55 of 59 people found the following review helpful
Very interesting but a bit disappointed at first glance...,
This review is from: I Never Knew That About England (Hardcover)
Just got this as a Christmas present for someone, and looking through, it makes a very interesting read, with lots of unusual and entertaining nuggets of information and facts. The illustrations are good too.
However I was a bit disappointed to find 3 mistakes in the space of as many pages when I looked at my own local area (Suffolk), which could have been corrected by anyone with Google and an extra 30 seconds to check each one... It was Sir Robert Watson-Watt who was instrumental in the development of RADAR at Bawdsey just before WW2 (not Robin), it's the River Deben (not Debden), and Grimston Hall is in Trimley St Martin (not the adjacent parish of Trimley St Mary). Which just makes me slightly question the veracity of the rest of the book. But it's still a good read, and probably the rest of it's all true!
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-9 of 9 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 17 Aug 2008 08:51:01 BDT
C. G. Mckenzie says:
I concur. The book's a great idea, let down by inaccuracies. A bit like newspapers, which seem accurate until you read an article on something you already know about.
In reply to an earlier post on 14 Sep 2008 10:33:11 BDT
Stephen M. Whitaker says:
In reply to an earlier post on 14 Oct 2008 18:51:53 BDT
Last edited by the author on 14 Oct 2008 18:58:07 BDT
Mr Whitaker - there are such things as proof readers and researchers. One very expensive book on English folklore published recently is blighted by many similar inaccuracies. Our culture reveres the written word precisely because of an author's obligation to get his facts straight. Poor memory is forgivable. Poor research is not.
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Nov 2008 11:26:00 GMT
Last edited by the author on 3 Nov 2008 11:59:21 GMT
But, Mr "Easy-to-please" Whitaker, what's the point of buying inaccurate information and being lead up the proverbial garden path? You must enjoy reading the redtop newspapers!
What are these "modern mores" all about?
Looks like you should check your own literary accuracy! Perhaps you're trying to write "modern MORALS" but can't get your facts right!
I've deleted this book from my Wish List as a result of bad reviews.
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Nov 2008 11:32:01 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Nov 2008 11:59:43 GMT]
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Nov 2008 11:42:56 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Nov 2008 11:48:46 GMT]
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Jan 2010 00:24:36 GMT
I agree with your point of view, Gajet, regarding the necessity of accuracy:
unfortunately, you rather spoil your argument by confusing your limitations in vocabulary with literary inaccuracy. Mr. Whittaker is not 'inaccurate' because he uses a word different to the one you yourself would choose, if you were him.
Morals = standards of values that guide a person's actions
mores [from the Latin] = customs, the cultural ambience that often determines a person's actions
as in the French proverb: autres temps, autres mores.
In reply to an earlier post on 2 Nov 2010 10:11:35 GMT
Caroline Galwey says:
I think you're confusing the French proverb 'autres temps, autres moeurs' (different times, different ways) with the famous Latin tag 'O tempora, O mores!' (Oh what times we live in! Oh, our standards! - or, as Flanders and Swann had it, Oh Times! Oh Daily Mirror!) attributed, I think, to Cato the Elder. French moeurs is derived from Latin mores, but not identical.
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Dec 2011 18:03:58 GMT
Boom. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Alexa.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›