Myth is starting to become the subject of pretty frequent blogospheric discussion. Some of this is just because I made sure bloggers got copies. That explains this nice post by my former neighbor Phil Coggan, the capital markets editor at the Economist. And this one by Matthew Yglesias. My editor gave a copy to Baseline Scenario's James Kwak, which resulted in this. My PR czarina got a book to The Deal's Robert Teitelman, which led to this.
But a lot of blog mentions now are just coming out of the woodwork. Some are from people who bought the book and have been reading it, others simply seem motivated by the title. I have unwittingly (or half-wittingly) followed the advice of David Brooks, from Bobos in Paradise, on how to make a splash in American intellectual life:
I like to think my book falls in the Fukuyama category (the title is perhaps exaggerated, but the text holds up pretty well), not the Kennedy one. Although I'm not sure Kennedy was wrong. Early, perhaps. But not necessarily wrong.
Brooks also recommends book titles that begin with The End of, or The Death of. I guess The Myth of is close enough.