Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 12:37:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Ruth Groff <rgroff-AT-yorku.ca>
Subject: Re: BHA: Adorno on style


Hiya Colin,

I'm going to resist the urge to reply, even though it's nearly more than I
can bear...

... other than to say that I'm pleased to see that, for what it's worth, you
agree that "many of RBs later works...could be expounded more clearly."  

I really can't comment on whether Bhaskar can or should do this himself, or
whether an editor, or even a co-writer, should do this.  I don't think that
that was ever an important point of contention.

Colin:
>Now, I think many of RBs
>later works could (I say later becuase it seems to me that RTS, PON, PIF,
>SRHE, RR are all perfectly clear) be expounded more clearly, but note, this
>is not to say that RB could write them any more clearly.

Meanwhile, on to more important things: How about that summary of DPF 2.8
from Tobin?!

Warmly,
R.



     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---