12-11-2018, 01:14 AM
-JKP -
For it to be a history, rather than discussion of current thinking, it needs a definite cut-off, and the first century of study seems a fair one.
Besides, even to offer a critical evaluation dead people's ideas can bring storms of protest in this study (I was once met with deeply offended expressions of censure for daring to doubt 'the word of a nobleman' when I said I thought the alleged rumour, allegedly passed on by Mnishovsky was given more weight than it merited.)
So imagine trying to write a detailed critique of things said and written by current members. I expect my 'warning' level would rocket to 100% in the first two posts.
For it to be a history, rather than discussion of current thinking, it needs a definite cut-off, and the first century of study seems a fair one.
Besides, even to offer a critical evaluation dead people's ideas can bring storms of protest in this study (I was once met with deeply offended expressions of censure for daring to doubt 'the word of a nobleman' when I said I thought the alleged rumour, allegedly passed on by Mnishovsky was given more weight than it merited.)
So imagine trying to write a detailed critique of things said and written by current members. I expect my 'warning' level would rocket to 100% in the first two posts.