tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20855844.post8509983103405387397..comments2024-02-28T05:20:51.002-05:00Comments on Kermit's Log: Cullingkermitthefroghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15742856153167362749noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20855844.post-62587699108633824052008-02-05T18:04:00.000-05:002008-02-05T18:04:00.000-05:00I'm not sure that I have anything useful to add, i...I'm not sure that I have anything useful to add, in terms of experience or advice. But I should take your love of totality as an example, because I would happily let myself get mired in history, and your resistance is probably a very good thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20855844.post-62930257437795731842008-02-05T09:58:00.000-05:002008-02-05T09:58:00.000-05:00No, that makes sense, and I think I'll probably en...No, that makes sense, and I think I'll probably end up taking the second option, since it is a moderately well-known story. Although that still means that to decide which details to include, *I* will need more than a nodding acquaintance with the history. :)kermitthefroghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15742856153167362749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20855844.post-66042686625835664752008-02-04T23:34:00.000-05:002008-02-04T23:34:00.000-05:00Hmm, maybe chapter 2 will become two chapters duri...Hmm, maybe chapter 2 will become two chapters during the process of writing it? <BR/><BR/>Or you could assume that your readers have a nodding acquaintance with the authors and history you are presenting them, and you will focus in this chapter on 1) only the bare minimum of background to give detail and 2)only those additional details that would be particularly new and interesting to your readers. You know --- instead of trying to present totality, you'd be telling a familiar story in a way calculated to be most new and interesting. <BR/><BR/>I might not be being entirely clear here.Sisyphushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09880634753539329199noreply@blogger.com