Originally posted by etenguy
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Stephen Knight Zone.
Collapse
X
-
Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
-
Originally posted by harry View PostWhy would the Crook family living at Churchtown in Gloucestershire,hint at a Royal connection. Wa s there a connection between that family and Annie Elizabeth Crook?
I haven’t heard of the Churchtown connection Harry? Who are they?
Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
I don’t have the Sturgis book with me at the moment Kattrup but the impression that I got is that the Royal Archives had been checked and that the Danish Royal Family could find no evidence of Sickert’s Grandfather ever working for them. Sickert grew up in a household where money was really tight as his father barely made a living so it’s difficult to see how he could have done any work for the Monarchy either without it being mentioned as a big deal.
For instance, about the father: “It is said he received financial support from Christian VIII.”
Looking at the footnotes, a lot of them are from various articles by Walter Sickert. Since an encyclopedia finds it necessary to use the uncertainty marker “it is said”, it seems the claim was never substantiated.
However, it would not have been at all unusual for a young talented artist to be given a grant for his further edification. This does not rule out a later life in poverty.
So it’s very possibly true, but what does it matter? Nothing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by harry View PostNo Herlock,you wouldn't have.I see I spelt the name of the village wrong.It should have been Churchdown.They were a family named Crook who claimed a connection to Royalty.This was long before Knight came on the scene.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kattrup View Post
The main Danish artists’ encyclopedia has entries for both father and grandfather.
For instance, about the father: “It is said he received financial support from Christian VIII.”
Looking at the footnotes, a lot of them are from various articles by Walter Sickert. Since an encyclopedia finds it necessary to use the uncertainty marker “it is said”, it seems the claim was never substantiated.
However, it would not have been at all unusual for a young talented artist to be given a grant for his further edification. This does not rule out a later life in poverty.
So it’s very possibly true, but what does it matter? Nothing.
Thanks for that Kattrup.
Thanks for tatRegards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Just a little something to throw into the Stephen Knight mix.
We need to take into account that Stephen died young, and was being affected by a brain tumor for the last years of his life, so he never gave an in depth defence of his book. Many things stated as "facts" have been clearly disproved, but we'll never know if he was aware of these errors, fed inaccurate information or was just being liberal with what he had to work with. Since before 'Final Solution' he was a local reporter, we can't draw any inference from his previous work. But, his other published book, 'The Brotherhood', also suffered from severe criticism, largely due to relying on anonymous sources. The defence for the criticism in this case is always the same, "it's a conspiracy".
I read The Brotherhood many years ago and thought it was ground breaking. Unfortunately, it never stood up to scrutiny, and showed that at best, Stephen was probably too reliant on taking things at face value, and not checking the provenance of his 'sources'.
The man wrote two books, both criticised in the same manner. Both regarded as fiction.
But then, 'they' would say that.....
Thems the Vagaries.....
Comment
-
The main Danish artists’ encyclopedia has entries for both father and grandfather.
For instance, about the father: “It is said he received financial support from Christian VIII.”
Looking at the footnotes, a lot of them are from various articles by Walter Sickert. Since an encyclopedia finds it necessary to use the uncertainty marker “it is said”, it seems the claim was never substantiated.
However, it would not have been at all unusual for a young talented artist to be given a grant for his further edification. This does not rule out a later life in poverty.
So it’s very possibly true, but what does it matter? Nothing.
'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman
Comment
-
Good points Al. I’m certainly not trying to suggest that Knight was any kind of evil genius behind a fraud. It’s likelier that he simply got carried away when he heard this incredible/intriguing story and then tended to see everything in the light of it being true. Not the first and certainly not the last to be guilty of that. I can’t recall specifics but I seem to remember it being pointed out how he’d ignored inconvenient evidence. And of course the discoveries that Simon made in 1976 were all available to him had he looked.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
I guess that what one finds when one digs a little deeper .
A more important question is why would Princess Alexander have chosen a struggling, unknown artist who was a minor member of an art movement that was shunned by the art establishment? Especially given the amount of establishment-approved painters who would have jumped at the chance of helping out Princess Alexandra?Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
What it shows is, it cant just be dismissed with certainty that Sickerts family didnt or never have had ties with Danish Royalty as you and others have claimed , thats all.'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
This is the point that Paul Begg has made Eten. Obviously the story came from somewhere and someone. We have the elements from The Malta Story which gives us a possible secret Royal Marriage and offspring. Then we have Mornington Crescent The Lodger story with the connection to Sickert. We have Gorman and Alice Margaret. We just need the mastermind behind the whole thing. Did Joseph receive the story as he told it or did he (or Harry Jonas) modify it to add intrigue and to make it saleable?
Comment
-
Originally posted by FISHY1118 View PostWhat it shows is, it cant just be dismissed with certainty that Sickerts family didnt or never have had ties with Danish Royalty as you and others have claimed , thats all.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by etenguy View Post
The Malta Story is interesting, and it is possible the brothers could have been confused. If we assumed both stories were true - then what an extraordinary unlikely coincidence.Regards
Sir Herlock Sholmes.
“A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View PostThe man wrote two books
I believe he wrote 4 books. The two already mentioned, plus the non-fiction The Killing of Justice Godfrey, and Requiem at Rogano which was fiction and if I recall correctly Knight's 2nd book. The Final Solution being his first. Rogano was a good read, about a retired Scotland Yard inspector who works out that current murders by The Deptford Strangler are similar to murders in Rogano, Italy in the 15th century.
These are not clues, Fred.
It is not yarn leading us to the dark heart of this place.
They are half-glimpsed imaginings, tangle of shadows.
And you and I floundering at them in the ever vainer hope that we might corral them into meaning when we will not.
We will not.
Comment
Comment