very disappointed to see the rubbish that has been dumped here
recently. Let's look at one of the worst offenders:
On Dec 7, 10:27 am, Bill Arnold <billarnold...@yahoo.com> wrote:
BA: So you do *not* keep up with this charade of *IDENTITY*
falsehoods, you might as well find out there is only *one*
Dickinson scholar Bill Arnold, so click the clickable and scroll
down to *Emily Dickinson's Secret Love*:
http://jeffbooks.com/EmilyDickinson.html
Bill
A better view may be obtained from seeing some of the http://www.amazon.com
reviews [NB a website and few quotes, for those who sadly cannot
contemplate rational posts without the same]:
http://www.amazon.com/Emily-Dickinsons- ... 1892582007
Here are some of my favourites, written by independent readers of Mr
Arnold's dross - it is instructive to see that their conclusions tally
with those of intelligent posters here who are fed up to the back
teeth with having to wade through his tiresome garbage:
"Reduces Emily's poetry to the level of cheap pulp fiction"
"The writing is so poorly fashioned that I would not, in general,
accept it as a final effort from even a seventh grade writer"
"The book is not worth the time, and certainly not worth the asking
price. To rate it with one star is overly generous"
"This book is positively horrid. The only aspect which is worse than
the poorly written text is the pitiable (but 'original') poetry
interspersed throughout the volume in vile excess. Miss Dickinson
herself would surely weep to see her name used in such nonsensical
trash"
"'Emily Dickinson's Secret Love' is, without doubt, a 'book of
destiny.' Its 'destiny' is to supplant the Sears catalog in "backyard
aftermarkets" everywhere."
"I had been warned that this book was poorly written and edited, that
it had no documentation, and that it did not succeed in proving the
author's arguments. Nothing, however, could ever have prepared me for
the inaccuracies and unwarranted assumptions of the book itself."
"Although the author of this book refers to himself as a Dickinson
scholar and presents the book as a work of Dickinson scholarship, the
presence of a number of spelling, grammatical, and usage errors, along
with numerous stylistic infelicities, make one wonder what kind of
scholar this might be."
"This book is ineffective as poetry, journalism, biography, and
scholarship"
"This is great book for poetlovers. I got mine at amazon. It teels me
all i need to know bout the poet. She has got so many good pomes. My
but i don understn the nasty rightups some people write. Book makes
good cents to me. i wsrite pomes to."
Mr Arnold, your posts here are irredeemable rubbish. Please, please
go back to lurking until you have learned to think and write cogently,
and have picked up one or two of the basics of genealogical research.
You embarrass yourself each and every time you post.
In fairness, Mr Arnold's is not the only stinking vomit to have been
deposited here recently. It seems that Douglas Richardson - whom I
once admired as an independent thinker and committed researcher - has
now sunk to the pitiable level where he depends on, and indeed
welcomes, the support of idiots and trolls such as Bill Arnold and
Spencer Hines. For heaven's sake, Douglas, what does that say to
you? Are you that lacking in insight?
If Mr Richardson's recent effluent, masquerading as postings to a
mediaeval genealogy discussion group, are indicative of where he is
at, then frankly it's high time he saved himself further embarrassment
and debasement in the eyes of those of us who can think, by refraining
from posting [especially if that means the tedious cross-posting
ceases as well].
Now - anyone for mediaeval genealogy?
MA-R