The Canadian editor who, with Oxford University Press, produced the single published volume of the Letters of Marshall McLuhan — the source the series leans on for dates and correspondents, and, in dialogue 68, the occasion of a genuine disagreement between the hosts about how far an editor should go in telling readers what a writer "really" meant. New to it — start with dialogue 68.
Across the dialogues
Promoted from footnote to contested figure — the two hosts split over whether his annotation is thorough scholarship or a know-it-all's overreach, and the split doubles as a disagreement about what an editor of a difficult writer owes the reader
Bob's defence rests on coverage — the notes identify everyone McLuhan wrote to, which for a correspondence spanning decades is the scholarship that makes the volume usable at all.
"I think I like that Toye would give good footnotes about all the different people."
Cameron's objection is to register, not diligence — the editor who explains what McLuhan "was really talking about" substitutes his own reading for the ambiguity that carries the meaning.
"he tries to be a little bit of a know-it-all."
The verdict stated plainly, and immediately qualified by both men — the notes are at their best where Toye let McLuhan inform him rather than the reverse.
"So I'm not a big fan of Toye."
The evidence for the qualification — the note on McLuhan's 1959 blackout could only have come from Corinne, so the volume's most valuable annotations are the ones its editor did not author.
"Toye didn't know anything about that."
Connections
Toye edited the single published volume, cut down with OUP from an original four.
Some annotations could only have come from Corinne — the 1959 blackout note among them.