Re: David Salo's book on "Sindarin"
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Carl F. Hostetter <Aelfwine@e...> wrote:
>However, not everything that goes into VT is material from the Tolkien estate, as a glance
> On May 19, 2004, at 10:55 PM, treowgeweorc wrote:
> > By the same token, Salo, Fauskanger, Star, and others would be on the
> > editorial boards of Vinyar Tengwar and Parma Eldalamberon.
> As indeed they could have been (well, not Lisa, as to my mind she is
> unqualified for the position), if they could be trusted not to release
> materials (primary or secondary), before they had been completely
> edited and cleared for publication, and in other than the medium in
> which their publication had been approved. Unfortunately, they have
> amply proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy in this regard.
at the back issue catalogue will confirm. So there are two separate issues: who is on the
member of the "editorial team" with access to the Estate materials; and who is on the list
of VT editors and/or reviewers.
There is a danger that when the editors of a journal are defined in terms of personal or
ideological allegiances, that the journal might become little more than a "fan-zine" or a
venue for vanity publication. An example of this might be the journal "Social Text," and its
role in the so-called "Sokal Affair":
- Rachel Shallit writes:
> Anyway, a blind review process would really not serve any purpose.To date there have not even been hints of a problem.
> As far as I know, no one has tried to submit an article that had to
> be rejected; I am completely sure that no one has complained about
> the submission process or questioned the management of the site.
> And as for viewpoints that the editor doesn't agree with, I knowIndeed, I actively welcome any and all articles so long as sources are
> that a lot of the articles published there don't agree with Aaron's
> theories, but that doesn't keep him from hosting them on his site.
cited and grammar is maintained at an optimal level. While I do
disagree with some of the ideas presented on my site, I can see the
reasoning behind most of them and agree that they are possible
alternative interpretations. Differing interpretations of limited
data is fine - manipulation of data and lack of citation is not.
Sadly, Carl is very correct when he mentions that there are very few
scholarly works submitted. It is interesting to note, as Carl does,
that there have never been submissions by Salo or Fauskanger. Salo
hardly even posts to his own list.
> I may be biased, but I see no reason to try to fix I Lam Arth; itNor Tengwestie or VT. Never has there been a complaint about
> really isn't broken.
submission to either. If there had been a "coverup" I have no doubt
that it would have been "exposed" on ELFLING. I have complete faith
in Carl's ability to manage these scholarly works.
Carl and VT have been around *a lot* longer than I have and has thus
far a perfect track record. Pretty darn good for _many years_ of service.
PS. Good to hear from you Rachel :).