 |
 |
ABigail makes a VERY important and (for this discussion) useful distinction between REED contributors/editors, etc., and REED users, who may be sometimes be the same people but most often, I suspect, are not. And where, I ask rhetorically, would either group be without the other? I confess I don't fully recall how this discussion got started, but I trust it was NOT from a negative criticism of REED's editorial policies for "failing" to provide every conceivable type of information a user could POSSIBLY think up a need for. One of the most profitable, for me, experiences of using resources such as the RRED volumes is to see if what I'm looking for ISN'T represented. How else, again rhetorically, would our data-foundations grow without some perception of what yet REMAINS to be done? Further, and again I trust this was not part of original inquiry, no one can or should do all of an investigator's homework for her/him. REED protect us (!) from the despair of finding that what we think we're discovering as a contribution to discourse has already been found, indexed, reprinted, and stacked on the library shelf in a REED volume. Count me a grateful, if sporadic, end-user of the butterfly-collector's hard work. Contextualizing interpreters like me wouldn't get much done without it. Cheers, Naomi Liebler