Martha Stewart (1) vs. Maurice Sendak; Stigler advances

Hiroaki writes:

Judas could talk about pretty much anything he wants? And, I wonder what he would talk about if he were invited on Christmas Day.

Good Friday or Easter would be better, no? In any case, we never have seminars on Christmas or Easter, and in the modern university you’ll rarely see any major activities on Friday, either. So one strike against Judas there.

From the other direction, here’s Jonathan:

I’m still mulling the Nobel Prize post below, which involves Stigler in two ways: as an historian of scientific fame and as the son of a sorta-Nobel winner.

Since Stigler’s Law is an ironic ccmment on Robert Merton’s (himself the *father* of a sorta-Nobel winner) Matthew Effect, we will have Steve at the seminar to explain the Judas Effect http://glorybooks.org/judas-iscariot-effect/

The seminar will explain how what has become known as the Matthew Effect was really the contribution of Judas. This will give Judas the credit without having to attend the seminar…. or something.

I don’t quite follow either, but the general idea sounds good, so the Eponymous One it is.

Today’s matchup

Media entrepreneur Martha is our top-seeded alleged tax cheat, and Maurice is an unseeded but renowned children’s book author and illustrator. Both were innovators in publishing: Stewart had her multimedia empire, and Sendak had the Nutshell Library.

What’ll it be? Cooking and entertaining tips or In the Night Kitchen? Insider trading or the Wild Things?

A quick check on Wikipedia reveals this:

In June 2022, Martha Stewart announced that she would be launching her first original podcast, entitled The Martha Stewart Podcast, in partnership with iHeart Radio. On June 15, 2022, Stewart shared that Snoop Dogg would be the guest on the first episode of podcast, which debuted on June 22, 2022.

This sounds absolutely horrible, but if we had to rule out everyone who has a podcast we’ll get nowhere. If Isaac Newton were alive today, he’d probably have an Incel’s Corner podcast where he’d complain about not getting credit for “the calculus” and go on about how alchemy would be absolutely huge if it weren’t for all that government regulation. So we’ll have to compare Martha to Maurice on their own merits. Who’d be a better seminar speaker?

Again, here are the announcement and the rules.

8 thoughts on “Martha Stewart (1) vs. Maurice Sendak; Stigler advances

  1. In this MS vs MS matchup I can’t imagine enjoying Stewart. I doubt she’d talk about her time in jail, just use the seminar to push her latest venture.

    For imagination I want Sendak. I don’t need him to recite Chicken Soup with Rice (which I know by heart) but would travel to NY to hear more about his stage designs, having seen https://www.gardnermuseum.org/calendar/drawing-curtain at Boston’s Gardner Museum.

    Maurice Sendak (1928–2012), author and illustrator of beloved children’s books, was an avid fan of music who had his own successful “second act” as a set and costume designer for opera and ballet. Sendak’s iconic, muted color palette and whimsical but sophisticated designs for theater reflect his love of Old Master artworks and literature and reference popular animation, folklore, and comic and picture book art. Like his children’s books, these stage designs present worlds that are both magical and mysterious, joyful and volatile, places where one might feel at times like an outsider, a theme which resonated with Sendak’s own lived experience.

  2. Martha was not a tax cheat at all, so I’m not sure what she’s doing in this category at all, much less top seed. What she *was* convicted of was lying about something that wouldn’t have gotten her into trouble even if she’d told the truth about it.

    Sendak, on the other hand, “refuse[s] to lie to children” but seems preoccupied by a number of amusing, if not particularly well-founded, hot takes: ” Of Salman Rushdie, who once gave him a terrible review in the New York Times, he says: “That flaccid fuckhead. He was detestable. I called up the Ayatollah, nobody knows that.” Roald Dahl: “The cruelty in his books is off-putting. Scary guy. I know he’s very popular but what’s nice about this guy? He’s dead, that’s what’s nice about him.” Stephen King: “Bullshit.” Gwyneth Paltrow: “I can’t stand her.” https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/oct/02/maurice-sendak-interview

    Any chance of a Sendak-Dahl final?

  3. > Martha was not a tax cheat at all, so I’m not sure what she’s doing in this category at all

    “At all” may be a bit too strong when you appear before a judge arguing that you didn’t have to pay taxes and he rules against you.

  4. I think “Where the Wild Things Are” is overrated, and the Guardian interview (thanks, Jonathan) makes Sendak sound unhinged. (Of course, Sendak himself contributes by pointing out, “I’m totally crazy.”) On the other hand, everything I’ve seen with Martha Stewart in it conveys an overpolished, artificial, ultra-scripted aura. Let’s have a seminar with more chaos and spontaneity.

  5. Please, Newton was a volcel and proud of it.

    All the complainers about Martha Stewart’s categorization seem to be overlooking the “alleged” part. Martha Stewart never even paid sales tax. There, I’ve now alleged it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *