TWAIN-L Archives

Mark Twain Forum


Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 19:50:32 -0500
Reply-To: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dan Davis <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (22 lines)
All good questions. 

Perhaps "errata" should be taken euphemistically in this case. Personally, I think "lapses" is a better fit. 

> On Feb 13, 2015, at 3:25 PM, Barbara Schmidt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Other issues that I have not yet seen publicly addressed regard the
> questions -- Were public employees on the public payroll when the book
> was being produced?  Did anyone involved receive personal profit? What was
> the initial print run? If not published for anyone's personal profit, but
> as a fundraising effort, then the details should be public record. Are
> they? Why was Little Brown, the publisher, involved when the government has
> their own printing office? Did Little Brown go through a bid process for
> rights to publish the book? If so, the amount they paid should be public
> record.  Is it?
> Martin is correct in stating "the issues regarding this book are more
> serious than a series of "mistakes" would imply."
> Barb