> But why is there a schism between these two types of writing?
> Why reward people for producing work that is not understandable
> and of little use to anyone outside of a small circle?
A lot of it is probably due to humanities (and social science) types slavishly imitating the hard sciences -- getting really "technical" to prove that they are as smart and as skillful at doing "research" as the physicists, chemists, and biologists.
Also, the academic world is by nature a small circle -- advancing your career is done by impressing your peers in that circle. The outside world has nothing to say about it.
That said, there are of course a number of outstanding exceptions -- the Chomster comes to mind.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax