[Tutor] [Off-topic rant on the title of the "Dummies/Idiots/Morons" book series]

[Danny Yoo]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, R. Alan Monroe wrote:

> > However, did anyone write 'The big dummy's guide to OOP' or 'OOP for
> > the compleat idiot'?
>
> Not sure, but I hope the same guy writes "Design Patterns for the
> Compelete Idiot" too, because the few books I've flipped through so far
> were a little beyond my hobby level.

[Off topic rant: sorry, have to get this off my chest!]


False modesty is one thing, but insulting the intelligence of your
readership is just crude.  The real beef I have about the "Idiot" books is
the implication that the people who read the books are incurable idiots.
I shiver whenever I read some title at the bookstore like "Internet
Security for Idiots".  Do I really want idiots anywhere near my firewalls
or handling any of my security?


My attitude might be better if the book series wore titles like:

    "*Foobar* for the Ignorant"

because ignorance is very curable.  Paradoxically though, I think
"ignorant" has an even uglier connotation in English than "idiot", perhaps
because being an idiot automatically qualifies one to reliquish some
responsibility: if one is an idiot, he or she has perfectly good reasons
for not understanding anything.  Someone can be a "lovable idiot", to be
pitied, but I've seldom heard of someone being a "lovable ignoramus".


If anything, I'd love to see something like:

    "The Apprentice's Guide to Learning Python"

because "apprentice" strikes the right balance of the kind of person who
doesn't quite have enough experience yet in a particular field, but who is
very willing to learn.  It makes no statement on the person's expertise in
anything else, and that's exactly right.  Expertise is not intrinstic, and
it can be learned with experience.


Dunno why I get fired up about these issues.  Naming is very important to
programmers, I guess.  *grin* Please forgive me for my rant.