Madam, – Bruce Arnold, (March 17th), surprisingly, seems to misunderstand the function of a book reviewer. The function of a book reviewer is to review the book submitted as it is, in terms of its contents as a whole. It is not part of a reviewer's function to travel to the Strawberry Beds or anywhere else in quest of elucidation from the author or editors of issues that are not explicated in the book itself. Mr Arnold's piece in the Irish Independentwas not a book review, did not claim to be and belongs to an entirely different journalistic category. Mr Arnold himself makes the situation clear by informing us that his visit to the Strawberry Beds was a "unique privilege". This is a privilege that is not being extended to ordinary readers, who, like the reviewer, are confronted by the book alone and have to make of it what they can.
The same consideration applies to Antony Farrell’s letter (March 17th). No doubt there were reasons for the editors’ failure to supply the normal scholarly apparatus and rationale for the 9,000 changes made to a long-established and very familiar text. (Though no reasons are given in the book itself: the first mention of “legal considerations” comes in Mr Farrell’s letter.)
Whatever about such considerations, the fact remains that this edition – the book itself – is without such apparatus and all the review (Weekend Review, March 13th) did was to point out this unfortunate fact and draw the consequences. – Yours, etc,