Dear Patrick, Thanks for clarifying that your acknowledgements were to my conversations with you in this forum and that occasionally continued as individual correspondence after originating in this forum.
I wish the acknowledgements passage provided this clarity. Afterall, the name of the forum that provided opportunity for those conversations also deserves acknowledgement. More significantly that provides the full context to the reader by helping them know where and through which means (here, email conversation in an email list) the acknowledged conversations happened. Thanks also for your good words about my being courteous and you learning etc. Learning in all such conversations is always mutual. I too learnt a lot from my conversations with you. With all such good memory of you , you might also remember that my conversations with you were quite often based on a difference of opinion, and even a difference of stance regarding different issues particularly the issue of focus in the article on hand. Of course, the different stand need not and did not stop us from being mutually respectful and cordial. My answering your enquiry about whether FLAME would be a good be place for you to apply, or my Likedin congratulations on your work anniversaries, Sanskrit word helps etc. are all part of this mutual cordiality not getting affected by difference in stand on issues of research focus or publications. It is the missing of this aspect of my different stance with regard to the issue on focus in the article that leads to a problematic inaccuracy of documentation. We, the researchers suffering from the lack of proper documentation in premodern sources that compels us to struggle to resolve opposing pictures from different documents mentioning the same one or more individuals, should not commit such inaccuracies in these times of improved documentation norms in research documents. For example, an observer looking at this acknowledgement passage in this article and my own expressions in other sources where I express a completely different if not opposite stance may have to struggle in the same way to resolve the conflict in the two pictures from the two documents. In fact, it is an intrigued reader who found such a conflict that brought this academia page to my notice. I too would not like to continue this conversation any further than just clarifying the reasons for my expression here in the beginning of this thread. Thanks and warm regards, Nagaraj On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:43 PM patrick mccartney <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Friends, > > I am confused by this delayed public outrage and regret that Dr Paturi has > thought to communicate to the members of this list, instead of speaking to > me privately. I'm not sure what the desired outcome of this protest is > meant to be. Though if some new readers come to click on the link shared, I > welcome it. > > I intend to the keep this response brief and consider this case closed > from here on. Please let me directly address a fundamental point. > > This paper sat waiting to be published for close to 18 months. If I recall > correctly, it was accepted for publication in 2016 or early 2017. > > Nagaraj, over the course of 2014-17 we regularly engaged in some robust > conversations on this very list. They were terribly edifying for me. I > value those exchanges. We continued several conversations privately over > many replies. You were always courteous and generous with your time and > knowledge. I learned a great deal from you. Even to this day there are a > few things you said to me that rattle around in my brain and guide my > ideas. > > Our exchanges even lead to you suggesting I apply for a job and me > literally being offered a job at Flame University in late 2017. Though I > had already accepted an offer to come to Japan, I still had a 3hr phone > call with some representative from Flame whose name I forget, though he > acknowledged our sambandhi. > > While you might not have seen a draft of this paper or even known it > existed. Though your thoughts over the years helped shaped core aspects of > the thesis central to this and several other papers since published. I felt > indebted to you and thought it necessary to acknowledge your help. > > I imagine the perceived offense is that you overdetermined my > acknowledgement to directly relate to this specific paper and that you had > some part to play in its crafting. It is regrettable that this has > occurred. Though, in an oblique way, you most certainly did. As well, a > careful reading of the full acknowledgment does not actually suggest that > you did. Neither is necessarily implied. For instance, I do not thank you > for "reading a draft and offering valuable suggestions". > > > > Sincerely, > > Patrick > > > > > On Tue, 15 Jun. 2021, 15:01 Nagaraj Paturi via INDOLOGY, < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I found the following acknowledgements passage : >> >> Acknowledgements >> I would like to thank Shameem Black, Andrew Ollet, Brian Hatcher, Brian >> Pennington, Nagaraj Paturi, Dominik Wujastyk, Patricia Mumme, Karl-Stéphan >> Bouthillette, Borayin Larios, Vikram Zutshi, Andrey Klebanov, the anonymous >> reviewers, and the editors at Asian Ethnology for their constructive >> comments. >> >> in an article >> >> "Stretching into the Shadows: Unlikely Alliances, Strategic Syncretism, >> and De-Post-Colonizing Yogaland's "Yogatopia(s)" >> >> by Patrick McCartney >> >> at >> >> >> https://www.academia.edu/41273385/Stretching_into_the_Shadows_Unlikely_Alliances_Strategic_Syncretism_and_De_Post_Colonizing_Yogalands_Yogatopia_s_ >> >> I never knew this article, never read it before I found it just now. >> >> So the question of my providing any comments to it constructive or >> otherwise does not arise. >> >> So this statement in this passage is not factual. >> >> I reject his thanks and protest the manufacturing of my providing >> comments to it . >> >> Wanted to share it here because we two are members here in this forum. >> >> Thanks for your understanding. >> >> Regards, >> >> Nagaraj >> >> >> Nagaraj Paturi >> >> Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA. >> >> >> Director, Indic Academy >> BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra >> BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra >> BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru. >> Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru >> BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership >> Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership >> Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, >> FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education, >> Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA. >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> INDOLOGY mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology >> > -- Nagaraj Paturi Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA. Director, Indic Academy BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru. Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of Liberal Education, Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
