Posted by Jim Lindgren:
Garry Wills on Bellesiles on CSPAN2: People get taken by very good con men.--

   Garry Wills was on the three-hour [1]In Depth program on Sunday, Jan.
   2 on CSPAN2. Jerome [2]Sternstein, an historian and VC reader who saw
   the noon (ET) broadcast, tipped me off and I watched the midnight (ET)
   rebroadcast. Wills was in good form--thoughtful, interesting,
   impressive.

   What might be of interest to some Volokh Conspiracy readers, given
   Eugene's many posts on the topic, is a couple of questions that Wills
   was asked about the Michael Bellesiles controversy over Arming America
   (2000). Wills had written a [3]rave review in the New York Times when
   the book came out. In April 2002, I asked Wills after a lecture at
   Northwestern what he thought of the book then. [4]He replied, "I was
   took. The book is a fraud."

   During the CSPAN2 interview, the first part of Wills's statement to me
   was mentioned to him and he was asked for a comment. Wills responded
   that "a lot us" were taken. He pointed to other historians and the
   Bancroft Prize committee. Wills said that Bellesiles was very
   convincing, but he took it a step too far; Bellesiles claimed to have
   consulted archives that he didn't. I don't recall Wills's wording, but
   he said in effect that there was a lot of good work in the book and
   the problematic work could have been left out. Then Wills said this
   (an exact or almost exact quote): "People get taken by very good con
   men." Of course, this is stronger language than the sort I try to use
   about Bellesiles myself.

   Wills was asked in effect if he should have retracted or corrected his
   review (which the discussion might have wrongly attributed to the New
   York Review of Books rather than the New York Times). Wills said that
   he had wanted to wait until the challenges were confirmed, which they
   were in the Emory investigation, saying about the investigation
   something like, "Clearly, I agreed with it."

   The only thing that I thought was significantly mistaken was when
   Wills said that the probate records in the archives were checked by
   gun defenders. He did not treat this as at all sinister, and it is
   perhaps not surprising that Bellesiles's false claim on this point is
   still believed. But it is false.

   It was Justin Heather and I who went to the [5]probate [6]archives,
   and I have long been known as a pro-gun control scholar, having
   co-authored with one of my mentors Frank Zimring. Others who looked at
   probate records in this case include Randy Roth, who favors gun
   control, and Gloria Main, who I believe probably does as well. Thus, I
   think it is fair to say that at least a majority of those scholars who
   looked at probate records to check Arming America favor substantial
   gun control.

   Because my cable system on the south side of Chicago (Univ. of Chicago
   neighborhood) doesn't get CSPAN2, I was unable to record it on my VCR,
   listening instead on my computer, so I am paraphrasing, not quoting
   Wills. It appears that audio might become available online soon, so
   that I can check or create a transcript. The exchange on Bellesiles
   happens about 2 hours and 7 minutes into the program. If I get a
   transcript, I will probably correct or rewrite the quotes above to get
   them as close to perfect as I can.

References

   1. 
http://www.booktv.org/General/index.asp?segID=5331&schedID=328&category=In+Depth
   2. http://hnn.us/articles/1074.html
   3. http://partners.nytimes.com/books/00/09/10/reviews/000910.10willot.html
   4. http://hnn.us/articles/1074.html
   5. http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/Lindgren/lindwmmary.PDF
   6. 
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/Lindgren/LindgrenFINAL.pdf

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to