I've been wondering this myself. The article doesn't actually say, but what the hell.
DeLong is the only of the four to make a reasonable argument. And I like that he refers to the "book-buying upper-middle class of America", as opposed to the book-reading class, as I believe the latter is a smaller set, and is only mostly intersected with the former (as the smart among us use the library--I'm not that smart, for the record). I'm perhaps being cynical, but I would have to imagine that for most books the number read:number sold is a relatively small ratio, but for Capital the ratio is dismally so. I imagine that for regular Krugman readers, the allure to buy the book was too much, and they clicked right through to Amazon, or walked over to the econ section of the B & N whose coffee shop they happened to be occupying. Then, they had the sad realization that 500 words with snark and no math is easier to digest than 700 pages with heavy math and--I shall assume, though I've not purchased or read Capital--very little humor, and they laid the book on the coffee table as a decoration. These four people in the article nobly try to debate the merits of the book, and why it may resonate with so many people. I think they should have invited a psychologist and a stylist, too, if they wanted to get to the heart of the matter.
Stephanie Kelton: this book that spends two pages apologizing every time it uses algebra is a "scholarly tome." Also, OWS and Fifty Shades of Grey. Tyler Cowen: Because it advocates wealth redistribution and everybody loves wealth redistribution. Also, JK Rowling and Bill Gates, despite the fact that Piketty clearly argues that modern wage billionaires are 20th-century American anomaly. Emmanuel Derman: Black Scholes is the only true model of economics, despite being resoundingly discredited around the time of L T fuckin' C M. Brad DeLong: Americans don't trust economists anymore and even if Piketty is wrong, at least he's saying something DIFFERENT. Game set match Brad DeLong.
According to a friend, someone tracked this by looking at the average number of "pages turned" on the Amazon ebook, and the results aren't pretty. Not remotely surprising. Eh, you'd be surprised. He's quite readable. No jokes, but many literary references and constant changes of subtopic keep things pretty light.I'm perhaps being cynical, but I would have to imagine that for most books the number read:number sold is a relatively small ratio, but for Capital the ratio is dismally so.
Then, they had the sad realization that 500 words with snark and no math is easier to digest than 700 pages with heavy math and--I shall assume, though I've not purchased or read Capital--very little humor
I remember an old teacher saying a similar thing about Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time (As an example of why scientists need to step up their communications skills)I'm perhaps being cynical, but I would have to imagine that for most books the number read:number sold is a relatively small ratio, but for Capital the ratio is dismally so.