Fascinating how the comments here reflect so accurately the final verse of the John Godfrey Saxe poem that Schmaltz uses to begin his book.
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Saxe's poem was yet another version of the many different versions of the ancient Eastern fable. As with such fables, they hold true in many situations -- project work, and various posters to reviews of books, apparently. I wonder what reports these selfsame blind men (and women) might have if they spent a couple of hours actually reading and considering this short book.
You left out the most relevant verse for application to the conversation here.
Moral:
So Oft in Theologic Wars
The disputants I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an elephant
Not one of them has seen.
The comments here, commenting on a review of a book that, it seems, not one of the reviewers has seen, only proves the point of this verse.
The guy who wrote the review, David McClintock, happens to be with Dorset House publishing -- who publishes DeMarco and Lister's books. Schmaltz also happens to be a member in good standing of the community of folks that have worked closely with one of the grand old men of Software Development, Jerry Weinberg. This community, of course, includes DeMarco and Lister. So, yes, I'd say this book has similarities to Peopleware. You might disagree.
I happened to read the book. I think, if you do, you'll be pleasantly surprised to see your point made and very well illustrated. The point, as I read it, is not to try to grasp the whole elephant but to work together in a way that you can integrate all of the other strange stories with your own so you can experience a 'sense' of a coherent whole. Even though none of you will ever fully grasp the whole.
Every challenging project I've ever been involved with involved a whole crew of strange and wonderful perspectives akin to such blind men around the ellusive elephant. Without some means of coping well, too many of these turn into theologic wars as each perspective tries to win-out over the others. Just what might happen should the perspectives cohere? It feels like magic and leaves us wanting to do something like that again.
Slashdot Mirror
Fascinating how the comments here reflect so accurately the final verse of the John Godfrey Saxe poem that Schmaltz uses to begin his book.
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Saxe's poem was yet another version of the many different versions of the ancient Eastern fable. As with such fables, they hold true in many situations -- project work, and various posters to reviews of books, apparently. I wonder what reports these selfsame blind men (and women) might have if they spent a couple of hours actually reading and considering this short book.
You left out the most relevant verse for application to the conversation here.
Moral:
So Oft in Theologic Wars
The disputants I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an elephant
Not one of them has seen.
The comments here, commenting on a review of a book that, it seems, not one of the reviewers has seen, only proves the point of this verse.
The guy who wrote the review, David McClintock, happens to be with Dorset House publishing -- who publishes DeMarco and Lister's books. Schmaltz also happens to be a member in good standing of the community of folks that have worked closely with one of the grand old men of Software Development, Jerry Weinberg. This community, of course, includes DeMarco and Lister. So, yes, I'd say this book has similarities to Peopleware. You might disagree.
I happened to read the book. I think, if you do, you'll be pleasantly surprised to see your point made and very well illustrated. The point, as I read it, is not to try to grasp the whole elephant but to work together in a way that you can integrate all of the other strange stories with your own so you can experience a 'sense' of a coherent whole. Even though none of you will ever fully grasp the whole. Every challenging project I've ever been involved with involved a whole crew of strange and wonderful perspectives akin to such blind men around the ellusive elephant. Without some means of coping well, too many of these turn into theologic wars as each perspective tries to win-out over the others. Just what might happen should the perspectives cohere? It feels like magic and leaves us wanting to do something like that again.