Wow, Glenn let it all hang out in his memoir, and now he and Glenn II double down.
It's easy to understand leaving a candid private memoir. A memoir is a remnant of a real human, left for posterity, and if the memoir is not candid about the good and bad aspects of its author, the remnant is not of a complete human being, but rather of a collection of events--which themselves may be accurately described or not.
So why make a candid memoir public? In Glenn's case, I can think of three reasons:
1. To be truthful. Glenn is a public figure, and it's natural for public figures to write memoirs. If Glenn is to follow suit, lying--including covering up or just sugar coating--wouldn't do for the honest person that I believe Glenn is. Plus, his past troubles are, to an extent, well known, so if his memoir wasn't open about them, people would know he was being dishonest. Glenn signed up for some hard admissions in doing a memoir, and he delivered.
2. To address charges of hypocrisy head on. It's well known that in his public life Glenn advocates for ways of conducting oneself that he often failed to follow himself. He intends his recommendations to be taken seriously and believes passionately that they can change many lives for the better. Given their importance, it would be wrong to leave these ideas vulnerable to dismissal through simple ad hominem critiques. Thus, for better or worse, candid "admissions" were necessary to keep Glenn's public discourse focused on his ideas, not himself. In this way, Glenn's memoir is a courageous act in defense of important ideas.
3. To connect with people at a personal level. The memoir tells people that they are not alone in their fight against personal demons. We all have them, and it's an act of compassion to have prominent people speak out to reinforce that message.
Glenn may have his own reasons, of course.
---
I liked the memoir--even the parts describing Glenn's economics work.
Wow, Glenn let it all hang out in his memoir, and now he and Glenn II double down.
It's easy to understand leaving a candid private memoir. A memoir is a remnant of a real human, left for posterity, and if the memoir is not candid about the good and bad aspects of its author, the remnant is not of a complete human being, but rather of a collection of events--which themselves may be accurately described or not.
So why make a candid memoir public? In Glenn's case, I can think of three reasons:
1. To be truthful. Glenn is a public figure, and it's natural for public figures to write memoirs. If Glenn is to follow suit, lying--including covering up or just sugar coating--wouldn't do for the honest person that I believe Glenn is. Plus, his past troubles are, to an extent, well known, so if his memoir wasn't open about them, people would know he was being dishonest. Glenn signed up for some hard admissions in doing a memoir, and he delivered.
2. To address charges of hypocrisy head on. It's well known that in his public life Glenn advocates for ways of conducting oneself that he often failed to follow himself. He intends his recommendations to be taken seriously and believes passionately that they can change many lives for the better. Given their importance, it would be wrong to leave these ideas vulnerable to dismissal through simple ad hominem critiques. Thus, for better or worse, candid "admissions" were necessary to keep Glenn's public discourse focused on his ideas, not himself. In this way, Glenn's memoir is a courageous act in defense of important ideas.
3. To connect with people at a personal level. The memoir tells people that they are not alone in their fight against personal demons. We all have them, and it's an act of compassion to have prominent people speak out to reinforce that message.
Glenn may have his own reasons, of course.
---
I liked the memoir--even the parts describing Glenn's economics work.