It's probably a good thing that I don't do research for a living, what with me being so easily distracted and all. If I were to ever find employment in that field, I have no doubt that I'd be tossed out on my ear before the end of my first day on the job.
My biggest problem, especially when it comes to looking through old newspapers online, is that even if I'm only clicking on a particular page for say two lines worth of information, I almost always end up reading the entire page, and sometimes even a few of the subsequent pages from the same issue. I suppose this unto itself isn't a huge problem to some, but when you, or in this case, I, also tend to start writing things down for future reference, or opening new windows to seek out additional information about items in other stories on the page. When all is said and done, it's very easy for me to end up spending upwards of an hour on a page that I should've only been on for a couple of minutes or less.
And hey, it just so happens that I have a perfect, and rather fresh, example of what I'm talking about.
Yesterday I found myself trying to do a bit of research for a post on the Beavers blog (shameless plug!). One of the lines of inquiry took me to the July 29th, 1921 edition of the LeRoy Reporter (out of LeRoy, KS), which I realized within mere seconds was a false lead, but even so, I still wound up spending the next 30 minutes looking into multiple unrelated things from just that initial page. By the time I was done, I had no new information for the blog post, and I had to get off the computer and start getting ready to seize the day. I may not have gotten anything done, but I don't consider the session to have been a total wash, as I did come across a turn of phrase that was new to me, "turning turtle". I have no idea if anyone else cares or not, but hears the article in which said phrase was used:
I spent a few minutes looking for any additional info on Mrs. Amanda Gillespie, the driver, and could only find an article from five years earlier, in the same newspaper, that mentioned her and her husband had just celebrated their 41st wedding anniversary. With that information, even if she had gotten married at 16 (which I don't know), she would've been at least 62 years old at the time of this accident. I think it's safe to say that these gals were extremely lucky that day. Model T's from that era usually topped out at around 40mph, but I don't think that a 60-plus year-old woman would've been doing forty on a, most likely, unpaved country road during this time. It's also worth noting that seatbelts wouldn't appear in a Ford for another thirty years, and that people were routinely ejected from Model T's during accidents. If my assumption is correct, the slower speed at the time of this accident is probably the main contributor in all three women being able to walk away (figuratively speaking) from this particular incident.
So, in conclusion, I'm terribly unfocused when it comes to doing research, but do occasionally learn a thing or two. And while I don't get nearly as much done as I would like, I do enjoy reading through old papers, and going down historical rabbit holes, so I guess I can't say that my attempts are a complete waste of time; though it would be nice to be able to focus on specific tasks from time to time.
