I'm a little concerned that if one was to reference where a particular subject is discussed in "The White Man's Bible" and say to the uninitiated person who asks for the source they may go looking for it in the wrong book. That could cause confusion. NER is technically part of the White Man's Bible but Ben Klassen must have chosen not to have that written on the front as a sub-title and I don't think that adding it actually makes a positive difference. At best to do so is neutral and at worst, it causes confusion... perhaps?
Is the counter argument that adding this sub-title is a way to make sure all the readers know they should next read the subsequent book/s?
I tend to just go with the "if it isn't broken then don't fix it" though.
Is the counter argument that adding this sub-title is a way to make sure all the readers know they should next read the subsequent book/s?
I tend to just go with the "if it isn't broken then don't fix it" though.