|
Related Topics:
| Please goto my website. - Please go to my website with my Sliders (with Earth: Final Conflict and scifi story about a parallel universe in a picture. The URL is
On-topic question for C. Barker - At the risk of starting a with Chris that doesn't involve the hurling of abuse... Chris, I just finished reading the Tartarus edition of Elizabeth Jane Howard's stories and was quite i seem to recall you had some feelings about..
Walter De La Mare - I have the two recent edited by Giles de la Mare but wasn't there supposed to be a third possibly of stories? Does anyone know its fate?
Dirda on Vernon Lee - As Pulitzer Michael Dirda has now come through with his of Vernon Lee's HAUNTINGS in Sunday's Post Book World. The article can be found at:..
William Hope Hodgson - THE BOATS OF THE "GLEN CARRIG" &c. - This just arrived in the mail today, and it is an book. Jason Van striking against dark any doubts I once had about the absence of for this series. Please keep them..
|
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 44
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:32 pm
Post subject: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs
Archived from groups: alt>books>ghost-fiction (more info?)
|
|
|
One or two issues to tidy up.
Firstly, Mr Roden, I am glad that you finally went *some* way towards
answering the Conan Doyle question. Your "All Hallows" review of "Weirdly
Supernatural" excused the high price of £22 for a poor, five page ghost
story on the grounds of "high" royalty fees, and then set about damning WS
on the grounds of hypocrisy. But now - although you *still* avoid naming a
precise figure - you finally concede that the royalties paid were actually
nothing more than the normal going rate. Not the "high" fees previously
claimed.
I therefore stand wholeheartedly behind my original contention that you
deliberately and cynically bled collectors dry with this weak publication.
And that you callously disregarded Arthur Conan Doyle and Dame Jean's wishes
in doing so. You waited until the latter had died, then rushed into action.
Doyle collectors are completists - you more than most know this - and they
would have *had* to buy this book to maintain the integrity of their
collections. You also subsequently manipulated the 'All Hallows' review of
'Weirdly Supernatural' in order to seek personal revenge. Both actions were
devious and expose you for the manipulative, dominating bully that you are.
If someone does not kiss the Ashtree arse, you undertake a major retaliatory
offensive.
Secondly, 'Gerald Kersh' is indeed a pseudonym. I am extremley sure of this.
But in a climate where your partner-in-editing John Pelan implies - yet
again - that there is something odd about the number of signed books I turn
up, you ask for help? (The only 'odd' aspect being Pelan's obvious jealousy;
anyone visiting my ABE site will see that I regularly handle some very
interesting volumes, which have included signed Mrs Riddell, William Hope
Hodgson, Vincent O'Sullivan, Emma Frances Dawson and Charlotte Perkins
Gilman titles, all of which were obtained from thoroughly reliable sources,
many known to this group); and in a climate where you manipulate both "All
Hallows" and this discussion forum to promote your wares, do down
disfavoured rivals, and to wrestle for overall domination, you ask for
help?; and in a climate where you pour defamatory scorn upon a book you
personally coveted, but have still yet to see - in just such a climate, you
ask *me* for a favour?
No, I think I shall wait until *after* Ashtree's publication before
revealing Kersh's true identity. You have stolen enough ideas and projects
from me already. The idea that I should *voluntarily* assist you is
laughable, a delusion that only a megalomaniac could harbour.
In the meantime, I wash my hands of your small press discussion site. May it
turn round and bite you on the arse one day, the same arse that you invite
everyone to kiss.
Farewell
(With acks. to P. E.)
So, farewell then.
Adieu.
It's been worse for me
Than you.
Stupidly I thought
You wanted nought
But thought:
I was wrong.
Plugs for breakfast, plugs for tea,
Tip the waiter
To avoid a scalded knee.
Farewell to a clique
Small press thique
One that I tried
Quite hard to stique.
So, farewell free speech,
Farewell from the breach.
A farewell knell
Upon an uncrackable shell.
Chris Barker
The Haunted River
Website: www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Jun 30, 2003
Posts: 45
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:32 pm
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
So, in other words, nothing's changed? You'd rather continue to be
unpleasant or leave, rather than accept the chance of a possible
'ceasefire'? Doesn't make sense to me.
Huw
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver.DeleteThis@waitrose.com> wrote in message news:<AoudnUQDT67JjJ2iXTWJig.DeleteThis@brightview.com>...
> One or two issues to tidy up.
>
> Firstly, Mr Roden, I am glad that you finally went *some* way towards
> answering the Conan Doyle question. Your "All Hallows" review of "Weirdly
> Supernatural" excused the high price of £22 for a poor, five page ghost
> story on the grounds of "high" royalty fees, and then set about damning WS
> on the grounds of hypocrisy. But now - although you *still* avoid naming a
> precise figure - you finally concede that the royalties paid were actually
> nothing more than the normal going rate. Not the "high" fees previously
> claimed.
>
> I therefore stand wholeheartedly behind my original contention that you
> deliberately and cynically bled collectors dry with this weak publication.
> And that you callously disregarded Arthur Conan Doyle and Dame Jean's wishes
> in doing so. You waited until the latter had died, then rushed into action.
>
> Doyle collectors are completists - you more than most know this - and they
> would have *had* to buy this book to maintain the integrity of their
> collections. You also subsequently manipulated the 'All Hallows' review of
> 'Weirdly Supernatural' in order to seek personal revenge. Both actions were
> devious and expose you for the manipulative, dominating bully that you are.
> If someone does not kiss the Ashtree arse, you undertake a major retaliatory
> offensive.
>
> Secondly, 'Gerald Kersh' is indeed a pseudonym. I am extremley sure of this.
> But in a climate where your partner-in-editing John Pelan implies - yet
> again - that there is something odd about the number of signed books I turn
> up, you ask for help? (The only 'odd' aspect being Pelan's obvious jealousy;
> anyone visiting my ABE site will see that I regularly handle some very
> interesting volumes, which have included signed Mrs Riddell, William Hope
> Hodgson, Vincent O'Sullivan, Emma Frances Dawson and Charlotte Perkins
> Gilman titles, all of which were obtained from thoroughly reliable sources,
> many known to this group); and in a climate where you manipulate both "All
> Hallows" and this discussion forum to promote your wares, do down
> disfavoured rivals, and to wrestle for overall domination, you ask for
> help?; and in a climate where you pour defamatory scorn upon a book you
> personally coveted, but have still yet to see - in just such a climate, you
> ask *me* for a favour?
>
> No, I think I shall wait until *after* Ashtree's publication before
> revealing Kersh's true identity. You have stolen enough ideas and projects
> from me already. The idea that I should *voluntarily* assist you is
> laughable, a delusion that only a megalomaniac could harbour.
>
> In the meantime, I wash my hands of your small press discussion site. May it
> turn round and bite you on the arse one day, the same arse that you invite
> everyone to kiss.
>
>
> Farewell
> (With acks. to P. E.)
>
> So, farewell then.
> Adieu.
> It's been worse for me
> Than you.
>
> Stupidly I thought
> You wanted nought
> But thought:
> I was wrong.
>
> Plugs for breakfast, plugs for tea,
> Tip the waiter
> To avoid a scalded knee.
>
> Farewell to a clique
> Small press thique
> One that I tried
> Quite hard to stique.
>
> So, farewell free speech,
> Farewell from the breach.
> A farewell knell
> Upon an uncrackable shell.
>
>
> Chris Barker
> The Haunted River
<font color=purple> > Website: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver</font" target="_blank">www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver</font</a>><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 18
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:32 pm
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver.TakeThisOut@waitrose.com> wrote in message >
> Secondly, 'Gerald Kersh' is indeed a pseudonym. I am extremley sure of
this.
I'm sure that Kersh's birth certificate will provide the necessary evidence.
It is being investigated.
Regarding the following:
> But in a climate where your partner-in-editing John Pelan implies - yet
> again - that there is something odd about the number of signed books I
turn
> up, you ask for help? (The only 'odd' aspect being Pelan's obvious
jealousy;
> anyone visiting my ABE site will see that I regularly handle some very
> interesting volumes, which have included signed Mrs Riddell, William Hope
> Hodgson, Vincent O'Sullivan, Emma Frances Dawson and Charlotte Perkins
> Gilman titles, all of which were obtained from thoroughly reliable
sources,
> many known to this group);
John, like others, is likely always cautious about the validity of signed
copies until their provenance has been verified. Likely he's recently heard
the same rumours circulating amongst UK book collectors that I have: that
someone in the UK is claiming to have a signed Mrs Riddell; and the
reputable collector who sold it is insisting that it wasn't signed at the
time of the sale.
CR<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 30, 2003
Posts: 25
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:32 pm
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver RemoveThis @waitrose.com> wrote in message
news:AoudnUQDT67JjJ2iXTWJig@brightview.com...
> One or two issues to tidy up.
> Doyle collectors are completists - you more than most know this - and they
> would have *had* to buy this book to maintain the integrity of their
> collections. You also subsequently manipulated the 'All Hallows' review of
> 'Weirdly Supernatural' in order to seek personal revenge. Both actions
were
> devious and expose you for the manipulative, dominating bully that you
are.
> If someone does not kiss the Ashtree arse, you undertake a major
retaliatory
> offensive.
No one held a gun to anyone's head to force them to buy this or any other
book we've produced. Your belief that collectors are like sheep is rather
silly, and somewhat offensive to your potential customers, one would have
thought.
The review of WEIRDLY SUPERNATURAL which I ran in ALL HALLOWS was not
manipulated in any way, and was in fact longer than the work being reviewed
really justified. However, Jim Rockhill endeavoured to be as fair as
possible, and I gave him the room to say what he felt needed to be said.
Unfortunately, you are so convinced that the world is against you that any
criticism, however gently put and justified it may be (such as the fact that
the journal wasn't paginated, for instance, making it difficult to find
things), is misconstrued as an attack; so the reviewer and editor can't win
for losing. I expect the same will occur with Reggie's book; any criticisms,
however justified, will be instances of sour grapes. Frankly, I wonder why I
bother having it reviewed at all; but I want to be fair to the 400 or so
readers of AH, and let them know about a book which will undoubtedly be of
interest. I'd be failing in my duty as an editor if I didn't bring the book
to their attention, and failing the readers if I didn't run a review that
was as objective as any other review in the journal.
> in a climate where you manipulate both "All
> Hallows" and this discussion forum to promote your wares, do down
> disfavoured rivals, and to wrestle for overall domination, you ask for
> help?; and in a climate where you pour defamatory scorn upon a book you
> personally coveted, but have still yet to see - in just such a climate,
you
> ask *me* for a favour?
What defamatory scorn? All we've done is question the binding method and a
typo spotted in the introduction. You're the one who's blown the whole thing
up into World War 3. And I think that if you read Christopher's post, you'll
see that we have not, in fact, asked you for a favour; we are able to
research things ourselves. As we remember the last time a 'favour' and you
were packaged together - something to do with copies of Cowles dustwrappers
in exchange for us publishing, sight unseen, one of your stories in ALL
HALLOWS (of which you must have had a higher opinion then than you do now) -
we're not likely to make the same mistake twice.
> No, I think I shall wait until *after* Ashtree's publication before
> revealing Kersh's true identity. You have stolen enough ideas and projects
> from me already. The idea that I should *voluntarily* assist you is
> laughable, a delusion that only a megalomaniac could harbour.
Actually, assisting goes on all the time in the small press world. Looking
at your (re-)revised information page for Reggie's book, I see a few things
which I would gladly have given some tips on; tips based on several years of
experience, and motivated not by a decision to try to show my superiority,
or your inexperience, but to try to help out. I note that after I pointed
out the fact that people would have trouble sending payment for 'circa
£35.00/US$55', you dropped the 'circa' (you're welcome!), so obviously
you're willing to accept some help. Ah well, I expect you'll discover these
things on your own as you go along.
Barbara<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 86
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 4:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
ubug RemoveThis @ms8.hinet.net (Huw Lines) wrote in message news:<2cd1056e.0306300452.369fb030 RemoveThis @posting.google.com>...
> So, in other words, nothing's changed? You'd rather continue to be
> unpleasant or leave, rather than accept the chance of a possible
> 'ceasefire'? Doesn't make sense to me.
>
> Huw
If you were discussing anyone else, I would say the same thing, Huw,
but this is all too typical. I have known three year olds to act with
more dignity and restraint, eventually.
Once he thinks his scent has left the region, he will be back soon
enough, like the mangy, one-eared, limping tomcat you see enter the
yard ever so often, hiking a leg and spraying every surface it can
reach.
I wish him luck with his projects and look forward to seeing Mr.
Oliver's collection, but rarely read his posts any more. Look at his
response to Nomis' sincere and on-topic question--snide, logorrheic,
evasive, and mercenary. Who needs this?
A: Would you mind telling me the location of the nearest bathroom?
B [long, flowery paragraph on the subject of running water, punctuated
at regular intervals with the words "I" and "me", excised]: I could,
but I just wrote a particularly wicked paragraph on that very subject
for the latest Baedecker--a paragraph that the highest literary lights
of the day have assured me is as salacious as it is excellently
phrased. (O! Were there but a knighthood in store for those who toil
as nobly, as wittily, and as misunderstood as I! Pardon my tears.) You
may, however, pay me for directions to the second-nearest bathroom, as
I have not yet placed that one. Between you and me--I am ever so
naughty to admit this in such company--the paragraph written by the
widely-published and award-winning C. would better benefit the public
in a roll beside the loo than in a book directing them to it.
Eh-Ho-ho-ho! Pardon my tears, yet again, good fellow. Now, where was
I, and where . . . are you?
Jim
"It has sometimes been away so long as nearly two months, once for
three. Its absence always exceeds a fortnight, although it may be but
by a single day. Fifteen days having past since I saw it last, it may
return now at any moment."
"There is in its motion an indefinable power to dissipate thought, and
to contract one's attention to that monotony . . . " ---Le Fanu "Green
Tea"<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 30, 2003
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 4:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver.TakeThisOut@waitrose.com> wrote in message
> In the meantime, I wash my hands of your small press discussion site. May it
> turn round and bite you on the arse one day, the same arse that you invite
> everyone to kiss.
>
>
> Farewell
> (With acks. to P. E.)
>
> So, farewell then.
> Adieu.
Please, make it so. Please show us that for once you are true to your
word. Please leave and do not return.
M.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 30, 2003
Posts: 49
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2003 4:20 pm
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
ubug RemoveThis @ms8.hinet.net (Huw Lines) wrote in message news:<2cd1056e.0306300452.369fb030 RemoveThis @posting.google.com>...
> So, in other words, nothing's changed? You'd rather continue to be
> unpleasant or leave, rather than accept the chance of a possible
> 'ceasefire'? Doesn't make sense to me.
>
> Huw
>
Nor would it to any sane person...
'It had only one peculiarity-a character of malignity-unfathomable
malignity.'
J. S. Le Fanu - 'Green Tea'
Cheers,
John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 44
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:18 am
Post subject: Important Warning To C Roden The Slandere (Was Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs) [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
I have just finished speaking on the telephone to Andrew Stevens, the
collector/dealer who sold me the signed copy of "The Haunted River". In your
post, you clearly refer to myself, Andrew and this book.
Andrew and I are shocked and appalled by your foul allegation. He has asked
me to send him a copy of your comments with a view to considering legal
action (although you may remember Andrew from his 1996 Sotheby's sale, you
may not know that is in fact by profession a solicitor). He is concerned
that you might be defaming and misquoting him.
Your allegation is a damnable lie. Andrew denies ever having said anything
of the kind. The signature is completely authentic, and we will prove it in
court if necessary.
With reference to your earlier allegation that I deliberately misled
customers about Reggie's new book, both I and the author believe that you
have probably libelled me there too. Although in two minds about whether or
not to pursue an action against you, this recent development has tipped the
balance.
You will be hearing about these matters directly. In the meantime, I
strongly urge you to desist with your outrageous and unprofessional attacks
on The Haunted River. Your behaviour has been nothing short of disgusting.
Chris Barker
"Christopher Roden" <ashtree DeleteThis @wkpowerlink.com> wrote in message
news:3f005c57$0$29320$baae4c71@news.mindlink.net...
>
> "Chris Barker" <hauntedriver DeleteThis @waitrose.com> wrote in message >
> > Secondly, 'Gerald Kersh' is indeed a pseudonym. I am extremley sure of
> this.
>
> I'm sure that Kersh's birth certificate will provide the necessary
evidence.
> It is being investigated.
>
> Regarding the following:
>
> > But in a climate where your partner-in-editing John Pelan implies - yet
> > again - that there is something odd about the number of signed books I
> turn
> > up, you ask for help? (The only 'odd' aspect being Pelan's obvious
> jealousy;
> > anyone visiting my ABE site will see that I regularly handle some very
> > interesting volumes, which have included signed Mrs Riddell, William
Hope
> > Hodgson, Vincent O'Sullivan, Emma Frances Dawson and Charlotte Perkins
> > Gilman titles, all of which were obtained from thoroughly reliable
> sources,
> > many known to this group);
>
> John, like others, is likely always cautious about the validity of signed
> copies until their provenance has been verified. Likely he's recently
heard
> the same rumours circulating amongst UK book collectors that I have: that
> someone in the UK is claiming to have a signed Mrs Riddell; and the
> reputable collector who sold it is insisting that it wasn't signed at the
> time of the sale.
>
> CR
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 18
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:18 am
Post subject: Re: Important Warning To C Roden The Slandere (Was Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs) [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Tut, tut, Mr Barker. What I said was that there were rumours circulating
amongst UK book collectors/dealers regarding an alleged signed copy of a Mrs
Riddell book. Was your name mentioned anywhere?
Aren't you rather over-reacting? Or is there something you want to tell us?
Christopher
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver.RemoveThis@waitrose.com> wrote in message
news:FcScnR5zQMMIK52iU-KYvA@brightview.com...
> I have just finished speaking on the telephone to Andrew Stevens, the
> collector/dealer who sold me the signed copy of "The Haunted River". In
your
> post, you clearly refer to myself, Andrew and this book.
>
> Andrew and I are shocked and appalled by your foul allegation. He has
asked
> me to send him a copy of your comments with a view to considering legal
> action (although you may remember Andrew from his 1996 Sotheby's sale, you
> may not know that is in fact by profession a solicitor). He is concerned
> that you might be defaming and misquoting him.
>
> Your allegation is a damnable lie. Andrew denies ever having said anything
> of the kind. The signature is completely authentic, and we will prove it
in
> court if necessary.
>
> With reference to your earlier allegation that I deliberately misled
> customers about Reggie's new book, both I and the author believe that you
> have probably libelled me there too. Although in two minds about whether
or
> not to pursue an action against you, this recent development has tipped
the
> balance.
>
> You will be hearing about these matters directly. In the meantime, I
> strongly urge you to desist with your outrageous and unprofessional
attacks
> on The Haunted River. Your behaviour has been nothing short of disgusting.
>
> Chris Barker
>
>
> "Christopher Roden" <ashtree.RemoveThis@wkpowerlink.com> wrote in message
> news:3f005c57$0$29320$baae4c71@news.mindlink.net...
> >
> > "Chris Barker" <hauntedriver.RemoveThis@waitrose.com> wrote in message >
> > > Secondly, 'Gerald Kersh' is indeed a pseudonym. I am extremley sure of
> > this.
> >
> > I'm sure that Kersh's birth certificate will provide the necessary
> evidence.
> > It is being investigated.
> >
> > Regarding the following:
> >
> > > But in a climate where your partner-in-editing John Pelan implies -
yet
> > > again - that there is something odd about the number of signed books I
> > turn
> > > up, you ask for help? (The only 'odd' aspect being Pelan's obvious
> > jealousy;
> > > anyone visiting my ABE site will see that I regularly handle some very
> > > interesting volumes, which have included signed Mrs Riddell, William
> Hope
> > > Hodgson, Vincent O'Sullivan, Emma Frances Dawson and Charlotte Perkins
> > > Gilman titles, all of which were obtained from thoroughly reliable
> > sources,
> > > many known to this group);
> >
> > John, like others, is likely always cautious about the validity of
signed
> > copies until their provenance has been verified. Likely he's recently
> heard
> > the same rumours circulating amongst UK book collectors that I have:
that
> > someone in the UK is claiming to have a signed Mrs Riddell; and the
> > reputable collector who sold it is insisting that it wasn't signed at
the
> > time of the sale.
> >
> > CR
> >
> >
>
><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 68
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:51 am
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <da490663.0306301201.a5dff26.RemoveThis@posting.google.com>,
jrock.RemoveThis@locallink.net (Jim Rockhill) wrote:
> I wish him luck with his projects and look forward to seeing Mr.
> Oliver's collection, but rarely read his posts any more. Look at his
> response to Nomis' sincere and on-topic question--snide, logorrheic,
> evasive, and mercenary. Who needs this?
>
I liked the idea of giving Chris a chance to speak about something that
interests him and remind us all that he isn't always the guy on the
other side of the net. I can understand him not wanting to spill the
contents of his article before it even sees print (that's only fair to
David), but I think he could have lifted the sheet a little, if only to
whet our appetite.
> A: Would you mind telling me the location of the nearest bathroom?
>
> B [long, flowery paragraph on the subject of running water, punctuated
> at regular intervals with the words "I" and "me", excised]: I could,
> but I just wrote a particularly wicked paragraph on that very subject
> for the latest Baedecker--a paragraph that the highest literary lights
> of the day have assured me is as salacious as it is excellently
> phrased. (O! Were there but a knighthood in store for those who toil
> as nobly, as wittily, and as misunderstood as I! Pardon my tears.) You
> may, however, pay me for directions to the second-nearest bathroom, as
> I have not yet placed that one. Between you and me--I am ever so
> naughty to admit this in such company--the paragraph written by the
> widely-published and award-winning C. would better benefit the public
> in a roll beside the loo than in a book directing them to it.
> Eh-Ho-ho-ho! Pardon my tears, yet again, good fellow. Now, where was
> I, and where . . . are you?
I try to be impartial, but how am I not supposed to laugh at this? Well
done Jim.
nomis
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.oozingbrain.com" target="_blank">http://www.oozingbrain.com</a>
home to _Withered Spirits: The Works of Terry Lamsley_
and _The Big F Webpage_ (diehards unite!)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 86
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:37 am
Post subject: Re: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
nomis <ghostbrain.RemoveThis@oozingbrain.com> wrote in message news:<ghostbrain-05D5FE.21511630062003.RemoveThis@nntp.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
> In article <da490663.0306301201.a5dff26.RemoveThis@posting.google.com>,
> jrock.RemoveThis@locallink.net (Jim Rockhill) wrote:
>
> I try to be impartial, but how am I not supposed to laugh at this? Well
> done Jim.
>
> nomis
>
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.oozingbrain.com</font" target="_blank">http://www.oozingbrain.com</font</a>>
>
> home to _Withered Spirits: The Works of Terry Lamsley_
> and _The Big F Webpage_ (diehards unite!)
Thank you, nomis. On top of all the other unpleasantness here, I
thought you had been treated rather shabbily for trying to give the
fellow the benefit of the doubt.
Jim<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 44
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 1:26 pm
Post subject: Warning To C Roden [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Christopher Roden" <ashtree.RemoveThis@wkpowerlink.com> wrote in message
news:3f00bc0b$0$29324$baae4c71@news.mindlink.net...
> Tut, tut, Mr Barker. What I said was that there were rumours circulating
> amongst UK book collectors/dealers regarding an alleged signed copy of a
Mrs
> Riddell book. Was your name mentioned anywhere?
>
> Aren't you rather over-reacting? Or is there something you want to tell
us?
>
> Christopher
>
FAO Mr Roden (Ashtree Press, Canada)
I believe it is obvious to a greta many people to whom (myself and Andrew
Stevens) and to what book (The Haunted River) you are referring, despite
your subsequent attempt to try and distance yourself from the allegation.
Your comment was made in response to my mention of a signed Mrs Riddell
book, a book that has been mentionned in great detail on my website, and a
book that has caused some discussion amongst collectors. No other book could
possibly fit the bill.
You are now in an unenviable position. You have accused me of deliberately
"lying" to customers in an attempt to undermine THE DREAMS OF CARDINAL
VITTORINI, a silly allegation that is disputed by both author and printer. I
can prove that you lied, and I can establish your motive for doing so e.g.
your chagrin at not securing the project.
Now you have alleged that Andrew Stevens insists that when he sold me a Mrs
Riddell book, it was not signed. You intimate that I added the signature, or
rather, that Andrew has intimated that I added the signature, when the
simple truth is that Andrew failed to spot it when cataloguing the volume,
during the course of his cataloguing a great number of similar books. This
is a scandalous allegation and of a highly defamatory nature. Not only do
Andrew and I dispute it, but I can produce the book. I am perfectly happy to
have the signature authenticated by genre experts and subjected to any
necessary scientific test.
Once again, I strongly urge you to desist from making further untrue
allegations. I don't think that you are taking this seriously enough. You
cannot make defamatory statements and get away with it just because it is
the internet.
Chris Barker
The Haunted River
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver" target="_blank">www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 01, 2003
Posts: 303
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 1:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Warning To C Barker [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:26:03 +0100, "Chris Barker"
<hauntedriver.TakeThisOut@waitrose.com> wrote:
>
>"Christopher Roden" <ashtree.TakeThisOut@wkpowerlink.com> wrote in message
>news:3f00bc0b$0$29324$baae4c71@news.mindlink.net...
>> Tut, tut, Mr Barker. What I said was that there were rumours circulating
>> amongst UK book collectors/dealers regarding an alleged signed copy of a
>Mrs
>> Riddell book. Was your name mentioned anywhere?
>>
>> Aren't you rather over-reacting? Or is there something you want to tell
>us?
>>
>> Christopher
>>
>
>FAO Mr Roden (Ashtree Press, Canada)
>
>I believe it is obvious to a greta many people to whom (myself and Andrew
>Stevens) and to what book (The Haunted River) you are referring, despite
>your subsequent attempt to try and distance yourself from the allegation.
>Your comment was made in response to my mention of a signed Mrs Riddell
>book, a book that has been mentionned in great detail on my website, and a
>book that has caused some discussion amongst collectors. No other book could
>possibly fit the bill.
Nonsense. Chris responded to my comments on the seeming plethora of
rare signed books turning up in the UK of late. There has certainly
been some talk among collectors that the quantity is almost too good
to be true. Make of that what you will.
>
>You are now in an unenviable position. You have accused me of deliberately
>"lying" to customers in an attempt to undermine THE DREAMS OF CARDINAL
>VITTORINI, a silly allegation that is disputed by both author and printer. I
>can prove that you lied, and I can establish your motive for doing so e.g.
>your chagrin at not securing the project.
A. You are a liar and a carpet-bagger that attempted to foist off a
shoddy product done on the cheap.
B. You are a mooncalf that doesn't know the difference between
notch-binding and Smythe-sewing.
Pick one.
>
>Now you have alleged that Andrew Stevens insists that when he sold me a Mrs
>Riddell book, it was not signed. You intimate that I added the signature, or
>rather, that Andrew has intimated that I added the signature, when the
>simple truth is that Andrew failed to spot it when cataloguing the volume,
>during the course of his cataloguing a great number of similar books. This
>is a scandalous allegation and of a highly defamatory nature. Not only do
>Andrew and I dispute it, but I can produce the book. I am perfectly happy to
>have the signature authenticated by genre experts and subjected to any
>necessary scientific test.
I don't recall anyone mentioning Mr. Stevens or this particular book
you're going on about, Is this the product of voices in your head?
>
>Once again, I strongly urge you to desist from making further untrue
>allegations. I don't think that you are taking this seriously enough. You
>cannot make defamatory statements and get away with it just because it is
>the internet.
Indeed? And have you removed your lies, errors, and fabrications from
your website?
By the way, I thought you were leaving? More lies?
Your constant threat of legal actions are as tiresome as they are
pointless, I haven't studied law in years, but you're the sort that a
solicitor dreams about having represented by the opposition:
Q: Mr. Barker, did you post a sale listing for a non-existent book on
an internet site for booksellers?
CB:
Q: Mr Barker, did you post a story written by yourself on the Internet
and claim it was a previously undiscovered tale by Sax Rohmer?
CB:
Q: Mr Barker, did you advertise a book as featuring sewn signatures
when it was in fact notch-bound?
CB:
Q: Mr. Barker, is the substance of your case that your reputation has
been impugned?
CB:
Q: No further questions, your Honor...
Don't go away mad Hoppy, just go away...
Cheers,
John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 28, 2003
Posts: 18
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 1:26 pm
Post subject: ::Re: Warning To C Roden [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver.DeleteThis@waitrose.com> wrote in message
news:r4Gcnaz-3crRzpyiXTWJiA@brightview.com...
>
> I believe it is obvious to a greta many people to whom (myself and Andrew
> Stevens) and to what book (The Haunted River) you are referring, despite
> your subsequent attempt to try and distance yourself from the allegation.
> Your comment was made in response to my mention of a signed Mrs Riddell
> book, a book that has been mentionned in great detail on my website, and a
> book that has caused some discussion amongst collectors. No other book
could
> possibly fit the bill.
>
In a response to Ramsey Campbell yesterday, you admitted that at the sight
of 'Chris' in a posting, you automatically assumed it referred to you.
Now you automatically assume that a posting which does not contain a name
refers to you.
This suggests a couple of things:
1. Rampant paranoia - and I believe this has been disucssed on a prior
occasion.
2. Egomania.
What the hell do I know about YOUR copy of this or that book? And frankly
who cares? You're too irrelevant to be bothered about. And when you have a
few spare minutes, why don't you ask your friend Reggie to show you the
e-mail exchanges we had over his collection? He should be able to convince
you, since it seems no one else can, that I am not suffering from raging
jealousy at not being able to publish his stories. If he's honest with you,
he may also tell you a few home truths about yourself.
Q: Mr Barker: Did you advertise a glued book as sewn?
CB:
Q: Mr Barker: Did you correct this misrepresentation before or after the
matter was raised on alt.books.ghost-fiction?
CB:
Q: Did you advertise the book at rec.collecting.books as a sewn book?
CB:
Q: Did you correct the misinformation at rec.collecting.books?
CB:
Q: Was your name mentioned in connection with gossip circulating in the book
trade in the UK?
CB:
Q: Were you told on numerous occasions that certain items which appear on
your website were incorrect and that they misrepresented various
contributors to alt.books.ghost-fiction?
CB:
Q: Did you correct those misrepresentations?
CB:
Q: Is it true, Mr Barker, that you see your name in every posting to
alt.books.ghost-fiction, even when it is not there?
CB:
Q: Do you not think Mr Barker that you should seek help?
CB:
Q: Did you not promise for the fourth time, just a day ago, to leave
alt.books.ghost-fiction in peace? That you would leave because you were
unable to achieve the domination of that group that you seek?
CB:
Q: How long did that promise last, Mr Barker?
CB:
Q: Do you know what truth is, Mr Barker?
CB:
CR<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 29, 2003
Posts: 86
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2003 1:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Warning To C Roden [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Chris Barker" <hauntedriver DeleteThis @waitrose.com> wrote in message news:<r4Gcnaz-3crRzpyiXTWJiA DeleteThis @brightview.com>...
(Snip)
> You cannot make defamatory statements and get away with it just because it is
> the internet.
>
> Chris Barker
> The Haunted River
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver</font" target="_blank">www.users.waitrose.com/~hauntedriver</font</a>>
Then cease to do so.
Or is this one of those "Do as I say, not as I do" situations some
people reserve for their children and whomever else they consider
beneath them? You think you can smear Ash-Tree, Midnight House,
Tartarus, George Locke, and who knows however many other people on the
internet, by name, repeatedly, out of some misconception that you are
a crusader whose tabloid antics are so cute no one will take them
amiss, but if you so much as sniff something that might--through some
vivid stretch of your own imagination--refer to you, you cry foul.
As the master of innuendo you deem yourself, you may have felt capable
of reading something more into the reference to Riddell than appeared
on the page; if so, it was more than any of the rest of us saw.
Some people have gone down in lexicographical history by becoming
associated with certain extreme stances or behaviors. Hence
dictionaries now carry definitions for bowdlerism, chauvinism, sadism,
masochism, etc. How many years will it be before we see your name
immortalized in dictionaries as a synonym for extreme and self-serving
hypocrisy?
Jim<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: Doyle, Kersh & Au Revoirs |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
