Mango Books to publish Lady Lucan's memoirs

[jmenges]

Phil,

You're so full of ****. I've seen your Facebook posts where you whole-heartily engage in banter about "smash and grab", "must only be in it for the money", questioning the honesty of Adam without having any of the facts, and encouraging (by "liking", rather than disputing) the preposterous idea that now that Lady Lucan is dead, Adam might invent fake material and insert it in her book. We're not stupid. If this had been published by anyone other than Mango Books you and your buddies in the tin-foil echo chamber on Facebook wouldn't have said a single thing about it.

JM

[Monty]

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Monty

[PaulB]

Right Paul...

You've asked for this.

I don't give a rats backside WHO the publisher is..or WHO owns said company. Like I stated..it wasn't a "boot in" on anyone. Your inference is totally wrong..get it? wrong. You.. and Menges..are out of order making that accusation. Now back off and stick to the point both GUT and I made. You assume very very wrongly. The literary scoop of the year could have waited a few days. Period. It looks wrong to me. Period.

My point was about the timing of the announcement. Period. Who announces it is besides the point. Etiquette says..to me at least. .and GUT it appears (Thank you).. that waiting a few days would have been the right way of doing it. The lady is not dead a week and for some unknown reason there's a damned rush to announce her book release.. before she is even buried?

The Christmas sales will not be affected by a few days waiting now..incase that was the worry. The Lady deserves to be interred without the fuss of any potential massive media scramble around her name. Indecent haste I call it. Whoever the publishing people are.

Monty. Thank you for your partly understanding comment. Appreciated.

GUT. Thank you for your agreement.



Phil

I think Mango has made two book announcements here recently, and in both cases you have made critical comments. It is therefore unsurprising that your posts should be considered an attempt to put the boot in. I did not say they were such an attempt (although people can draw their own conclusions on that), only that it isn't urprising if someone interpreted them that way. You are too intelligent not to have realised that it would and could be, so your feigned outrage when somebody did so doesn't ring true. But there you go...

And I tried to explain, as far as my very limited knowledge goes, that the newpapers were aware of the book and that it was going to be mentioned in today's newspapers, which in turn made it necessary to bring the announcement forward. If this book was some sort of tawdry dish-the-dirt book, I'd possibly be inclined to agree with you, but it isn't. Lady Lucan worked very hard to make sure that this book was ready for publication. One of her last wishes was that it would be published.

You are entitled to your opinion and some people might be interested in it, but from what little I know, in this case I don't think Lady Lucan would agree with you.

Curb the anger, Phil, whether it's real or not. It's not good for the heart.

[jmenges]

To the best of my knowledge, Lady Lucan was determined that she had the opportunity to tell her story and it was learned by the press that she had written the book, and it's publication was going to be made known in the newspapers. Adam therefore had little choice but to announce publication of the book and give those interested in reading Lady Lucan's account the opportunity to pre-order the book.

And The Daily Mail has in fact named Mango Books as the publisher this morning. So now we know why Adam announced it yesterday. I hope that makes Phil feel better.

Move along...

JM

[PaulB]

Phil,

You're so full of ****. I've seen your Facebook posts where you whole-heartily engage in banter about "smash and grab", "must only be in it for the money", questioning the honesty of Adam without having any of the facts, and encouraging (by "liking", rather than disputing) the preposterous idea that now that Lady Lucan is dead, Adam might invent fake material and insert it in her book. We're not stupid. If this had been published by anyone other than Mango Books you and your buddies in the tin-foil echo chamber on Facebook wouldn't have said a single thing about it.

JM

To suggest that Adam Wood would add fake content to Lady Lucan's book is an absolute and utter disgrace, and if Phil Carter added his "like" to that then he certainly belongs down there with the dirt and filth of the gutter. Talk about beyond the pale. I do not belong to many Facebook pages and I haven't seen any messages from Phil Carter. Thanks for the honesty, Jonathan.

[PaulB]

And The Daily Mail has in fact named Mango Books as the publisher this morning. So now we know why Adam announced it yesterday. I hope that makes Phil feel better.

Move along...

JM

I'd heard that the Daily Mail was planning to publish something. Other newspapers too. It's an important book, hence the press interest in what Lady Lucan has to say, and I suspect that the premature announcement occasioned by Lady Lucan's death has upset Adam's plans.

[Steve S]

It's no secret on FB that there's a tiny,but vociferous group dedicated to slagging off Adam, Mango Books, and their authors.....To levels approching slander......

[ChrisGeorge]

This should be a great read, and all credit to my friend Adam for pulling off the coup of being able to obtain the publishing rights to Lady Lucan's memoir!

Cheers

Chris

[Herlock Sholmes]

I look forward to this one. I always thought that she was quite an enigmatic, slightly 'detached' figure. I'm pretty sure that she doesn't know what became of Lucan though. I don't think that we will ever know unless someone from his coterie breaks ranks.

[Pcdunn]

This article is interesting:

http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/01/new-theory-claims-lord-lucan-tried-to-murder-wife-because-she-killed-a-kitten-6969542/

Says it was a gift from him. Very strange.

[Phil Carter]

I think Mango has made two book announcements here recently, and in both cases you have made critical comments. It is therefore unsurprising that your posts should be considered an attempt to put the boot in. I did not say they were such an attempt (although people can draw their own conclusions on that), only that it isn't urprising if someone interpreted them that way. You are too intelligent not to have realised that it would and could be, so your feigned outrage when somebody did so doesn't ring true. But there you go...

And I tried to explain, as far as my very limited knowledge goes, that the newpapers were aware of the book and that it was going to be mentioned in today's newspapers, which in turn made it necessary to bring the announcement forward. If this book was some sort of tawdry dish-the-dirt book, I'd possibly be inclined to agree with you, but it isn't. Lady Lucan worked very hard to make sure that this book was ready for publication. One of her last wishes was that it would be published.

You are entitled to your opinion and some people might be interested in it, but from what little I know, in this case I don't think Lady Lucan would agree with you.

Curb the anger, Phil, whether it's real or not. It's not good for the heart.

Paul,

I will write this in the clearest possible terms.
1) There was no feigned outrage.
You still ignore the comment that I don't give a rats backside WHO the publisher or company owner is. My point is that WHATEVER "type" of book it is..about WHOMEVER.. it is perhaps old fashioned but I opine that burial should have taken place before this announcement. I'd say that about any recently deceased person. Its is etiquette. What newspapers do is not a standard bearer. My thoughts say..act above what is these days considered "acceptable practice". (Just as I made private comment to some that when Swanson's Freemasonary jewels, aprons and apparel were bring put up for sale, it is very much frowned upon by Freemasons as it was considered the correct thing to do to donate such items back to the person's 'Mother Lodge'...the first lodge a person was initiated in if it is still in existence. I am not a Freemason, but my late father was, and I was advised to the above effect at the time of his death. The reason it is considered the right thing to do is to benefit other Freemasons who may not have great amounts of money.
i received no reply from certain quarters, for reasons I know not why)
2. You hold the right to assume something based on me pressing 'like' on a fb page? The reason why I press like and in most cases made no comnent. More often than not actually. But by holding my 'previous' up and banging that drum you and Menges (the rude chap who throws insults across the pond..they missed..shame..) ignore the principle of what I believe in. Too right I was angry!! More happy yo "stick the boot in".. both of you. Pot...kettle.
3. As you are so pally with Adam Wood..please DO tell him that whether it was his company or not..I'd have the same opinion. To me..whatever newspapers do.. the book will STILL be a scoop even if a few days grace pre announcement had been held. Do tell him. As you seem to be well in with him. Thank you.
4) as you don't read facebook posts..and are not privy to private comments from outside that site.. Id be very careful listening to a person who isn't privy to those private comments either. That's from down here in the gutter. I suggest Menges gets ALL facts before posting 'truth'.
He won't get it from me..nor through his "spy" feeding him info either. Yes..Monty..too little knowledge is a dangerous thing. .works both ways.
5) I mean all of this sincerely. I just happen to be left with a feeling of "indecent haste". Whether the late Lady Lucan would agree or not is besides the point. It is an old fashioned principle I adhere to. Just like I don't like personal insults being flung around on public..and try my utmost to not do the same thing. It's me. To those who think that it is ok in this modern world to do so..Don't expect me to join in. My anger was clear..about the PRINCIPLE of announcing a book publishing 5 days after a person dies( having been unseen for a few days and the police break open her premises) and the dear Lady isn't put to rest! Maybe I'm so old fashioned that a time for mourning..allowing family privacy.. is correct.
Maybe I am. But I honestly believe that waiting until after the funeral would not have cost anything. It"s a scoop announcement. That's all. It would not have lost any effect. If asked for a quote re what newspapers write. .it is no skin off a publishers nose to say for example.."an announcement will be made shortly after the funeral". Nobody can jump in and gazump this scoop. So no loss would occur.

Now..regarding my heart. Thank you for your concern. It is fine. My short lived irritation and anger did not affect it..nor my kidneys..I'm sure you are pleased to know.

I will not be writing further on the subject and will not reply further. I only occasionally pop in here..so don't waste your time replying.

By the way.."squealers" are generally regarded as those living "down in the gutter". Ask a criminal. Yeah. That low.

Now..sleep is in order.



Phil

[Sam Flynn]

My anger was clear..about the PRINCIPLE of announcing a book publishing 5 days after a person dies( having been unseen for a few days and the police break open her premises) and the dear Lady isn't put to rest! Maybe I'm so old fashioned that a time for mourning..allowing family privacy.. is correct.

I don't doubt your sincerity, Phil, and I fully understand where you're coming from. Just be sure to fulminate on FB - or here - whenever Amazon, iTunes (etc etc) deign to promote books, movies or albums whenever a celebrity dies. What's sauce for the Mango Books goose should be sauce for the Amazon/iTunes gander.

[Magpie]

Does she confess?