It deals with the nature of authority on a very practical basis similar to the way Hume and Heidegger deal with tradition. At the point one starts either first thinking of mature life or choosing a text to be edited one has to choose an authority. Either there is only one textual tradition available which means that is all you have to work with or there are many texts (or traditions) one has to deal with and among them choose the soundest. No text is an unquestioned authority but must be examined critically for self consistency in logic, style, intent, etc. If numerous texts are involved, none are to be arbitrarily thrown out without thorough examination because even the poorest texts sometimes have a few merits that may be of great value.

That is the thread of thought. However, it is presented with a savagery of humor and mockery that Jud should love. Nothing and no one is sacred, yet Housman can find diamonds in the worst of cads. Housman can apreciate the merits of a brilliant beginner just starting out a tradition while stumbling as well as the drudge who achieves merit by their consaistency of effort. And he never tolerates fools but serves them up for dinner.