DianeOD
"Presenting my argument'
Thanks L P (if I may be familiar)
This isn't the first time someone has asked for a clear, ordered explanation of my work and its conclusions. Sounds simple, but isnt. To explain the stuff properly, and demonstrate the links between ideas, social and religious lines of communication, relevance of astronomy, and of astronomy to memory and oratory, and thus trace how a very ancient system of folk-astronomy came to Europe... (whew!) ... took a thousand pages in manuscript. In other words, my book is as long as Dummett's Game of Tarot. Its just as detailed, and is also presented in the usual academic language and format.
I have been trying to edit up bits of the ms from time to time, to make separate papers, but the trouble is that making a separate paper out of part of a single, sustained line of historical argument really only works if much of the material is already fairly familiar to the audience.
On the other hand, giving a succinct summary (as I recently did on this forum) leads to charges that the work is not just original, but the product of imagination or free association.
People ask for the Bibliographic sources.
I give them the sources - they can't find the same argument... (because the argument is a product of reading and research, not of quotation)... and the ruota begins again.
I do want to share the information, but frankly not sure how to, any more. Presently talking with wopc about putting up more papers on their site. Perhaps if I just issue each chapter of my book as a separate "paper" - dunno.
Thanks L P (if I may be familiar)
This isn't the first time someone has asked for a clear, ordered explanation of my work and its conclusions. Sounds simple, but isnt. To explain the stuff properly, and demonstrate the links between ideas, social and religious lines of communication, relevance of astronomy, and of astronomy to memory and oratory, and thus trace how a very ancient system of folk-astronomy came to Europe... (whew!) ... took a thousand pages in manuscript. In other words, my book is as long as Dummett's Game of Tarot. Its just as detailed, and is also presented in the usual academic language and format.
I have been trying to edit up bits of the ms from time to time, to make separate papers, but the trouble is that making a separate paper out of part of a single, sustained line of historical argument really only works if much of the material is already fairly familiar to the audience.
On the other hand, giving a succinct summary (as I recently did on this forum) leads to charges that the work is not just original, but the product of imagination or free association.
People ask for the Bibliographic sources.
I give them the sources - they can't find the same argument... (because the argument is a product of reading and research, not of quotation)... and the ruota begins again.
I do want to share the information, but frankly not sure how to, any more. Presently talking with wopc about putting up more papers on their site. Perhaps if I just issue each chapter of my book as a separate "paper" - dunno.
