For anyone interested in #receptiogate I highly recommend the following book (even though it's not about medieval manuscripts):
"Sul confine italo-svizzero 1943-1945" (RECEPTIO Academic Press, 2020) is a Gold Open Access publication supported by SNSF. It is currently available as a PDF file at this address: https://receptioacademic.press/sulconf
(click on download button, no registration needed)
Having now spent a bit of time examining this book, I venture to say that it illustrates everything that's problematic about the "De Roucy Hours," and in a much more blatant and massive fashion. The RECEPTIO method (at least as showcased in recent publications) is remarkably consistent, whether applied to medieval books of hours, early modern poetry, or the history of the Shoah. In particular, it seems to dictate the heavy use of online sources as well as their near-total non-acknowledgment in an attempt to aggrandize one's own originality.
If the International Philological Society existed, it would have to sue RECEPTIO for defaming the idea of philology.
@Marphurius Which underscores that those who say “sure, plagiarism is bad, but it’s The System™ that makes academics do bad things” are mistaken.
Yes, the system is flawed; what Max Weber wrote about the privatdozent is still true, and a titularprofessur is like a nice diploma that you can hang on your wall, saying: “Congratulations, you ALMOST made it, mwhahaha!” Still, scholars do have agency and are responsible for what they do. CR’s practices are not accidental and clearly go far beyond “dubious, but understandable.” #RECEPTIOgate
@true_mxp @Marphurius THANK YOU. Regardless of the "System's" inadequacies, CR still CHOSE to behave as she did. Many others in the same "system" do not plagiarize, forge or have imaginary friends they hold conversations with (okay that last one might be a lot of scholars but we don't try to get OTHERS to believe in our imaginary friends).