Can I go to bed now? No, of course not. Instead, I'm going to go back to wading through scholars and people who think they are scholars who can't manage to keep their terminology straight, writing about people who are probably seriously disturbed and have ideas that are just plain crazy. Why did I pick this topic, again? (I'd go into detail, but I'd hate to be picked on on search engines for that stuff. ::shudder:: ) Argh, argh, argh. I just want to be done, but it's hard to see that happening until 4:59 p.m. Friday. So, a question. If I'm supposed to have 12 sources (excessive - I could write this paper with half that number, easy), and journal length articles qualify as sources, oughtn't several papers by otherwise unrelated people on more or less unrelated topics (they all relate to my theme, but they don't repeat material) published in a single collection to count as separate sources? I'll certainly have to cite them all separately, at least in footnotes. (There's no way I'm going to be able to handle everything with internal citation... it's going to require explaination, and that requires footnotes.) It seems perfectly reasonable to me (and certainly I'm using about as much material from those individual chapters as I am from other book sources), but I suspect the professor won't see it that way. I hate arbitrary number requirements - one just ends up citing things to bolster the works cited list, and it doesn't accomplish anything. Like I could (or would) write twenty pages on just two or three sources. Admittedly I currently have a A in this course, and the paper is worth only 25% of my grade (which is less than the final - entirely pathetic considering the work that's going into this thing), and I need neither the class nor the grade for anything, ever. But even if I don't care that much, I still have to finish it. Work, work, work. :P ~Erin, 10:31 PM Comments: Post a Comment
