Posting has been sporadic due to footnotes.

Like Heu Mihi, I’m dealing with an “indefatigably persistent article” (that sounds much less threatening than the Article That Will Not Die), which I have finally beaten into submission for the third time. That is, I’ve beaten its text, but it is not yet submitted, because footnotes.

References to secondary literature, things I have read and have notes for and just have to format them for this journal (can you say idiosyncratic? I knew you could). References to things I have read but who the hell said it? References to things I know someone wrote about, probably more than one someone; maybe I have the citations in a previously-written article or maybe there are notes somewhere on this computer, in some file, probably named something unhelpful, which will probably crash Windows Explorer when I search for it. Properly phrased and formatted references to legal documents (not my usual wheelhouse). References to books on my shelves, bristling with post-its saying “Add to MMP-3.” References to things hand-copied into my research journal when I was working somewhere I either couldn’t have my laptop or just didn’t bother to bring it.

Gah. I wish I were Keith Wrightson. But pride forbids. The MMP-3 will be properly documented if it kills me. It has 95 theses footnotes now, which is probably all of them; it’s just that most of them say things like “Citation here.” Yesterday I had dealt with 19 of these. Today I finished note number 37. So I’ve nearly doubled my count in just a few hours.

It will get done. My articles always seem like a hopeless mess until very suddenly they are finished. So I know how this works. But I want to be DONE already.


2 thoughts on “What I’m up to

  1. I feel your pain. It’s astonishing how much time it takes to find a good reference to what everyone knows.

    And the historian of Coventry was Charles Phythian-Adams. But you know that already. “Ceremony and the Citizen” was the article, then there was a book.

    1. Yes, thanks to nicoleandmaggie who are more skilled with Google than I am. But I’m still outraged over the lack of footnotes in Wrightson’s book.

      (Sometimes I think I just enjoy working up a good head of steam. Maybe I should write letters to the editor and sign them Outraged on the Internet.)

      W/r/t references, it’s not even what everyone knows, but what I know I read . . . possibly recently . . . or maybe a long time ago . . . and as I go searching through files, I find other references and think “oh, wow, must add that, how could I have forgotten?”

Comments are now closed.