professor and the Madman": ". . . we're never sure when Winchester is cleaving to facts and when he is fictionalizing." Winchester also missed some significant information in his book. Moreover, there are a number of inaccuracies in "The Professor and the Madman." About Minor's death Winchester writes, incorrectly, "There were no obituaries." An obituary was published in 1921 in "Yale University Obituary Record of Graduates Deceased During the Year Ending July 1, 1920." From this obituary one learns that Minor was born in the East Indies; that he entered the Yale School of Medicine in 1861 and was graduated in 1863; that he was incarcerated at Broadmoor, transferred to St. Elizabeth's in the U.S., and later transferred from St. Elizabeth's to The Retreat, in Hartford, where he died on March 26, 1920. The Yale obituary also mentions his brother Alfred. Winchester refers to the lawyer who defended Minor in his murder trial, but does not mention the lawyer's name. My research suggests that the person who defended Minor is the same one who defended Oscar Wilde. The man's name is Edward Clarke. I am surprised that Winchester did not seize upon this possibility. Winchester theorizes that Minor's clinically paranoid dread of the Irish, and of the Fenians in particular, was the result of his experience as a Union Army Surgeon with Irish troops during the Civil War. Winchester neglects the fact that during the years that Minor was stationed in New York (on Governors Island) the Fenians were, in fact, his real enemy. Minor lived in New York during 1867 and 1868, when the local papers frequently covered events pertaining to the revolutionary movement in Ireland and to activities of the Irish in New York. In March of 1867 the Irish cause held the front page of just about every newspaper every day. It was during the week of March 18 that the expectation of a Fenian attack on Canada, still part of the British Empire at that time, appeared in at least three separate articles in three different papers. News of U.S. troops being moved from New York to the border to thwart the offensive also made headlines. That Minor would have been selected to assist in the battlefield action against the Fenians is not unlikely. This attack never took place; however, less than a year before, the Fenians had staged an assault on Canada from New York State. Eight hundred Irishmen crossed the Niagara River and captured Fort Erie. They were subsequently defeated by U.S. troops, and about 700 Fenians were arrested. Minor would have known of this. Winchester mentions the American vice-consul-general and quotes a letter of his to the Medical Superintendent of Broadmoor, but neglects to cite his name, which is Joshua Nunn. Winchester also failed to locate a series of twenty-two letters by Joshua Nunn, an important source of information regarding Minor. The letters to Minor's family and friends in America contain particulars that conflict with some of Winchester's assumptions regarding Minor's life at Broadmoor and his relations with his family. Joshua Nunn clearly went beyond the call of duty in his assistance to, and profound concern for, Minor. Nunn was the man who handled all the details of Minor's legal situation as well as Minor's living conditions at Broadmoor. He was also very involved in the press accounts. Nunn not only corresponded and met with Minor and his family but also visited Minor at Broadmoor. According to the Nunn letters, the family did not want Minor returned to an asylum in the U.S. They were satisfied to let him remain at Broadmoor. This information contradicts Winchester's indication that the family would have rejoiced at Minor's return. Nunn was surprised at the family's neglect of Minor and at their refusal, at one point, to send Minor any more money at Broadmoor. Nunn makes very clear that Minor's mail was heavily censored. This conflicts with Winchester's implication. Winchester makes a mystifying observation at the end of his book. He states that it was only at the completion of the "Oxford English Dictionary," in 1927, that Americans could say that the Dictionary "was now, at least partly, of their own making." From the very beginning Americans had the right to claim that the Dictionary was, to a significant extent, a creation of their own making. In Murray's first years of editing the "O.E.D.," fully one half of the 800 volunteer readers with whom he worked were American. James Murray felt that his most avid support came from the United States. He said, "...it is Americans upon whom I depend above all." He called Americans "the most reliable and trustworthy volunteers." In 1883 Murray wrote, "I truly believe that the future of English scholarship lies in the United States, where the language is studied with an enthusiasm unknown here and which will soon leave us far behind." "The Professor and the Madman" focuses on some of the same fascinating aspects of the collaboration of Murray and Minor that first inspired me to dramatize the story. It is important, however, to look beyond the surface of material Winchester presents as truth.
|
