TWAIN-L Archives

Mark Twain Forum


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Mimi Shillingsburg <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1993 09:30:44 -0600
In-Reply-To: "ALAN C. REESE" <[log in to unmask]> "Re: TWAIN.SEX" (Dec 22, 8:57pm)
Reply-To: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (17 lines)
Thank you, Alan Reese, for explaining clearly and concisely what the MT
readers seem to be objecting to, and what Hoffman apparently never will be
able to see.  It's not Hoffman's "New" Twain that is objectionable but
Hoffman's "method" of finding this new Twain.  and with a figure as popular
as Twain among the reading public, it is double obnoxious because, unlike
the readers of the Forum who have enough scholarly experience to identify
questionable "research," many in the general population may not be able
to analyze the "research."  It's such sensationalism that has many times
helped us humanists lose credibility with the general public.  If the
is there, Twainians will welcome it, I have no doubt, but if it's foundation
is a "pile of noodles," we can only hope the common sense will reveal such.

(Sorry for the typos).
Miriam Shillingsburg