As a writer of academic material, you also have zero say over how your book is priced or if it is produced in less expensive forms (e.g., paperback or electronic).

If Prof. Stewart has done well from his textbook, it is because other academics recognize its value as a teaching resource. A high volume of students therefore buy it because it is listed as a required text in their syllabi. In other words, he has earned it.

Therefore, many people are going after the wrong part of the equation. Blame the publishers who both determine recommended selling prices and the insane practice of yearly edition changes, even in disciplines that are relatively static–like calculus.

I appreciate your comments, but many of you are missing my point and in some cases inventing things that are not in my post.

(1) I am not envious or Stewart or bothered by his wealth. As I said, I have no problem with people making money off of things that they produce, even if I myself don’t care for the product. I think that Stewart’s Calculus books are a long, long way from being “the best calculus book ever written” and if you want a survey of my pedagogical beefs with his book, do a search on this blog. But that doesn’t matter – if he makes money, then fine. I think the Backstreet Boys stink, but I’m not going to suggest the wealth they’ve amassed from sales of albums is morally tainted or that they should stop charging for their songs or concerts. (That is, if they *give* concerts anymore. Or maybe they could give one at Stewart’s house.)

(2) The comment about students stopping in for sushi unannounced, or that students have a legitimate claim to pieces of Stewart’s house, is snark, not logic.

(3) I’m very aware that the vast majority of textbooks make next to no money for their authors. The sheer magnitude of Stewart’s exception is what I am trying to highlight here.

(4) I am also very aware that textbook authoring is extremely hard work. I was the author of a test bank — only the test bank — for the liberal arts math book co-authored by Gary Musser who chimed in above. It was almost a year of taxing, monotonous, error-filled work that I was very glad to have done, and that was just writing multiple choice tests. It gave me the sense that people who write the actual books really are doing it more as a labor of love than anything. So please let’s stop with the “If you only knew how much time it takes, you wouldn’t suggest giving it away” arguments.

(5) And anyway, I am not suggesting that Stewart SHOULD make his books available for free, as if he were morally obligated to do so since he made so much money off them. I am in no position to hand out moral instructions to anybody (except my kids) and tell them what they “should” or “should not” do. And Frank, I am not saying that he “should” give the book away “just because it has become a success”. I said nothing of the sort. I *am* saying that it would be a very cool thing if he did give it away, though. Just like it would be very cool if your favorite musical performer decided, VOLUNTARILY, to give a free concert or put u his/her next album for a free MP3 download. And at this stage of Stewart’s career — now that he’s written his book and built the house, and established his legacy — it would be a great philanthropic thing to do and would help countless thousands of students, particularly those from low-income families or those in cash-strapped high school AP programs, to acquire what is already the de facto industry standard textbook. He’s clearly financially stable enough to afford to do this, at least in part — i.e. make the text without the problem sets available for free, or make only the problem sets available for free, or make the first edition from 1988 free. That is, he’s financially stable unless he’s built such a big house that paying for the property tax and the electric bill is going to require that he sell millions more calculus books.

I think Reva has the #1 point here — Stewart probably does not have the creative control over his product that would allow him to make the choice. If that’s so, then I would modify my proposition to say that perhaps Stewart could talk to his publisher about making this happen.

(6) Gary, I am not complaining, nor did I complain anywhere in my post, about the cost of Stewart’s book. What I said was, if you paid $150 for the book, you probably are wondering how much of that went towards paying for Stewart’s house and the lavish parties thrown within. I would be asking the same question if the cost were $20.

(7) Elsa, the link to the original article suffices as attribution. This sort of thing goes on in blogging all the time. And if for some reason WSJ comes emailing tomorrow asking me to take the quote down, I will gladly and apologetically do so. Also, Elsa, I did not say anywhere in my post — nor do I think it’s true — that it’s “easy” to write a textbook. Where did you read that?