Yes, but that story only describes the historical progress and some commentary on the Steads and their views.  It does not cover the, in my opinion far more important, issues of how and why the publisher decided to take the opportunity ‘away’ from John Bird, and then not offer but thrust it upon the Steads.  It is not lost on me that even to this very moment, on PRH’s page for this book, they are dancing around avoiding even the hint of a mention of Prof. Bird’s name, using rhetoric that strongly suggests it was the Steads that found the missing manuscript, and continuing to spin the idea that this is a Twain story in full, slipping some of those clever little Stead interpolations in ‘under the radar’ where — uncorrected — we’re sure to see them showing up in further essays.

I can’t help but wonder that this story is a little microcosm of so much that is wrong about contemporary approaches to thinking, writing, and publishing, and carefully pulling back the curtain from some of the up-to-now hidden protagonists in this little affair would have at least the refreshing aspect of lancing an undiagnosed infection.



> On Oct 3, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Barbara Schmidt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> The NEW YORKER has already published the "backstory" of this book -- on
> September 7… http://tinyurl.com/y8wds7pu