That's true, i guess I'm trying to say "the portrayal of Feynman versus the reality of him" which "he didn't write any books" doesn't represent well.
With some more thought, the fact that he wasn't the direct author of any books is interesting but not really that significant to his character, so i can't see much reason to point it out other than to discredit his achievements.
Though if the achievement being discredited is the number of books he's seemingly written then it makes sense to a degree.
> if the achievement being discredited is the number of books he's seemingly written then it makes sense to a degree.
Only if you take "written" literally, as in, he didn't do the actual writing, he just told the stories orally and someone else wrote them down.
I personally don't care much about that; the stories are his (including, as I've said, whatever misrepresentations of what actually happened they contain). Lots of people have books ghostwritten, and that's not considered unusual.
More than that, there are famous examples of books for which someone got the credit for the writing when they actually did little or none of it: John F. Kennedy being credited as the author of Profiles in Courage, for example. Even the content of Profiles in Courage was probably less Kennedy's than the content of the books Feynman gets credited for was Feynman's.
With some more thought, the fact that he wasn't the direct author of any books is interesting but not really that significant to his character, so i can't see much reason to point it out other than to discredit his achievements.
Though if the achievement being discredited is the number of books he's seemingly written then it makes sense to a degree.