Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00376)

Hi Daniel,

I think we need to have it spelled out. 

One issue that comes to my mind though, is that Algeo and the heirs of
Cooper obviously got into disagreements with the result that Algeo
would be sued for using the material by Cooper (the family lawyer
wrote that on theos-talk if I remember correctly). Now what part Algeo
had in deserving that, I don't know, but it is a credit to Algeo that
this aspect of the situation was not put into print. It does make him
look more guilty though. 

This obviously doesn't mean that the criticism of the book isn't
valid. I noted each one of the mistakes Deveney noted in my own copy
of the HPB-Letters and I'm sure it would be a good idea if a full list
was compiled (the review states he only chose a few for the review)
and put online somewhere (needless to say, my website would be open to
such a list, as I suspect yours would). 

Katinka
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell"
<danielhcaldwell@y...> wrote:
> Paul,
> 
> You excerpted some choice extracts from
> John Patrick Deveney's review of THE LETTERS OF 
> H.P. BLAVATSKY, Volume I.
> 
> One of those excerpts reads:
> 
> ===================================================
> 
> The editor in his preface acknowledges the 
> Herculean labors of the late John Cooper 
> in adding to the corpus of letters and in 
> preparing them for publication, but states 
> that, for unspecified reasons, none
> of Cooper's work could be used "directly," 
> and that even his transcriptions of texts 
> were not used because they were "not
> accurate." This is a surprising charge, 
> directed as it is toward a person known 
> for his meticulous work and now unavailable 
> to defend himself...
> 
> ============================================
> 
> I call special attention to the part that reads:
> 
> ================================================
> 
> [Dr. Algeo] ... states 
> that, for unspecified reasons, none
> of Cooper's work could be used "directly," 
> and that even his transcriptions of texts 
> were not used because they were "not
> accurate." This is a surprising charge, 
> directed as it is toward a person known 
> for his meticulous work and now unavailable 
> to defend himself.
> 
> =============================================
> 
> I may be wrong, but it appears to me that
> Mr. Deveney's summary does NOT portray what
> Dr. Algeo actually wrote.
> 
> Look at Dr. Algeo's Preface, pp. xiv-xv
> beginning with the section titled "HISTORY
> OF THE PROJECT."
> 
> And read carefully the paragraph on p. xv
> beginning "After John Cooper's death...."
> 
> Read the 2nd sentence of that paragraph.
> That sentence begins: "One of those 
> reasons...."
> 
> Does anyone see the DIFFERENCE between
> what Dr. Algeo originally wrote and what
> Mr. Deveney gives in his summary statement?
> 
> If not, I will be more than glad to spell
> it out.
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc