...for Dummies

[mneme]

Rather predictably, spying the "...for Dummies" books in the SF section of Barnes & Nobles (namely, D&D for Dummies and Trading-Card Games for Dummies) got me monologuing (fortunately, I'm not a supervillain).

The obvious undone "For Dummies" books are clearly "Dummies Books for Dummies" (for those confused by the variety of the line) and "Ventriloquism for Dummies".

But what I'm really waiting for is "Neurosurgery for Dummies". ebartley says she doesn't want to be operated on by anyone who learned from such a book -- nonsense! After all, you shouldn't be allowed to buy it unless you've first passed the self-tests in such books as "Biochemistry for Dummies", "Surgery for Dummies", etc...

Comments

[cattitude.livejournal.com]

I'm still waiting for "Petty Theft for Dummies," including Chapter 6, Bookstores.

[avram]

Didn’t Abbie Hoffman already write that?

[mneme]

I was wondering about that myself.

But shouldn't it be followed by "self-representation for dummies?"

[selki.livejournal.com]

I didn't buy a Crockpot Cooking for Dummies, even though it had some great healthy recipes, because I don't like those titles.

[madfilkentist]

I once glanced at XML for Dummies in a house I was visiting. The idea seems to be that the concepts are better conveyed if you use lots of dumb jokes in the presentation.

[jl8e]

From what I understand, some Dummies books are very good (Bridge for Dummies is the only canonical example I know of, but I don't pay much attention), but there are also a lot which are written by people who read Writing Dummies Books For Dummies

[jazzfish]

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Dummies is, sadly, not yet available either.

[kgbooklog.livejournal.com]

Yes it is (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1580081746/).

[jazzfish]

. . . I sit corrected.

[hrj.livejournal.com]

They send you the functional equivalent of the "Dummies Books for Dummies" after you contract to write one. The series definitely has a strongly prescriptive format and structure -- it works better for some topics than for others. When I wrote my Dummies book, there were aspects of the format that I found annoying, but there was a lot to say for having all the specifications laid out for you in advance, even -- perhaps especially -- when they're simply arbitrary. (E.g., Thou shalt begin all chapter titles with a gerund.) I know a lot of people get torqued over the whole "dummy/idiot" verbiage, but one of the reasons I agreed to write for the series in the first place was because they don't either treat you like an idiot (when you have pre-existing knowledge) or make you feel like one (when you don't). I rather like a how-to book that takes the attitude, "Look, you don't know as much about this topic as you'd like to, but I expect you to be a reasonably intelligent human being who is interested in the whys and wherefores as well as the whats and hows. And it's ok to skim through the parts you already know or to skip the sidebars -- we'll flag whether stuff is bread, cake, or fluffy icing."

[mneme]

Huh -- cool; good to know.

And yeah; I've generally got the impression that the "...for Dummies" books have their place, though they're of very mixed quality.

[drcpunk.livejournal.com]

I've found the for Dummies books heavy slogging. Maybe I'm just not smart enough for them.

I have had luck with Osborne's For Busy People series. These books are written to be read in sound bites, on bathroom breaks, and so on.