Jeffrey Richards' rudeness

Hi

I'm Joanne. I don't usually have time to post a lot to mailing lists but I had to comment on something in the Ricardian Bulletin which I received yesterday.

It was about the correspondence between John Ashdown-Hill and Jeffrey Richards about Richard III's alleged deformity. When Mr Ashdown-Hill rebutted Mr Richards' arguments, the latter ended the correspondence by writing:

"...unless one is prepared to concede absolutely that Richard III was pure, good, beautiful and blameless, it is impossible to have a reasonable conversation with members of your society".

Well, for starters, this Ricardian does not worship St Richard, so he shouldn't be lumping everyone together or tarring everyone with the same brush. Secondly, I think it's obvious who has got on his high horse and is not capable of "reasonable conversation" and it certainly isn't Mr Ashdown-Hill.

So much for academic debate and politely agreeing to differ!

Joanne

--- In , "Joanne Summerill"
<jsummerill@s...> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm Joanne. I don't usually have time to post a lot to mailing
lists but I had to comment on something in the Ricardian Bulletin
which I received yesterday.
>
> It was about the correspondence between John Ashdown-Hill and
Jeffrey Richards about Richard III's alleged deformity. When Mr
Ashdown-Hill rebutted Mr Richards' arguments, the latter ended the
correspondence by writing:
>
> "...unless one is prepared to concede absolutely that Richard III
was pure, good, beautiful and blameless, it is impossible to have a
reasonable conversation with members of your society".
>
> Well, for starters, this Ricardian does not worship St Richard, so
he shouldn't be lumping everyone together or tarring everyone with
the same brush. Secondly, I think it's obvious who has got on his
high horse and is not capable of "reasonable conversation" and it
certainly isn't Mr Ashdown-Hill.
>
> So much for academic debate and politely agreeing to differ!
>
> Joanne
>
Personally, I think uncivility is deplorable in any forum, and that
it is always interesting (if sometimes fruitless) to explore other
points of view and consider what-ifs.

I'm thoroughly enjoying our current what-if: What if Lincoln's
rebellion and the Yorkist pretender weren't a pathetic sham?

Katy

--- In , "Joanne Summerill"
<jsummerill@s...> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm Joanne. I don't usually have time to post a lot to mailing
lists but I had to comment on something in the Ricardian Bulletin
which I received yesterday.
>
> It was about the correspondence between John Ashdown-Hill and
Jeffrey Richards about Richard III's alleged deformity. When Mr
Ashdown-Hill rebutted Mr Richards' arguments, the latter ended the
correspondence by writing:
>
> "...unless one is prepared to concede absolutely that Richard III
was pure, good, beautiful and blameless, it is impossible to have a
reasonable conversation with members of your society".
>
> Well, for starters, this Ricardian does not worship St Richard, so
he shouldn't be lumping everyone together or tarring everyone with
the same brush. Secondly, I think it's obvious who has got on his
high horse and is not capable of "reasonable conversation" and it
certainly isn't Mr Ashdown-Hill.
>
> So much for academic debate and politely agreeing to differ!
>
> Joanne

I read that too. I wholly agree. It's amazing how some people (I
think also of Weir on page 1 of her book on the Princes) seem able to
comfort themselves with a definition of traditionalists like
themselves as "reasonable" and anybody who differs from that stance
(and they tend to name the Richard III Society) as starry-eyed
extremists wishing to canonise Richard. Ergo they don't have to
engage with anybody putting an alternative point of view.

Very rational! Especially since the Richard III Soc. has been so
completely strait-laced in the last 20 years, promoting so much
really painstaking research and not providing an airing to mere
enthusiasts, who have tended to go off and form their own societies.

Who do these folks think they're kidding (apart from themselves)?

If I'm not careful I'll get rude too.

Marie
>
>
>
>
>