tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18504323.post113937261091200349..comments2023-03-24T02:59:21.585-05:00Comments on LIS 569: History of American librarianship: Apostles of Culture, Part 2Greg Downeyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09154543464555817869noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18504323.post-1139377021359695092006-02-07T23:37:00.000-06:002006-02-07T23:37:00.000-06:00Please forgive me for not pursuing your discussion...Please forgive me for not pursuing your discussion questions here, but I have to vent about this section of <I>Apostles of Culture</I>. <BR/><BR/>Why on earth did Garrison think it was a good idea to summarize novels without saying what the titles were? She gave the authors and the names of their heroines, but at least half of her summaries of scandalous Victorian novels didn't mention the name of the book that was being summarized! The titles are in the endnotes, but I found it VERY annoying to have to keep flipping back to the end of the book just to find out what the novels were called.<BR/><BR/>It's not like these books are so well-known that we don't need to be told what they are -- Garrison herself says that most were out of print by the '40s. The only one I'd ever heard of before was <I>Belinda</I>.Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09892934409758178223noreply@blogger.com