FMyLife, Academic Version
Months ago:
Snippy review criticizes my edition of Beowulf and the Critics for not discussing Haber's A Comparative Study of Beowulf and the Æneid and Bertha Phillpotts' article on "Wyrd and Providence." I get all worried. I go and re-read the book and the articles wondering why I would be so stupid to leave out something so obvious. Turns out there was a reason: the stuff was completely irrelevant.
Today:
Anonymous referee writes: "Drout should look at Title of Book." Remarkably boring, Title of Book is almost entirely irrelevant to my paper. I spent today reading it. All 400 pages. All of today. Hey, I've got a new footnote.
Clearly I am incapable of learning from my mistakes. FMAcademicL.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
My life among the invertebrates
About Me
- Michael
- I am Professor of English and Director of the Center for the Study of the Medieval at Wheaton College, Norton, Mass., where I teach Old English (Anglo-Saxon), Middle English, medieval literature, fantasy, science fiction and writing. I am also a Millicent C. McIntosh Fellow. My scholarship is focused on tenth-century English literature and culture, meme-based theories of culture, and the works of J. R. R. Tolkien.
Links
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(50)
-
▼
September
(6)
- Clash of the Gods: Beowulf EvaluationAn excerpt fr...
- Tonight on The History Channel: Clash of the Gods ...
- The Staffordshire HoardThe largest Anglo-Saxon gol...
- New Course: The Anglo-Saxon World (and an update o...
- FMyLife, Academic VersionMonths ago:Snippy review ...
- Beowulf and the MoopsRight now on ANSAX-L, the Ang...
-
▼
September
(6)
1 comment:
Nothing yanks my chain more than reviewers whose reviews run something like this: "The book/paper is unacceptable because it does not mention my own irrelevant work, nor the irrelevant work of one of my friends/colleagues/mentors."
My own policy -- if I get one such review from a publication, I ignore it. If I get two, I refuse to submit to them again.
Post a Comment