Napoleon Series Archive 2003

Re: How We Grow
In Response To: How We Grow ()

Fascinating dialogue, It's not often one can get these sorts of insights into what the people who do it think they're doing.

I have to stick up (slightly) for Loraine Petre. I haven't had the displeasure of reading the tome that Mark refers to, but I'm indebted for his history of the 9th Foot, largely because it's about the only one, as far as I can see, and it's a less painful read than the other obviously is. Proof-readers don't seeem to have existed in his time - according to him, the 9th embarked from Cove a couple of weeks before they arrived there...?

I do agree about the umpteenth re-formulation, although presumably it means there's a demand there, which in itself is a good thing, and I imagine people start with those and move on to something more detailed and deeper and more adventurous in terms of "angle" etc, such as Mark's books or Rory Muir's. That's certainly what I'd advise a student to do. It's all about audience, really, in that sense, isn't it? Not too many footnotes or too much speculation for the general reader; the reverse for the scholar. I think that the more one knows and has read about the subject, the more one wants to know about the arcane by-paths, the embedded suppositions, the historiography etc. But that's about layers of (one's) knowledge.

That said, there's a few things that I think are non-negotiable:

*Factual accuracy. No lazily or deliberately repeating hoary inaccuracies. This falls under the heading of "spreading disinformation", and if a book does nothing else, it should at least be free of thsi pernicious fault
*Say something new or at least put it in a new and fresher light. Not just "the mixture as before".
*Not have too obvious an axe to grind
* Be readable, although in my field, at least, there is plenty of stuff which is usually categorised as "dull but worthy" - a lot of stuff written originally as Ph.Ds etc caomes into this category - maybe fascinating new information or analysis, boringly written. (Should it be allowed publication without drastic revision? Probably - but it will find its own level in the marketplace)

The ideal book?
Avoids all the above crimes, while also:

*Is excitingly written from a literary point of view
*Presents new information or analysis which is intrinsically interesting
*Speaks with the author's voice, including idiosyncratically, provided it is not overly partisan.

Mark's and Rory's books obviously fit the guidleines!

Keep up the good work!

Caroline

PS Howie, have you got the names of those "dirty" books on the era that you mention? That's one field that seems not to have been adequately covered?

Messages In This Thread

Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Better History 101
Re: Better History 101
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Bad History and Relativism
Re: The history book I would like to have written
Re: The history book I would like to have written
Re: The history book I would like to have written
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Rory Muir's "Salamanca".
Early Christmas
Re: Quotes
Re: Early Christmas
Re: Early Christmas
Limits of Narrative
Re: Limits of Narrative
Feu de Joie for Rory Muir
Why Write History?
How We Grow
Re: How We Grow
Re: How We Grow
Re: How We Grow
Right Angle
Re: Right Angle
Footnoting
Re: Right Angle
... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Only 'quite intelligent'?
Re: Only 'quite intelligent'?
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Audiences
Re: Audiences
Follow Ups or Spin Offs
Re: Follow Ups or Spin Offs
Re: Audiences
Re: Right Angle
Re: How We Grow
Reach for your Swords !
Re: Reach for your Swords !
"Full Monty" Footnotes!!
Re: "Full Monty" Footnotes!!
Re: "Full Monty" Footnotes!!
Long Footnotes
Re: Reach for your Swords !
Fair Points
When I was child, I spoke as a child
In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: When I was child, I spoke as a child
Re: When I was child, I spoke as a child
Re: When I was child, I spoke as a child
Re: Limits of Narrative
The Pits
Re: Limits of Narrative
And Good, Durable History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Good Military History