Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tl00049)

Daniel wrote:

>But the important question is:   "Why did the 'editor' of the Theosophy
>Company edition decide to make changes, then went ahead and made the
>changes, and did NOT alert readers to those changes (however minor or
>insignificant that editor or you may deem the changes)?"

Probably the SAME reason King James and others throughout history have
fiddled and meddled with other people's writings: The belief that either
the author or the public is confused and they (the editors) understand more
clearly what is important and what is not important.

In my dealings with my publisher, she would often change something I had
written and say "Well, this is what you really mean" or "They (the public)
won't understand this" or "Isn't this your point rather than what it sounds
like you're suggesting?"  And guess who won when it came down to the final
draft and printing?  Nor was there any notation or other hint that the
publisher, rather than I, had made such changes.  Now - imagine what
editors do with writings in which the author is dead and not around to
protest.

So, the answer to your question that I pose can be said in one word: Humans.

Most everything we have available to read has been interpreted and
re-interpreted - which is why declaring something "authoritive" is akin to
spittin' in the wind.

Kym