1. Terrence Erdt on November 29, 2004 9:57 PM writes...

I haven't read Riordan's book but I'll hazard these comments: the quoted thesis statement is cute but simplistic. Years ago I edited a dissertation for a friend getting her doctorate in sociology, and I recall her thesis and some of the key books on the subject of invention that were cited. The topic is well worked over. There are many examples of famous inventions and discoveries not at all "bubbling up" at the same time, though some obviously do. Social acceptance is an important issue of what is perceived as an invention, and many novel indeas and inventions have to wait decades, even centuries to be perceived as such. Mendel's work on genetics, of course, is obviously pertinent. As to the example of the household, the vibrator--isn't that sensationalistic. Candy for simple minds. Typical sort of work of a journalist. What about the lightbulb? Doesn't that count?

2. Renee Hopkins Callahan on November 30, 2004 9:27 AM writes...

Well...I have to say I haven't read the book either, just the review, and was passing it along as something interesting, not necessarily groundbreaking. The review doesn't claim it's groundbreaking either. Perhaps I didn't make it clear in my post, but I don't believe Riordan is claiming that this "bubbling up" is the only way inventions work either, but it's a way that doesn't often get talked about. Your point on social acceptance is well-taken. But your last point -- please! You are in fact talking about a blog post on a review of a book you haven't read. If you would keep your prejudice against journalists (and vibrators!) leashed for awhile, you'd see that Riordan is talking about the invention of luxuries, not necessities, and she was listing the order that home appliances were invented. The lightbulb is not an appliance. I find it fascinating that a completely recreational object such as a vibrator was invented before a work-related object such as a vacuum cleaner. Obviously your mileage may vary, but I intended no sensationalism.

3. Teresa Riordan on December 13, 2004 1:35 PM writes...

Thanks, Renee for mentioning my new book, Inventing Beauty.

I can't resist the temptation to hoist Terrence Erdt by his (her?) own petard, however. Yes, the lightbulb does count & indeed this is a perfect example to support my matrix idea. At least 10 inventors who were contemporaries of Edison came up with feasible lighting schemes. Edison was just the shrewdest & luckiest & as much an ingenuious businessman as he was an ingenious inventor. Thus we credit him with the invention of the lightbulb. Just as Americans like to celebrate invention, we also like to think (pretend) that inventions spring fully formed from the forehead of a single great inventor. Perhaps they sometimes do. But rarely.