Something of a set-back: amendments have been requested in relation to my 'Document 3' - partly because it was felt my "thematic linkage to ancient Greek philosophers may be neither necessary or advisable" as it was obscuring the purpose and structure of the document, and partly because my conclusions had been poorly derived from my data and had not been "crafted more determinedly into clear thematic strains." It is annoying that this feedback has been received just at the end of the long summer holiday when I could have devoted ample time to revising my text, and now I will have to combine this task with the very busiest part of the academic year. On the other hand, I fully understand and accept these criticisms, perceiving that my function is not after all to entertain my supervisors with rhetorical flourishes or witty cross-references to obscure parallels, as if hoping to dazzle them with displays of intellectual gymnastics, but more to state clearly my objectives, my methods, my findings and my conclusions. So I now have until November to re-submit Document 3 with what are described as 'minor modifications'. The problem is that, as they concern structure and properly developed conclusions, these seem more like major alterations to the document.