Bryn Mawr Classical Review 97.5.19


RESPONSE: Vernezze on Rak on Vernezze


By Peter Vernezze, PVERNEZZE@cc.weber.edu.

I apologize, of course, for using advertising copy from Hackett's catalog description of Irwin and Fine's Selections in my review (BMCR 97.5.9) of their Introductory Readings, and would like to thank the editor at Hackett for pointing this out (BMCR 97.5.12). The references were to the book's (i) "detailed glossary" and (ii) the "editors' extensive notes." The reference to (i) the detailed glossary was a favorable one and although Hackett intended it for the Introductory Readings, I believe it holds for the Selections as well. My reference to (ii) the "editors' extensive notes" was followed by the assertion that the back cover of the book itself claimed only that the work contained "brief clarifying and explanatory notes." The point was not the inconsistency between these two claims but that the notes do not qualify as either clarifying or explanatory, and I provided examples from the work to defend my claim. As for the implication by the editor at Hackett that I did not deal adequately with the translation, I would simply like to point out that these translations have been published previously in at least two other volumes Readings in Ancient Philosophy (Hackett 1995) and Selections (Hackett 1995). I saw no need to go over ground that to my mind has been adequately dealt with, choosing instead to review the book from a pedagogical standpoint.