[MD] Julian Baggini interview

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

Mark 4-11-06: Hello Glenn.
I thought after some time you had been allowed back onto the forum?
Sorry about that.
I didn't ask Baggini if or when he sent Anthony a copy of his  interview.
I asked Baggini if a transcript existed.
In response, Baggini sent me the transcript as a text file and gave me the  
date he sent this to Anthony.
I asked Baggini if a transcript of the interview existed because Anthony  had 
stated that one didn't 'really' exist.
Love,
Mark
 
 
Hello Mark,
I'd love it if I could take this to the forum but  I've
been banned, you see, so that won't be possible.

I want to know  why you asked Baginni if he sent Ant
the transcript. This is not something  only Ant can
answer. It's something only you can answer. Why would
you ask  Baggini this, and why further would you post
this correspondence? It seems  pointless. Why are you
bothering with this line of questioning. You,  you,
you. Not Anthony, you. :)
Glenn

--- Squonkonguitar at aol.com  wrote:

> Mark 3-11-06: Hello Glenn.
> First of all, i want to  tell you that i don't like
> to go in for  off-forum 
>  posts.
> I'm happy to have this stuff out in the open on the
> forum  for all to see -  
> there is nothing to hide or be afraid  of.
> Please feel free to use any of this on the forum or
> to  continue  there.
> I would much prefer that.
>  
>  Hi Mark,
> Yes, it does help, and I agree with all that, but
>  it's
> not  as simple as that, is it? Obviously, Ant should
>  not have bastardized the  interview and turned it
> into
> an  essay, but surely I did see and anyone else 
> could
> have seen  this perfectly well on their own, without
> an
> assist from   your "personal first-hand experience."
>  
> Mark 3-11-06: This  isn't so. As i indicated to
> Anthony, there is no mention  
>  of his involvement with the Baggini interview on
>  robertpirsig.org.
> Visitors to his site will have no idea there  ever
> was such an  interview let 
> alone recognise his  editorial changes.
> Anthony has now agreed to provide a link to  the
> Baggini interview.
>  
> Glenn:
> You see,  the plain fact that Ant doctored the
> interview  doesn't explain the  point of your last
> post
> in the thread which shows that   Baggini did in fact
> send Ant the transcript. What is the relevance   of
> this? Ant has certainly not denied this and if you
> don't want  DMB  calling you a wanker this weekend,
> maybe you should explain  what you are on  about. Am
> I
> clear on this?
>  Glenn
>  
> Mark 3-11-06: I can't speak for Anthony, which  is
> essentially what you are  
> asking me to do.
> I  can repeat what Anthony has already said regarding
> his motivation  for  
> producing an essay from the Baggini-Pirsig e-mail
>  exchanges, but you are already  
> aware of that i assume?
> In  my view, the interview, warts and all, makes for
> an informative  source,  
> and i should like to make my own mind up  regarding
> its merits and not have  
> Anthony make my mind up  for me.
> And this is were we return to editorial tinkering.
>  Love,
> Mark
> 
> > Mark 3-11-06: Hello Glenn.
> >  The issue if one of  editorial control.
> > I hope Julian Baggini  didn't edit his interview 
> with
> > Pirsig and published   it 
> > in it's entirety.
> >  There was no need for  Anthony to edit it either.
> > It's as simple as that   Glenn.
> > If you want more then i'm happy to debate the
> >  philosophy  of editorial  
> > control. The issue is an old  one and is relevant 
> to
> > issues concerning freedom  and  
> > openness in society.  Those who seek to mediate
> >  information seek to control  
> >  opinion and we all have  experience of how that
> can
> > be morally  reprehensible  i  
> > should think. At the intellectual level the issue 
>  of
> > openness becomes paramount, 
> >  and i think the  MoQ  supports this view.
> > I hope this helps?
> >  Love,
> >  Mark