Paul Harrison

[PaulB]

Did you ever meet Paul Harrison?

Hi Herlock, no, I never met him. I seem to recall that we briefly communicated when his Ripper book was published or when Martin, Keith and I were researching an edition of the A to Z.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock, no, I never met him. I seem to recall that we briefly communicated when his Ripper book was published or when Martin, Keith and I were researching an edition of the A to Z.

Hello Paul, his so-called apology was pretty cringy. I can’t recall much about his book although I do have it.

Quick question Paul, our mutual friend Dave has ordered Martha by Amanda Harvey Purse and he wondered if you will be reviewing it?

[PaulB]

I will be reviewing Martha, but there isn't a great deal new to be said about it. Amanda is passionate about the subject of her books and is a competent genealogical researcher who provides a basic account of the life of, in this case, Martha Tabram (and a number of associated people), to which she tries to add some contextualisation. Her writing is appalling though and it makes her books look bad. As for Paul Harrison, I thought his apology was cringe-making too.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I will be reviewing Martha, but there isn't a great deal new to be said about it. Amanda is passionate about the subject of her books and is a competent genealogical researcher who provides a basic account of the life of, in this case, Martha Tabram (and a number of associated people), to which she tries to add some contextualisation. Her writing is appalling though and it makes her books look bad. As for Paul Harrison, I thought his apology was cringe-making too.

Thanks for that Paul. It sounds like Amanda is getting a similar review to the one that you gave her last book. Maybe the speed that she seems to produce them have an adverse affect? Maybe she needs a bit of help?

[PaulB]

Thanks for that Paul. It sounds like Amanda is getting a similar review to the one that you gave her last book. Maybe the speed that she seems to produce them have an adverse affect? Maybe she needs a bit of help?

It's the information Amanda provides that's important. I'll take new information, even if it is wrapped up in awful writing, but that's because I think Amanda is tolerably accurate in what she writes and is a competent researcher. Anyone new to her work will doubt her accuracy when they encounter her almost unbelievably sloppy writing. It conveys someone who doesn't care. But she's so enthusiastic about her subjects that the criticism of her writing must hurt, and there is no benefit in hurting anyone, but churning out stuff that is sometimes incomprehensible doesn't do justice to her subjects or her books, and pretending that her books are well written when they're not, as I have seen done, does Amanda no favours. Amanda is the sort of dedicated researcher Ripperologists should encourage, but she needs solid editorial to give her books the polish they need.