IDK, I think Whitworth destroying a factory is close enough to gossipy sensationalism :)
Well, I agree, that's why I reported it, but that's *it*, is what I'm saying! That was the only gossipy sensationalism I could find in the book, so this is all you get from me.
So at first I thought the quotes were like air quotes: supposed to indicate that they weren't actually surprised. But then I got to 'past' and... I got nothin.
Yeah, no, the author's definitely saying they used the word 'surprise'. Honestly, they should feel something much stronger than that! like outrage! so I could almost see why you would put that one in quotes. But the 'past' is just the author doing the thing the author does, which is constantly signal that she's read the primary sources and wishes she had time and energy to publish them in toto for us. And I just wish she had gone for something more readable, because this isn't adding rigor so much as giving the the illusion of rigor.
Aw! That (and the next line) is kinda sweet, in a dorky kind of way. I like this guy!
What I saw of him through the filter this author presents, I liked too, I just don't have a sense of his relationships or interests or hobbies or emotional life, outside of diplomacy and his eternally in-arrears salary. Which is disappointing, but the author says this is all he gave us. But I'm glad I read it and thanks again for the help bringing it down to a price I was willing to pay!
Re: Whitworth destroys a factory
Well, I agree, that's why I reported it, but that's *it*, is what I'm saying! That was the only gossipy sensationalism I could find in the book, so this is all you get from me.
So at first I thought the quotes were like air quotes: supposed to indicate that they weren't actually surprised. But then I got to 'past' and... I got nothin.
Yeah, no, the author's definitely saying they used the word 'surprise'. Honestly, they should feel something much stronger than that! like outrage! so I could almost see why you would put that one in quotes. But the 'past' is just the author doing the thing the author does, which is constantly signal that she's read the primary sources and wishes she had time and energy to publish them in toto for us. And I just wish she had gone for something more readable, because this isn't adding rigor so much as giving the the illusion of rigor.
Aw! That (and the next line) is kinda sweet, in a dorky kind of way. I like this guy!
What I saw of him through the filter this author presents, I liked too, I just don't have a sense of his relationships or interests or hobbies or emotional life, outside of diplomacy and his eternally in-arrears salary. Which is disappointing, but the author says this is all he gave us. But I'm glad I read it and thanks again for the help bringing it down to a price I was willing to pay!