I apologize that this post does not contribute to the development of the topic of Laz Bichak, but I take an example from more experienced forum members.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Ian,
There are no contentions regarding collective, country-wise, quality of authorship. I was talking about a particular book written by a particular group of authors.
This book was mercilessly criticized on at least 2 Russian Fora for exactly the same reasons that were mentioned by me, plus some I have omitted, plus some I know little about. The only explanations offered in response were that they did not have enough time to research, and the objections from the muzeum to alter contexts of the existing labels.
Certainly, the authors did not engage in any malicious behavior such as willful falsification.
Please note that I have excluded books of Tirri and Astvatsaturian: their books were published before correct information became available. This is inevitable in any scientific endeavor and the authors, albeit mistaken, are blameless.
As to the access to Internet, both in the US and Russia it became available in the mid-1990’s ( see Wikipedia “Internet history in[country]”). I know it personally, since I communicated with American, European and Russian colleagues and searched their respective auctions and Fora for more than 20 years.
|
It looks very funny when the author of a book written in 2004 is forgiven for his mistakes, and a book written 2 years later but in a much larger "information vacuum" is sharply criticized.
If the moderators do not object, I still propose to compare the number of errors in Tirri's book and the catalog of the Ethnographic Museum in order to close this topic once and for all.
When using Wikipedia data, you should be very careful. Information from Wikipedia and reality are very often far apart.
And on topic - beautiful Laz Bichak from the collection of the Historical Museum (Moscow, Russia). Published in the book Astvatsaturyan: