... just watched an episode of Insp Morse today. good stuff by the way. but once in a while the blow-monkey prof just needs to go off to a sheryy-induced sleep. case in point here ...
robert clair
alexandria, va 22308
>I never write reviews without having read a book, nor do I usually wade
>into areas in which I am not an expert, so this is an exception.
>
> As I am sure Jan would concur from his experience with BQ and with his two
> superb tomes, there is difference between the publication of matters which
> are still up for debate (and are, thus, a cause for differing opinion) and
> those which are a matter of record I am sure there are those whose
> opinions differ from those which Jan presents in his publications - we
> have had evidence of such disagreements on this list from time to time.
> That is part of healthy research and debate.
>
> On the other hand, the misrepresentation of facts in the book in question
> is what seems to be most troubling. Regardless of its apparent usefulness
> in providing pictorial and historical details of 75 years of Campagnolo
> history in one place, this book has the potential of becoming THE
> definitive history of Campagnolo; the standard reference book, for some at
> least, on this matter for years to come. It is, after all, in print!
> Moreover, the reality is that few if any of us has the energy or time to
> produce an alternative.
>
> Nevertheless, with so many resources at the fingertips of the authors
> (including the collective widsom on this forum), it is difficult to accept
> that such a book could make it to the printing stage without getting all
> of its facts straight. In the academic world, with which I am most
> familiar, this would be considered as very shoddy research. Having said
> that, I have to believe that partial fault must lie with its publishers/
> editors. Academic publications are vetted, refereed, reviewed and edited
> at a number of different stages (now it would be naive of me to insist
> that all such publications are error free, but the reality is that there
> is a whole process in place which is intended to minimise errata). While
> this publication is not an academic book as such, I believe that the role
> of its publishers/ editors should have been to make sure that all facts
> (and material borrowed from other sources) were properly researched,
> supported and presented!!
>
> The end result, therefore, would have been a piece which would have been
> beyond reproach and, potentially, a much stronger, invaluable resource on
> one of the most important contributions to cycling history.
>
>
> Paul B. Williams, BAH, MPhil, PhD
> Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
> castell5@sympatico.ca