Some more Questions for Gregory Tillett
Apr 21, 2006 09:32 AM
Gregory, you wrote:
The claim that John's research was not included in
the Algeo volume is – let me use plain language –
a blatant, scandalous and bare-faced lie. I have
beside me as I write (i) the Algeo volume, (ii)
John's PhD thesis on the Blavatsky letters and (iii)
a copy of the manuscript sent by John to the TPH
before his death. If I compare them I find sentence
after sentence reproduced but for a word or two.
Does anyone seriously believe that, between the
time of John's death and the publication of the Algeo
volume, the complete text was re-researched and
created anew? Including letters that John had
discovered? Without any reliance on John's work,
Algeo or his puppets, acting independently, just
happened to find the same material?
I believe a few points of clarification are needed in order
to avoid any possible misunderstandings:
(1) When you write:
"If I compare them I find sentence
after sentence reproduced but for a word or two."
Now are you telling your readers on Theos-Talk that
you find sentence after sentence of John Cooper's
editorial COMMENTS/commentary reproduced in the
TPH Wheaton volume with only a word of two changed
here and there?
(2)And could you provide us with a small number of examples
illustrating this point of yours?
(3) Concerning your statement which reads:
"Including letters that John had discovered?"
there are 136 letters in the published TPH Wheaton
How many of these letters did John himself discover?
Do you know which ones in the TPH volume fall under
this category of "John discovered" as opposed to what
was already in the Boris de Zirkoff collection or available
thru other published sources known by Algeo independently of
the Cooper MSS?
(4) Again you write:
"....the complete text was re-researched and created anew?"
By "complete text" what do you mean? Does the complete
text include all of the letters provided FROM the Boris de
Zirkoff collection at Wheaton TS? And what particular letters in
this published Wheaton TPH volume were provided to the complete text
by Cooper himself? etc. etc.
(5) And who are the "puppets" that you are referring to?
Is this a somewhat "negative" term used to describe the
persons on the Letters commmittee? And since I was on that
committee does that mean I was a "puppet"? And when I was
working with and assisting John Cooper on the letters, was I
his "puppet"? And why call Dara Eklund Algeo's "puppet"? She
was the editor of several volumes of the CW series and worked
with Boris de Zirkoff. Was Dara Boris' puppet, too? Why use
this term to describe the said individuals? Is this a term you
would use for example in an article in THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY?
(6) And since you say you have documents (i), (ii) and (iii),
shouldn't you also be comparing all of these with document (iv)
[which consists of all the photocopies that TPH Wheaton originally
gave to John Cooper from the Boris de Zirkoff collection of H.P.B.'s
letters]?? Wouldn't these photocopies (which make up document iv)
help one to determine what was available at Wheaton to Algeo?
These are the types of questions that need to be answered so readers
will be in a better position to assess what you have written and
come to some more or less correct understanding of the issues
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application