*yawn*

I'm reading the introduction to a manuscript in order to write a short description of the project for the editorial board here at the press. The writing is riddled with so many surface errors, though, that I'm having a hard time concentrating on the ideas. Plus, I'm not sure there's much of a point to this work yet. Is the author trying to recuperate a historical figure? Is he trying to give us a more accurate portrait of the figure? Is he trying to tell us about the myth and persona that has developed around the figure? I would like him to lay out his approach to portraying this figure soon. Otherwise, I may have to say in the description that the author is rambling on about what other people have said about the figure without any purpose. (This description isn't a reader's report, though, so I'm supposed to avoid that kind of commentary.)

OMG I am so mean.