I've read the book itself, as well as several reviews and various documents about the controversy. All in preparation for writing a short piece for Skeptical Inquirer about the controversy spurred by the publication of an excerpt in the NY Times.
As far as the book is concerned, I strongly recommend it. It is very well written, and, although the book has a number of flaws, Dittrich had access to many obscure sources. I learned a lot. 1. Yes, he should have footnoted. The book is a blend of memoir and serious biography. In many cases, the source is obvious because he engaged in first person interviews, but he also used various archives, newspapers, and journal articles. So he should have footnoted. 2. Dittrich's personal connection to the story is both a blessing and a curse. He was remarkably objective much of the time, but his obvious connection to the story al -- stuartvyse.com --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=49382 or send a blank email to leave-49382-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
