[Sigia-l] History of "Information Architecture"

[Derek R]

Andrew wrote:

..|  Well, I guess I don't ascribe such conspiratorial intent
..|  to the members of [the book and seminar selling] 
..|  community as you do

Well, as I have said, circular and clique-like associations (and
revisions of history!!) are formed for only one purpose: to monopolize a
resource and to exclude non-members (duh!).

If this isn't conspiratorial intent I don't know what definition you
use.


..|  I actually have great respect for Peter and the
..|  others who have contributed significantly to these
..|  discussions over the past few years

You said at first you thought Peter's original post was some 'private
joke.' Then you described it as 'disturbing' and finally judged it
'pretentious, myopic, and self-delusional.' And now you are suggesting
you just 'regret some blind spots' ? Right-o.

As I have said, the sad part isn't the conspiratorial intent so much
(which is to be expected in every opportunity), but the quickness which
people want to jump on the band-wagon.

1) You need to ask yourself if the contributions made by 'Peter and the
others' could not have easily been made by any number of others
2) You need to remember Information Architecture was stolen from
another's hard work
3) You need to think of all those who were not given the chance to speak

Yes Peter and others have made contributions, but the contributions they
have made (and continue to make) are often, 'pretentious, myopic, and
self-delusional.'

The greater point here is 

1) why does Peter hold such a self-centered, high-minded view of his
contributions to IA
 -- and -- 
2) why does he omit mention of any of the myriad other sources from
which the well-spring of IA runs? 

The answer, in my humble observation, is a conspiratorial intent (to use
your phrase), which, as I have indicated, is common tactical practice
for book and seminar sellers to make a market for their books.

High-mindedness is the mark of every professional presenter!

For instance, you can't consider yourself a 'founding father' of a
discipline if you concede you stole all your ideas or had them
superficially inflated by social networking.

I think it would be more appropriate for Peter to indicate he and others
popularized IA through their book publishing and seminar efforts.
Anything more, as Peter is doing, is historically inaccurate and a
deliberate lie orchestrated for personal gain.


Be Well, Derek
http://derekrogerson.com/