DCHindley

Roger,

Such negative waves! (quoting the proto-beatnik Oddball from the movie "Kelley's Heroes")

I believe April D felt that the NG translation was deliberately made contrary to common expectations in order to creat controversy, and in turn sell something (NG subscriptions, commentaries, etc).

I sincerely doubt that any scholar, except maybe J D Crossan, B Mack and a couple others, cross over into the popular market strongly enough to make any serious money off their work. The REAL money is in devotional literature sold in evangelical bookstores, and by alarmist authors who folks used to call "controversialists."

Getting back on track, remember when R Eisenman's _The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered_ (1993, reprinted 1994 & 2004) came out? His translations of several DSS mss were quite different than those that preceeded his. There are legitimate differences of opinion when it coms to translation.

DCH

PS: I doubt that Eisenman made much of any money from that book either.

Notsri

A critical edition (or via: amazon.co.uk) was published this past June.

Roger Pearse

Thank you!

That came out quietly, didn't it? Hardly any reviews on Amazon.com, none on Amazon.co.uk. Amazon gives publication date as September.

Anyone interested in the curious backstory of this text, I have notes on it here.

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

I'm afraid I am terribly cynical about revisionism.

NG have form for misrepresentation on this one, that's for sure.

Perhaps, but that certainly doesn't stop people trying. I think we all might be surprised how profitable publishing is.

Tell me more! -- How do I exploit this market? Hey, I'm a complete tart; I'll write anything.

And, before anyone sneers, just remember who you work for and what you do for the pittance that is shoved in your bank balance every month. At least I'd get to choose what I did.

As I sit here writing a translation of Cyril Against Julian, I will bear your wise words in mind.

I wouldn't bet on that too strongly, you know.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

neilgodfrey

Have linked your notes to my review and related posts, Roger.

DeConick's comments on the NG critical edition just released in her book:

DCHindley

Go to any Christian, or even a regular, bookshop, look in "devotional" and pick up virtually any book that you see (they are pretty much identical). Then slavishly copy the style, subject matter and art without shame.

Alternatively, write super imaginative interpretations of "future times" biblical prophecy that will scare the reader into reading the sequel, attend a biblical fundamentalist mega-church and give generously to the minister's new mansion fund. Of course, negotiate your percentage from the minister first.

Been there, but you can't make any real money unless you got contacts who can steer projects to you for a kickback. But at least I had cash flow, until I paid my taxes. Hours sucked, too, but that also applied to my "real" jobs. I was "salaried", meaning I worked overtime for free, but the workload was always so heavy you needed to work 50-60 hours a week. When you calculate the average hourly rate, you might as well have worked at McDonalds. Well, OK, maybe as a clerk at the bank ... hmmm ... no, McDonalds.

DCH

Roger Pearse

Um. I'm a little dubious. But then I'm not sure that I've come across either genre, or would know how to write them. It isn't writing the book, it's the marketting that counts, I think, whatever you do. How else did Harry Potter become a success?

I know. Indeed I could make a nice living and provide for my old age, if I didn't have to pay the vast quantity of tax levied on us in order to fund the hate-ideology programmes and pork-barrel politics of our day. As it is I must spend half the year working at a pointless job. It's our *lives* that are taken by these vermin, not our money.

The unpaid overtime scam is a nice one too -- I'd call it stealing from the workers more like. I once was asked to do this, and I emailed the managing director of the firm to complain that this was theft. I got back a smug email telling me that he 'disagreed' and there were 'sound commercial reasons' for it. So there were for slavery, I believe. I left instead. Fortunately I freelance.

I worked out the other day that I was supposed to be paying 46% in direct tax, on basic rate taxation. Only 4% more and I'd be paying the same as the Helots of ancient Sparta.

Still, nothing to do with BC&H.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto

Deconick has written an op ed comment for the New York Times:

Gospel Truth from the New York Times most frequently emailed list

Roger Pearse

I agree with every word. Indeed James M. Robinson slated Rudolph Kasser and co for doing this. Admittedly Kasser &c were not entirely free agents, but then Kasser had 'form' for doing the same with the Jung codex. It's pure selfishness, and it puts the heritage of all mankind at risk.

I should add that there are three other manuscripts from the same find that aren't published even now, and have no prospect of being published. One of them (the only Coptic Exodus) is certainly in pieces; another (some NT letters in Coptic) is being hidden by someone -- I have no idea where -- and a third (Greek mathematical codex) is owned by a rich man who has agreed with two scholars to publish it. But one of the two has told me that he has other things to do, and so they are doing nothing, while effectively preventing publication.

Still it's not as good as the people at Karlsruehe university library. They were threatened with having to sell some papyri, and I pressed them to take digital photos and put them online. I got incredible abuse for this. One of the stooges even screamed at me that scholars *wanted* and would enjoy traveling to Karlsruehe to use them, rather than seeing them online.

Pardon me, but I get very cross with this sort of thing. Papyrology contains some real vermin. Even some of the better papyrologists admit as much.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

gstafleu

Here you say "National Geographic has bound to secrecy those scholars it hired to do the work of translation. Those scholars are unable to answer questions from other scholars about translation issues and what eventually appeared in the National Geographic publication of the gospel." If this is true, than surely the NG translation must be dismissed out of hand, as it violates some fundamental tenets of methodology (peer review, rebuttal)?

Gerard Stafleu