I’d take issue with the phrase “his idea of legibility”. What Rao is doing in that post is summarizing Scott’s excellent book on that same topic; it is of course a valuable service to intelligently summarize a book, but it’s hardly the same as coming up with the idea in the first place. (I was turned on to that book by a guy named Michael Bolton, who I think is a pretty extraordinary thinker in his own right. Rather than write a post about Scott’s book he’s only been going around ordering everyone he knew to read the book.)
I’d take issue with the phrase “his idea of legibility”. What Rao is doing in that post is summarizing Scott’s excellent book on that same topic; it is of course a valuable service to intelligently summarize a book, but it’s hardly the same as coming up with the idea in the first place. (I was turned on to that book by a guy named Michael Bolton, who I think is a pretty extraordinary thinker in his own right. Rather than write a post about Scott’s book he’s only been going around ordering everyone he knew to read the book.)
True.
So yeah, not his idea. He uses it a lot but didn’t originate it.
The linked post has prominent first-graf credit to Scott’s book.
Yup. Which would make “Scott’s idea of legibility” more accurate than “his (Rao’s) idea of legibility”.
Yeah, I missed something subtle: atucker, not VR, was claiming too much credit for VR, probably because you went on to contrast Bolton against VR.
We should expect narrative thinkers to riff on each others’ themes.