From dlupher@ups.edu Sun Jan 28 12:56:42 2001 Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW00.12) with ESMTP id MAA102538 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 12:56:41 -0800 Received: from mail.ups.edu (main.ups.edu [192.124.98.219]) by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id MAA00394 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 12:56:37 -0800 Received: from [207.207.116.53] (wyatt1dhcp53.ups.edu [207.207.116.53]) by mail.ups.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0SKuYf32151 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 12:56:34 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: dlupher@mail.ups.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <001801c08961$acda6200$88ed1ec4@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 12:48:56 -0800 To: classics@u.washington.edu From: David Lupher Subject: RE: Years - and It's Saturday Night Live in New York ! Terrence Lockyer writes >DL is still too ambitious. In case no one else has yet mentioned it by the >time this post arrives, I shall name: > >John Reed, *Ten Days that Shook the World* (1919) TL is still too ambitious, as Chris Robbins pointed out: >But why stop at a month? Why not a week, or even a day? That's it, >Let's put our minds to a book about a single day. Any day will do, >so we can just pick one at random. How about, say, 16th June 1904. Well, that's a hard one. The last person who *tried* to choose that day took a view both too limited and too expansive. Too limited, because he chose to limit his scope to "dear, dirty Dublin"---and also he neglected everything and everything that happened there between midnight and 8AM. And too expansive, for he spilled over into the wee hours of June 15. (Just how far into them, I'm not quite sure. Stuart Gilbert has Bloom and Stephen arriving at No. 7 Eccles Street at 2AM, which means that Molly can't start soliloquizing until close to 3, I should think. But Hugh Kenner has them arriving at 1AM, and he professes to be able to pin down Molly's soliloquy to 1:15-2:20.) As for "day books," I suppose it's cheating to mention books on particular battles: e.g. Gordon W. Prange's 873-page book on Pearl Harbor ("At Dawn We Slept," 1981) and his somewhat less weighty tome "Miracle at Midway" (both written with the help of two collaborators), or Martin Middlebrook's "The First Day of the Somme: July 1, 1916." And then there are three hefty volumes entitled "Gettysburg: The First Day" and so on. (And speaking of war books on single days, I recently stumbled across a book that Elizabeth Vandiver, who has an interest in this subject, probably knows: "The Christmas Truce.") P.S.: When I playfully claimed that Chris Robbins was "crowing," he squawked: >HA! One would be a fair fool indeed to seriously make such a "crow" in >THIS forum. But I did append a minor qualifier, to wit: > > "It's just that it was the only entry. :-)" > >Note the "smiley" for textual analysis purposes. All very true. I carefully edited out your disclaimer for effect. Highly selective quotation is one time-honored way to perpetrate "textual analysis." David Lupher Classics Dept. Univ. of Puget Sound .