Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 30 Aug 1997 17:21:46 -0500 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Yes, serious scholarship takes serious time. And, regretably, not too many
people are very good at it. Twiddling bits is much easier, and gives a
sense of being SO BUSY!
I'm not sure we disagree. Everybody recognizes stuff that was written off
the top of the head, and I am sure it doesn't advance the author's or the
publication's status.
I wonder if this thread has any thing to do with the thread about the
decling interest in serious history and in archives and museums that are
charged with presrving history and interpreting it to present and future
generations??? Maybe it is becoming increasingly difficult to take all of
this seriously.
I have had recent personal experience with two institutions that seemed much
more interested in making research difficult than in faciliting my research
and writing.
george
===========
>Yes, George, but adding to the body of museum knowledge & scholarship takes
>serious time.....the top-of-the-head stuff we see in Museum News is just a
>writing project for someone, in many cases, as if it were this week's
>Newsweek.
>
>
|
|
|