Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
Academic history is also interpretation. There is no way for a writer to stand back completely from the material. Contemporaneous reporting and first-person accounts are likewise only snapshots of reality, not the entire story.
|
Exactly. Point of view and bias are part of a continuum. You could also argue the flip side, that negating the experience of the women to value corporate good and legal status in interpreting events could be bias in the opposite direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrangerhere
At the risk of being the cold-blooded lawyer in the room... Why should they have known?
|
In Ottawa, I'd say the slider moved to somewhere between "should have known" and "actually did know." It was certainly well past the point where they could argue with plausible deniability that the difference in radium would mean the girls wouldn't get sick; wishful thinking was no longer sufficient justification and they should have known in the sense that they could no longer just assume that there would be a different outcome. And as for "actually did know," the actions of the Radium Dial Company attest to this: the physical examinations, the full-page ad, Peg Looney's secret autopsy and falsified results and so on prove this.