Update (11:50 a.m. Thurs., Feb. 26): CT has posted our take on the controversy here.
CT is looking into the commotion over veteran editor George Kurian's four-volume Encyclopedia of Christian Civilization being allegedly censored for being "too Christian."
Kurian, the lead editor, has been remarkably pointed in his accusations, while the publisher Wiley-Blackwell has offered plausible yet incomplete defenses. All in all, highly unusual to see such a big academic project unravel at such a late stage in the game.
Inside Higher Ed has the best coverage here. You can find Kurian's complaint posted here, and Wiley-Blackwell's first defense here and second defense here. The gist:
1) Kurian says the encyclopedia was pulled because a small group of critics didn't like the tone of his Christian language, feeling the reference needed to be more critical of Christianity and more positive towards Islam.
2) Wiley insists it pulled the volumes not out of anti-Christian bias but because editorial review procedures were bypassed without its knowledge.
3) Observers say it's highly unusual for a publisher to pull such a major project so late in the game and wonder how Wiley-Blackwell bumbled its editorial process.
A number of UK papers and Catholic News Agency have covered the controversy, and contributors have discussed in the comments section of this blog. Terry Mattingly at Get Religion is annoyed no mainstream press is covering it.
Much of this follows this National Review blog post done by Edward Feser, a contributor to the book. Feser follows up in this post where he presses Wiley to say whether Kurian is lying or not and Wiley in turn keeps dodging. Feser's conclusion:
So where does all of this leave us? In three consecutive statements now - their first two public statements, and Susan Spilka's emailed response to my questions - Wiley-Blackwell has failed directly to address any of Kurian's specific allegations to the effect that the publisher and/or editorial board demanded that certain changes of content be made so that the Encyclopedia would be less pro-Christian, more friendly toward Islam, and so forth. ... One might be tempted to dismiss all this as a case of "he said/they said." But it seems fair to conclude that while Kurian's claims have been clear, consistent, and specific, Wiley-Blackwell's statements have seemed piecemeal, vague, incomplete, and bureaucratic.
CT has a reporter on the story and will let our readers know what we turn up.
Posted by Jeremy Weber on February 20, 2009 3:50PM
Comments
Here is a follow-up letter we sent this afternoon.
Dear Mr. Feser,
Please allow me to clarify a few points in response to your February 17th article.
First, we have not responded to Mr. Kurian’s accusations characterizing the content issues because we have a process in place for a peer group of scholars --the Editorial Board-- to do that job. They are better qualified to evaluate the work and determine if revisions are necessary. Mr. Kurian agreed to and helped prepare Wiley-Blackwell’s agreements with Editorial Board members and is bound to fulfill his responsibilities in relation to them.
In addition, in your article, you confuse different facets of the publishing process: printing with publishing, and copy editing and legal vetting with a substantive review of the content. It is indeed unfortunate that the content review by the Editorial Board is taking place later than anticipated, but that does not negate the need to do so to ensure the quality of the work’s scholarship.
No decision was made by anyone at Wiley-Blackwell to "pulp" the first print run. Anyone who claims that such a decision was made is wrong. Mr. Carpenter did indeed have a conversation with Mr. Kurian regarding the first print run and specifically the effect changes would have on copies already printed. During that discussion, Mr. Carpenter proposed ways in which the first print run could be salvaged.
Wiley-Blackwell will more publicly announce its further plans once the Encyclopedia's Editorial Board has completed its review.
Posted by: Susan Spilka at February 20, 2009
Gee, considering the climate, I really wonder if anyone really needs biased left-wing sources like Inside Higher Ed to "get to the bottom of anything". I think you're lying through your teeth, Susan Spilka. And no Christian should be surprised in the least.
Posted by: A.C. at February 23, 2009
Thanks, Christianity Today, for picking up this story. More and more folks are beginning to sit up and take notice, and we'll be interested to read your reports.
Posted by: Mike at February 23, 2009
Post a comment