Kata Markon

["David C. Hindley" <dhindley AT compuserve.com>]

JFAlward said:

>>Or, we can just drop the whole matter right here.<<

Sounds good to me.

I can understand a desire to foster an environment where
professional academics can converse as freely as they might
at the social functions of a seminar, but there are real
life constraints that discourage many professional academics
from speaking too-freely in an open forum. S/he can
misspeak, or state a hypothesis that was not quite stated as
well as it could have been, etc.

Of course, the general public is the well from which the
student body (those who indirectly pay the professional
academic's salaries), and so there is also a desire to
expose the public to what is "happening" in academia, if
only to attract interest (and ultimately, students). I
suppose, too, that the informed portion of the general
public can serve as a sort of "reality check" for the ideas
being taught or analyzed by the professionals.

Members of the general public who participate in the forums
have to respect the fact that a certain amount of
familiarity with primary and secondary literature is assumed
in any particular discussion between academics. The hardest
thing for me to do sometimes is to keep my trap shut. Even
if I am really interested in a topic, a fairly extensive
amount of research has to be done before I feel comfortable
talking about it. But it is not an insurmountable amount of
research, and probably most people could do it if
sufficiently motivated.

Conversely, the professionals should also recognize that
outsiders who have not spent four years in graduate school
may also be monitoring the discussion, and avoid too much
use or jargon or unstated premises, especially the use of
the results of prior critics stated as if they are proven
facts. Sure, don't re-invent the wheel, but do realize the
wheel as we have it today is not the wheel that was first
invented in prehistory.

So, if someone asks if those "in the know" can help
recommend the latest important works on a subject, it does
not help to suggest that they should not ask for clues until
they have paid their dues. But isn't that the same as asking
them to reinvent the wheel? What is good for the goose is
good for the gander, they say. If the student is serious,
s/he will be following-up on the references and sources in
the footnotes of the modern works, and then work backwards.
But finding those key works, especially if the subject of
interest is covered only in passing or as a chapter, and not
as the major theme of the work, can be exceedingly
frustrating.

If it is answered that the answers could easily be found in
introductory books or ABD or TDNT, etc., all I can say is
that I can think of many occasions where professionals have
asked exactly those same kinds of "elementary" questions.
They were just outside of their primary field, and their
colleagues respond (usually) with graciousness,
understanding that there is no such thing anymore as an "all
around" critic as there was in the 19th and early 20th
centuries. Isn't the non-professional or student just as
"outside" their field when they ask a question? Surely "we"
can extend them a similar courtesy.

Still, no one wants to have to answer nuisance questions
thrown out by antagonists, but I do not think that was the
case here.

Respectfully,

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio, USA