Letters

Unprofessional review

I was amazed to see such an unprofessional book review as the review of Green Party Tempest in the fall 2005 Green Pages. The reviewer, Deirdre Helfferich, seemed more interested in reviewing some other book than the one written, displaying a bias for a specific brand of Green Party that does not exist, a complete lack of understanding of the context and purpose of the book, and a refusal to understand or even acknowledge the internal politics of the Green Party. The book was specifically written to help hard-core Green activists understand the nature of the attack on the GP by Greens for Democracy and Independence and the Nader camp during 2003 and 2004, and to prepare them for continuing attacks. As a field manual to the attacks on the party, naming names and reporting crimes is necessary. Many Greens have written to me that after reading the book they have a much clearer understanding of what the Green Party went through during the presidential campaign, and as was shown at the GP-US 2005 annual meeting in Tulsa, they are much more prepared to fight back. Helfferich does a great deal of good Green work, constantly seeking positive works to spread around, but her blinders around the internal politics of the party make her unsuited to review works on internal  Green politics. Green Pages needs to find a new reviewer for books on internal Green Party politics.

Sincerely,
Greg Gerritt 
gerritt@mindspring.com
www.greenpartytempest.org 
Green Party Tempest: Weathering the storm of 2004, by Greg Gerritt of Moshassuck River Press: 2005, 70 pp.

The reviewer replies:

Any history, whether from a personal or a neutral point of view, benefits from a consistent approach, first-hand quotes and examples, chapters that live up to their stated purpose and tight copyediting. Some chapters in this book, particularly the later ones, were well written and organized. Others were not.The book provided useful details on the politicking and maneuvering of various factions, identified the players, and provided a good chronology and background to events. But the author too often paraphrased, presenting his interpretations rather than leading the reader to a similar conclusion by providing the evidence. As a book reviewer, I assess the work as a complete package. This does not make me blind to the nuances of internal Green Party politics; nor am I blind to poorly crafted prose.

Deirdre Helfferich