Biased Penguins
Sir: I am most grateful to Mir W. van der Evken for so obligingly confirming the thesis on Penguin Education which I propounded in my review of 14 November, although it might have made the discussion more interesting if he had read what I wrote with more care. For example, of the only two phrases he purports to quote dir- ectly one is the exact reverse of what I wrote and the ,other does not appear at all.
However, his main criticism is that I attacked the Penguin educ- ation series for including books with the content of which I dis- agreed: he then cites a number of titles of merit. in fact, I snecifically said that the series included books that were 'sound and useful'. and nowhere criticised the content of any book except the one I was reviewing.
To complete Mr van der Evken's essay in total misrepresentation, be accuses me of suggesting that 'such books ought not to be pub- lished or, if published, ought to be described by their publishers in tones that in some way deprecate their authors' views'. This accus- ation is totally false, and nothing in what I wrote even remotely suggests it.
Mr van der Eyken can of course publish as many as he likes of the kind of books he likes. It is true that, 'as someone supposedly par- ticipating in a form of democratic government', I do happen to believe that, where there is an honest and arguable divergence of views between scholars and education- ists, there is something to be said for letting both sides be heard.
However, my main objection to the Penguin editorial blurbs seems to have escaped their general editor. Of course I do not expect blurbs to deprecate an author's views. Most reputable publishers, however, do try to represent their authors' views as what they are, rather than try to pass off as in- disputable facts the editors' own controversial opinions. In the eight passages I quoted there is only one sentence that purports to be a quotation from an author. The rest is editorial propaganda, all slanted one way, all disputable and sonic of it nonsense.
Mr van der Eyken does, in short, neatly make my point. He himself clearly does 'not believe that there can be any respectable alternative viewpoint to the one' he holds on education. I believe his view to be honestly held and entitled to full discussion. Can Penguin say the same for the vim% of others? If so, what are they going to do about it?
Angus Maude House of Commons, London swl
Previous page
