In my field, dissertations cannot criticize more established figures. We can indicate that we, with the utmost respect and deference, disagree with senior historians, but we may not criticize.
This is why I have a blog.
I'll call this historian Ed. Ed has written several books and is a huge name in the field. Many years ago I wrote to him for help on a research paper and recieved a very kind and informative type-written letter back. Thus I am predisposed to like Ed.
Ed is the only scholar ever to have examined my topic to any degree. He doesn't do much, and what he does is, to put it kindly, dated. Given that he wrote the book a great many years ago, I'm inclined to forgive him for that. The book won a great many prizes, and deservedly so.
He made lots of mistakes!!!
There, I've said it. It's a fine book and one that I've even suggested to people over the years. The mistakes I've found do not change that. They're such small details that only someone doing intimate dissection of the same group of people would notice, and it took me several years. Ed doesn't deserve to have any of his prizes recalled... but I'm finding more and more of them. I suspect that he took some notes incorrectly and the errors then made it into the manuscript and hence into my hands, but if you know where to look, they're not hard to find. Ed is a stupid git!
Thanks. I feel better now.
Words Written: spent yesterday at the library, getting more books
Lessons Graded: classes start soon!