TWAIN-L Archives

Mark Twain Forum

TWAIN-L@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
tdempsey <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 25 Jun 2006 23:15:00 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
Gregg,
    I guess I suffer from my professional training.  The only two areas I've
every really studied have been American Archeology and Law. (Okay, and now
slavery in northeast Missouri.)  I was taught scientific archeology -- dig
for information, not the classical European dig-for-goodies approach.
    In law, you always want the best evidence.  People invariably make
mistakes. It is human. I have seen many examples of it in Twain research
before.  I guarantee you that Ron Powers did not make up the mistake in
Dangerous Water.  He had a source for it.  I'm sure it was quite
authoritative.  I have not looked to see what he footnoted to.
    I think most academics think in a paradigmatic fashion. They divide up
into schools of thought and squabble like politicians -- only for less
money.  They subscribe to positions with religious fervor and toss opponents
on the rack faster than Torquemada. They pack about in herds until they
encounter an irresolvable conflict. This triggers a revolution in thinking
and the pack goes careening off in another direction.  (I've been reading
Harrold Bloom recently and thus am considering giving up reading all
together.)
    For the above reason, I tried to include as much original material as
possible in my work.  The criticism I've received most from people is that I
included too much in the way of quotes and examples. Somebody referred to it
as more of a source book.  I found that flattering. I think primary material
is far, far more important than the machinations of my simple mind.
    So to answer your question, I have the utmost faith in you, Bob,
Shelley, -- all of you.  You are great, brilliant people.  I would like to
have a brain transfusion from any one of you. But I think the answer to the
question as to which Cross was which isn't, "It is Samuel because Professor
So-and-so says so."  The better answer is, "It was Samuel Cross who Sam
remembered as corroborated by census records and church records."
    Now, as regards my reliability, every word I wrote was spoken to me by
an angel.  Every citation was revealed through divine intervention. Next
time you are in Hannibal, I will show you the golden plates.  It is okay to
question some things, Gregg, but leave revealed truth alone.  Me and W are
in agreement on that one.
    Amen,
    Terrell
    P.S.  I wretch when other people use the word paradigm.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2