I may be stating the obvious here, but I feel I need to say this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
The only problem is that all the information I have came from books someone else already wrote.
|
Very few historians write a book completely based on the original sources. That would imply it's a subject that has
never ever been written about, not even closely, and it's based on some completely new material. Even if the material is completely new, some research on the subject still probably exists. And I can't think of many things more insulting to the fellow researchers as well as the whole science itself than to ignore everything anyone has ever said and claim your work is the ultimate revelation.
Just refer to the already written books properly and build your own ideas based on them, develop their points further or disagree with them. Building new is based on improving the old.
Quote:
|
There are great writers out there with access to the primary sources. I only have access to their work.
|
Out of curiosity, what prevents you from accessing the primary sources?
In general, I agree that you already know a lot, have read a lot and definitely know how to put your thoughts on the paper (or the Internet forum in this case) in a constructive way. That's a great start for writing a book.