[at-l] Re: Who cares about MacKaye?

[rafe.bustin@verizon.net (rafe.bustin@verizon.net)]

[Shane:]

>>> I have a wide background there, and my conclusion having that 
>>>  background is the same for all other movements of that time:  
>>> They are no longer relevant.

[rafe b:]
> >That's a profound claim.  I disagree, but I'd like to hear your reasoning.


[David Faddleton:]
> The reasoning seemed pretty clear to me ... of course the edited version here 
> cuts the reasoning out. Notwithstanding the editing, I saw little profundity in the 
> reasoning or the conclusion. I saw a fair, objective, reasoning mind, but nothing 
> there seemed profound ... 


I'm talking about Shane's blithe dismissal of the movements of 
"his [MacKaye's] time", for which Shane offered no explanation.

The example of George Washington and the canals has no 
intrinsic relevance to MacKaye's era, which was the 1920s.


rafe b.