|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 29, 2016 15:17:00 GMT
I hadn't heard of the controversy over 'The Vampire of Kring' mentioned by Rosemary, and I presume she is referring to claims in Haining's 'M.R. James Book of the Supernatural' regarding it being a source for Stoker's 'Dracula'. This is very interesting stuff of which I was completely unaware. You're right, Rip, it's this thread. M. R. James Book Of The Supernatural. This is what I wrote on the subject in the News section of Ghosts & Scholars Newsletter 23: ********* Following on from the extensive coverage of MRJ in Fortean Times 292 (as mentioned last time), I wrote in to correct a statement by Ramsey Campbell in one of the sidebar sections, "Celebrating M.R. James". Headed "Unreliable Haining", my letter was published in FT 294 (November 2012). Ramsey had said that: "in the December 1929 issue of The Bookman... James demonstrates his familiarity with the genre, even tracing the roots of Dracula to (apparently) a sceptical article on vampirism from the November 1856 issue of Chambers's Repository". In my letter, I pointed out that this related to Peter Haining's completely incorrect identification of the item in question as the essay "The Vampire of Kring". "Unfortunately," I said, "wherever Haining found 'The Vampire of Kring'... it wasn't in Chambers's Repository. Researchers (in particular, Douglas A. Anderson) have examined every volume of that publication... The unnamed story that James was indicating has now been identified as something else entirely: 'The Mysterious Stranger', a fictional vampire tale which may well have been an influence on Dracula as it shares some of the same themes and ideas. 'The Mysterious Stranger' appeared anonymously... in an 1854 edition of the Repository, but Douglas Anderson has tracked down the author as C. von Wachsmann (1787-1862)". I finished off: "One mystery remains: where on earth did Haining find that essay on 'The Vampire of Kring' and why was he so dishonest about it?... Perhaps FT readers might have some thoughts." As it turned out, someone did! I received an e-mail from Dennis Lien who revealed that Doug Anderson had solved the mystery a couple of years ago, unbeknownst to me. "The Vampire of Kring" is an article called (in Dennis's words): "'Concerning Vampires' in the November 14, 1896 (year sic), issue of Chamber's Journal, pp.730-734. So, Haining had the wrong magazine, dated it forty years too early, and suggested that a long novel published May 1897 and years in the research and writing had been inspired by an anonymous article published in November 1896. About par for the Haining course, I'd say." And so would I! ********* Doug Anderson has done more excellent work than anyone on researching these Haining problems: there's more from him on the Wormwoodiana blog (in the comments as well as the main piece).
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 29, 2016 15:19:09 GMT
I mean to add the link to the relevant Wormwoodiana page:http://wormwoodiana.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/another-peter-haining-fraud.html
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 29, 2016 17:18:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 29, 2016 17:33:40 GMT
This is what I wrote on the subject in the News section of Ghosts & Scholars Newsletter 23: ********* Following on from the extensive coverage of MRJ in Fortean Times 292 (as mentioned last time), I wrote in to correct a statement by Ramsey Campbell in one of the sidebar sections, "Celebrating M.R. James". Headed "Unreliable Haining", my letter was published in FT 294 (November 2012). Ramsey had said that: "in the December 1929 issue of The Bookman... James demonstrates his familiarity with the genre, even tracing the roots of Dracula to (apparently) a sceptical article on vampirism from the November 1856 issue of Chambers's Repository". In my letter, I pointed out that this related to Peter Haining's completely incorrect identification of the item in question as the essay "The Vampire of Kring". "Unfortunately," I said, "wherever Haining found 'The Vampire of Kring'... it wasn't in Chambers's Repository. Researchers (in particular, Douglas A. Anderson) have examined every volume of that publication... The unnamed story that James was indicating has now been identified as something else entirely: 'The Mysterious Stranger', a fictional vampire tale which may well have been an influence on Dracula as it shares some of the same themes and ideas. 'The Mysterious Stranger' appeared anonymously... in an 1854 edition of the Repository, but Douglas Anderson has tracked down the author as C. von Wachsmann (1787-1862)". I finished off: "One mystery remains: where on earth did Haining find that essay on 'The Vampire of Kring' and why was he so dishonest about it?... Perhaps FT readers might have some thoughts." As it turned out, someone did! I received an e-mail from Dennis Lien who revealed that Doug Anderson had solved the mystery a couple of years ago, unbeknownst to me. "The Vampire of Kring" is an article called (in Dennis's words): "'Concerning Vampires' in the November 14, 1896 (year sic), issue of Chamber's Journal, pp.730-734. So, Haining had the wrong magazine, dated it forty years too early, and suggested that a long novel published May 1897 and years in the research and writing had been inspired by an anonymous article published in November 1896. About par for the Haining course, I'd say." And so would I! ********* Doug Anderson has done more excellent work than anyone on researching these Haining problems: there's more from him on the Wormwoodiana blog (in the comments as well as the main piece). Thank you for sharing, Ro. It's good to be able to put a name to 'Anon's The Mysterious Stranger after all these years, even Michel Parry was at a loss over that one. Being naive, I never suspected any funny business in regard to the 'Guy Endore' story ( Werewolf:Horror Stories Of The Man-Beast), but, of course, once you know it all makes sense. We included The Vow On Hallowe’en - i.e., the 'Dorothy Macardle' story that isn't by her at all, but the work of Lyllian Huntley Harris (originally exhumed for PH's Halloween Hauntings) - on the 2012 Vault Advent Calendar, where Doug Anderson is properly credited with revealing Mr. Haining's ... innocent mistake. The thing is, for all their inaccuracies - wilful or otherwise - I adore Peter Haining's anthologies, as I do his outrageous 'non-fiction' biographies of Spring-heeled Jack, Sweeney Todd, the English Highwayman et al.
|
|
|
Post by ripper on Aug 30, 2016 7:45:15 GMT
Thanks, Dem. Haining made 'The Casket' sound like a real hoot with its lurid stories and serials. I would love to see selections from the magazine, but am not aware that there have been any, apart from the highly-contended use of 'The Skeleton Count' by Haining.
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 30, 2016 8:14:12 GMT
The thing is, for all their inaccuracies - wilful or otherwise - I adore Peter Haining's anthologies, as I do his outrageous 'non-fiction' biographies of Spring-heeled Jack, Sweeney Todd, the English Highwayman et al. That's what makes it so sad to me: what Haining did well, he did magnificently well. So he didn't need to fake and lie, and cover up lies with more lies.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Aug 30, 2016 8:32:27 GMT
Wow. That's about 10 miles from where I grew up - and it's the first I've ever heard of a monster!
|
|
|
Post by ripper on Aug 30, 2016 13:49:20 GMT
Well spotted, Doctor Strange. Seems like Shuker really went to town on this one. Intriguing and illuminating.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 30, 2016 19:19:04 GMT
Wow. That's about 10 miles from where I grew up - and it's the first I've ever heard of a monster! Journalist turned popular author invents article for book of 'true' ghost stories and mysteries. Who'd have though, what's the world coming to, etc. Depending on your point of view, every volume of 'true' ghost stories could be picked apart as a ragbag of hearsay, local legend, apocryphal tales. I'm not entirely convinced by some of the entries in, say, Aidan Chambers' Haunted Houses, but they fired my imagination as a sprog and I still love the book to this day. I doubt Elliott O'Donnell let 'facts' get in the way of a good story, likewise just about any Jack the Ripper 'authority' we care to mention (Haining's fellow local hack turned author Donald McCormick being a prime example; their 'non-fiction' shares several traits, including that very 'fifties thing of quoting fabricated dialogue).
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 31, 2016 8:32:00 GMT
Journalist turned popular author invents article for book of 'true' ghost stories and mysteries. Who'd have though, what's the world coming to, etc. Depending on your point of view, every volume of 'true' ghost stories could be picked apart as a ragbag of hearsay, local legend, apocryphal tales. I'm not entirely convinced by some of the entries in, say, Aidan Chambers' Haunted Houses, but they fired my imagination as a sprog and I still love the book to this day. I doubt Elliott O'Donnell let 'facts' get in the way of a good story, likewise just about any Jack the Ripper 'authority' we care to mention (Haining's fellow local hack turned author Donald McCormick being a prime example; their 'non-fiction' shares several traits, including that very 'fifties thing of quoting fabricated dialogue). Fair point, but in this case it seems to have been more that Haining took material wholesale from another writer without crediting it. Arguably a worse sin. Sadly quoting fabricated dialogue isn't just a "fifties thing": in my US Civil War researches of a few years ago I encountered more than one recent book which did just that - it's a practice I find both dubious and deeply irritating! Donald McCormick is certainly another example of the Haining syndrome, though even worse. Some of his supposed discoveries have really messed up Ripper research over the years, and are still written up as facts: see www.casebook.org/dissertations/maybrick_diary/mb-mc.html (which, despite the URL, isn't just about the Maybrick diary!). I really find it hard to get my head around that mindset - reputable scholars ruining their future reputation with poor research covered up with confabulation.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 31, 2016 20:47:48 GMT
Fair point, but in this case it seems to have been more that Haining took material wholesale from another writer without crediting it. Arguably a worse sin. Sadly quoting fabricated dialogue isn't just a "fifties thing": in my US Civil War researches of a few years ago I encountered more than one recent book which did just that - it's a practice I find both dubious and deeply irritating! Donald McCormick is certainly another example of the Haining syndrome, though even worse. Some of his supposed discoveries have really messed up Ripper research over the years, and are still written up as facts: see www.casebook.org/dissertations/maybrick_diary/mb-mc.html (which, despite the URL, isn't just about the Maybrick diary!). I really find it hard to get my head around that mindset - reputable scholars ruining their future reputation with poor research covered up with confabulation. No "arguably" about it in my book. Poetic licence I can handle, but I certainly do not condone plagiarism. "Fifties thing" was me being lazy, because from my limited reading, it seemed almost standard practice at the time. I don't doubt it still goes on.
|
|
|
Post by johnnymains on Aug 16, 2019 12:03:47 GMT
Yeah - I think the same thing can be said about Bela Lugosi's 'The Bat' - the first appearance in print of a transcription of a radio play that Bela seemingly wrote and performed in 1955 - the year Bela was sent to a sanitarium for three months to get off drugs and married a woman 33 years his junior. Sadly Peter doesn't give a broadcast date (but does list NBC in the acknowledgements page) - but no matter how hard I look I just cannot find a trace of this particular radio show - the Bela Lugosi blog has a list of all known recordings - ( there are some recordings missing from this) but they say: "[...]He may have actually made over 200 broadcasts, stage productions [...] Of his known radio appearances, precious few appear to have survived." So if this one HAS survived, why is Peter the only person to know about it? I've done hundreds of archive searches - both newspaper, NBC recordings, Library of congress, archive.org, old time radio shows (the closest comes in 1950 when Dracula played by Lugosi tries to buy a ladies skull to turn it into amongst other things a tobacco jar 'whenever I stuff my pipe I'll think of you') Best case scenario - it's something that he managed to get a recording of - or maybe sent from a fan but still not discovered yet by the public and has remained lost after the Haining archive has been sold on- worst case, and this would be bonkers - he wrote it himself, passing it off as Lugosi knowing that nobody would ever question him cos he was Peter Haining.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Aug 16, 2019 16:00:20 GMT
Fascinating.
Personally, from what I've read on various Haining threads on here--I like your "bonkers" scenario best.
cheers, H.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 16, 2019 16:59:06 GMT
Yeah - I think the same thing can be said about Bela Lugosi's 'The Bat' - the first appearance in print of a transcription of a radio play that Bela seemingly wrote and performed in 1955 - the year Bela was sent to a sanitarium for three months to get off drugs and married a woman 33 years his junior. Sadly Peter doesn't give a broadcast date (but does list NBC in the acknowledgements page) - but no matter how hard I look I just cannot find a trace of this particular radio show - the Bela Lugosi blog has a list of all known recordings - ( there are some recordings missing from this) but they say: "[...]He may have actually made over 200 broadcasts, stage productions [...] Of his known radio appearances, precious few appear to have survived." So if this one HAS survived, why is Peter the only person to know about it? I've done hundreds of archive searches - both newspaper, NBC recordings, Library of congress, archive.org, old time radio shows (the closest comes in 1950 when Dracula played by Lugosi tries to buy a ladies skull to turn it into amongst other things a tobacco jar 'whenever I stuff my pipe I'll think of you') Best case scenario - it's something that he managed to get a recording of - or maybe sent from a fan but still not discovered yet by the public and has remained lost after the Haining archive has been sold on- worst case, and this would be bonkers - he wrote it himself, passing it off as Lugosi knowing that nobody would ever question him cos he was Peter Haining. "Bela knew his house was haunted ... there's the bat .... the howling dogs ... the weird woman ... the coffin-like boxes ..." The Bat is an extract from the uncredited (Forrest J. Ackerman ?) Lugosi's Haunted House, Famous Monsters of Filmland #59, Nov. 1969.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Aug 16, 2019 17:04:27 GMT
That's truly extraordinary detective work, Dem! Thanks!!!
H.
|
|