If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary
I thought the joke was that Maybrick wasn't American, and The Baron was faking his pig ignorance on the subject.
Lord knows why.
Love,
Caz
X
I thought it had to do with his rubbing elbows with Americans and picking up the language. Just too damn deep for me. Give me a Stooges pie in the face any day.
I wondered, but for me the pseudonym is too obvious. I tend to think it's just a fan, who is in awe of a lord.
I hope Ike will post more of Bongo's early DAiry work - particularly relating to CRicket weather.
Howzat, Ikeypoo?
Love,
Caz
X
Anything you say, Caz.
[Thinks: Does she not realise how much this quality of material costs? And me on a pension. It's alright for her, with a mobster's income, and ... oh oh, she's coming ... the glint of steel!]
I've read Dan Brown, and if I was his wife I'd be denying any writing credits.
I had just finished my History thesis (150+footnotes) and I took his book with me on vacation. While MrRosemary was golfing I decided to track down some of his more odd ‘footnotes-sources’ Many were completely obscure, outright falsehoods, and he’s on to that Isaac Causabon-Emerald-Tablet-Hermetic fan-hood. Such a joke.
From Voltaire writing in Diderot's Encyclopédie:
"One demands of modern historians more details, better ascertained facts, precise dates, , more attention to customs, laws, commerce, agriculture, population."
I realise from Al's post that an excuse can - and will - be made that all Bongo's pages were cutting room floor stuff, rejected because they didn't work with the surviving DAiry. But already that is moving Bongo's own goal posts over what those pages supposedly represented, and interpreting them differently. To me it only shows Bongo was half capable of copying the diary author's prose, albeit in a very rudimentary fashion. I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say he was capable of composing his own prose.
A point being missed so far is that Bongo was meant to have copied those pages in his own handwriting, from originals lodged with the bank or his solicitor. Why would his spelling have been so awful if he was copying someone else's work? And if he was copying his own spelling, the question remains: why go to all that trouble and not simply photocopy the original pages before lodging them?
The interesting thing about these two particular pages is that Bongo originally claimed they were among the first ten pages of the diary, which he removed when he first got it. But he refers to MAy the27th at the bottom of one page, then at the top of the other we get: ...promms Myself to take a stroll this evening CRicket weather To Good to Miss. May is such a pleasant Month... [yes, Bongo, very good] ...June, 4 days away. Blooms shall come forth*, so shall I.
[*I think Bongo just came tenth at that point. Woeful.]
Anyway, all this supposedly comes before Sir Jim thinks he 'caught a chill' from going to that cold, damp Manchester, and before he says he will visit Michael 'this coming June'.
At least he got Hopper's attendances right, after your temporary fit of the vapours.
Love,
Caz
X
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
I suppose what Bongos magic pages show is that he is actually capable of composing prose, unless he actually did transcribe 10 pages held in a bank vault.
Yes, spelling wise it's a bit shaky, kind of thing he might get some help with. If anything, along with his transcript saved on his word processor ( which he lied to Scotland Yard about) and his keen interest on obtaining a blank Victorian diary in early March 1992, I can't see how it further distances him from having some kind of involvement.
The page reads like the diary. Doesn't look like it, has truly awful spelling, but if he composed 10 pages in the same style as the diary? Maybe it's the bits from the cutting room floor.
Hi Al,
So why do you think Bongo began to boast about having these pages in 2002, before virtually thrusting them into Keith Skinner's hands? To finally prove he did write the DAiry, or to finally prove he didn't?
One is never quite sure with a chap like that. A bit of a charmer when I met him. Warm and funny, but not as witty as he thought he was, and he had absolutely no awareness that anyone might doubt the truth of whatever tall story he came out with next. I always had the impression he was very impressed with the diary and would dearly have loved to be able to write like that himself - bless him. He made quite a stab at it, didn't he? With the aid of a Stanley knife apparently.
Personally I prefer a switchblade, but that's just me.
I think my 'mistake' was in reading The Baron's posts and identifying him as a native English speaker who was just a bit slapdash. I now think I got the first bit right, and he's just not very good at imitating someone whose first language is not English.
If I'm right, do I get £5? I'm going to make Robert Smith an offer for Mike's DAiry, replace his missing pages and make myself a bleedin' fortune.
Love,
Caz
X
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
I'm truly sorry, Baron. Had I realised this, I would never have used your post as an example for Observer, of how many other posters, who are native English speakers, routinely make similar mistakes.
I think Barrett and his "missing" pages was nothing more than him getting attention and trying to show that he was still pulling the strings. 10 pages, he removed and kept in a bank vault, copied out? I'll file that under "my arse" for reference purposes.
What I was getting at, is that the pages he produced could be used to argue both ways equally. They don't seal the deal for him drafting the diary, he clearly wrote them out much later in a hopeless attempt to prove his authorship, or at any rate to throw a spanner in the collective works of anyone still interested.
But by the same virtue, they show that he wasn't totally incapable of composing something, bearing in mind his alcoholism was much more advanced than in 1992. The pages are an insight into Barrett's thinking ( as much as that's possible), but they don't stand up either for or against anything really. And yes, the spelling and grammar is dreadful, but it's the creativity that's of note.
But why Mike did alot of things, probably because he was depressed, an alcoholic and in poor mental health. He was a chronic liar who dug himself deeper with every retelling of whatever was "the truth" that month. " I'll never change my story, because when you're telling the truth, you're telling the truth"
"Always remember that. It's that simple" The man was his own worst enemy.
Comment