This is for my Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark book.
There are a few typesetting errors, to be sure, however, as I am reading this for proof, I have discovered a few things.
The first few chapters, dealing with historical criticism are rife with errors. Rife. Like if errors were holes and these chapters was cheese, it would be Swiss.
But, as I move into the chapter on mimetic criticism and Lucan, my writing errors — I know, right… I have typos? — are decreasing. Also the writing is better, in my opinion. Oh that I could do away with the one of the preceding chapters, etc…
I need to have it done by 10 Jan, and I am half way done. Then, back to the Typesetter.
But, in the meantime, I have to wonder if I would not, if I had to do it again, cut more. Like Timothy Michael Law, author of the forthcoming book, When God Spoke Greek, said about the need for scholars to show they have read everything. Do I really need a section on historical criticisms? The length of this volume before bibliography, etc… is something like 260 pages. I could get rid of about 30-45 pages by cutting stuff that I would assume everyone knows. I mean, ]], is only 168 pages, there about and it is packed with lots of stuff. Lots.
I guess I do not want the focus to be on the things they already know, but on the things I want them to know.
So, could I cut some? Should I?
One thing will settle this, I think.
I am using Goodreader to annotate my pdf of the first pages. I will then correct the original MSS. I will then prepare a list of corrections for the Typesetter. These things will go out. I will also prepare a second MSS that if the Typesetter chooses to just retype-set, then they will have a significantly shorter mss.
Something like 200 pages.
Anyway… what are your thoughts?