Jim --

Please don't misconstrue what I said about historians and writing.

I was not talking about the flowery writing of poets, or novelists.

Very few historians write "literature." That kind of writing "flourishes"
in likes of an Ed Gibbon or a Francis Parkman, or even a Bruce Catton.

They (historians) do, however,  write good readable -- for the most part --
"narrative" history.  Their professional training demands it. My grad
school papers were littered with red ink as profs attempted to drill good
writing practices into us.  The writing business is the business that
historians are in, and someone in the profession needs some mastery of it.
I can't say that I absorbed all that my profs labored at, but, like I said,
historians are expected to write for a living, so I'd say that the
expectations are different than those in a profession where good writing is
not seen as crucial.  I did not see this writing issue stressed in the
Hist. Arch. courses that I took.

We were always told that to write well, you need to read the works of good
writiers, historians or otherwise, and then just write and write and ....
until it becomes second nature.  It is often said that the best writing is
re-writing.

Cheers!

Carl Barna
Regional Historian
BLM Colorado State Office