Once was enamoured of footnotes
Blue Mauritius received its first write up in the press (that I’m aware of) in the UK’s Daily Mail recently (11 August). It didn’t make it online, but a copy was sent to me this week. It is mostly a descriptive review (Critic’s choice), and to my chagrin, refers to the ball envelopes as invitations (which I was at great pains not to in the text) and seems to have missed my point about the error theory. However, any publicity is good publicity I’m told, as long as they spell your name right!
Best of all, perhaps, the reviewer describes the book as ‘scholarly but very readable’.
This was one of my greatest challenges – appealing to both general and specialist readers. In the one article I wrote based on my Masters thesis there were more footnotes than text. Once was enamoured of footnotes is an apt description of me the academic.
I finished secondary school a good writer. By the time I had a research degree under my belt I was an excruciating writer, unable to leap small audiences of like-minded academics in a single bound. The Academy almost, but not quite, ruined me for writing. It has taken me some eight years and much effort to remedy this. I know that parts of my book do get bogged down in detail but for the most part it zips along…
So, I’ll say it loud and say it proud – I am beyond the recovering academic stage – I am ‘scholarly but very readable’ and very happy to be so!