Discover new books on Goodreads
See if your friends have read any of Richard Bartholomew's books
Richard’s 2025 Year in Books
Take a look at Richard’s Year in Books, including some fun facts about their reading.
Richard Bartholomew’s Followers (15)















More friends…
Richard Bartholomew
Goodreads Author
Member Since
August 2008
Richard Bartholomew hasn't written any blog posts yet.
Richard Bartholomew
Average rating:
3.27
·
11
ratings
·
0
reviews
· 1 distinct work
• Similar authors
|
30 vteřin na náboženství
by
Richard Bartholomew (Goodreads Author),
Mathew Guest (Goodreads Author)
3.58 avg rating — 314 ratings
—
published
2011
—
16 editions
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
* Note: these are all the books on Goodreads for this author. To add more, click here.
Richard Bartholomew
is currently reading
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
Richard’s Recent Updates
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book it was amazing
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
The mysterious "Mr Hyde" first came to public attention after he was named by a witness as the murderer of Sir Danvers Carew, a member of parliament killed with great brutality in a seemingly random street attack. However, the case was a frustrating
The mysterious "Mr Hyde" first came to public attention after he was named by a witness as the murderer of Sir Danvers Carew, a member of parliament killed with great brutality in a seemingly random street attack. However, the case was a frustrating one for Inspector Newcomen of Scotland Yard – who unlike his more famous colleague had no consulting detective to help him out:Mr. Hyde had disappeared out of the ken of the police as though he had never existed. Much of his past was unearthed, indeed, and all disreputable: tales came out of the man’s cruelty, at once so callous and violent; of his vile life, of his strange associates, of the hatred that seemed to have surrounded his career; but of his present whereabouts, not a whisper.Stevenson leaves the details of this "vile life" to the imagination – a striking contrast with how the story has been treated by the innumerable adaptations that have appeared since the book was first published in 1886. In many of these, Hyde exerts coercive control over a marginal woman from a lower social class while his alter ego Dr Henry Jeykll (properly pronounced "JEE-kul") has a "respectable" love interest, but no such characters appear in this novel and some critics instead detect an allegory of being closeted. Dr Jekyll is unmarried and about fifty years old; his lawyer Gabriel Utterson suspects that Hyde’s hold over him is due to blackmail, but he also infers that Hyde, who appears younger, is Jekyll’s “favourite”. As with his earlier annotated editions ( Sherlock Holmes and Dracula ), Leslie Klinger’s notes range widely across points of historical interest, archaic turns of phrases and parallels with other literary works, along with close attention to character motivations and suggestive plot details. It is an odd coincidence that Hyde struck down Sir Danvers just as he was on the way to post a letter to Utterson, and Klinger notes that when the matter is brought to his attention "all that Utterson is concerned about here is covering up the connection to his client Dr. Henry Jekyll to the crime". And was Sir Danvers really roaming the streets late at night just to post a letter? Klinger suspects "sexual tourism". When Utterson first introduces himself to Hyde he describes himself as being "of Gaunt Street" – there was no such street in Victorian London, and Klinger suggests that Utterson gave a false address reminiscent of Great Gaunt Street and Gaunt Square from Vanity Fair. But is this Utterson’s obfuscation or Stevenson’s? Should we infer some overlap with the world of Becky Sharp? Klinger also includes criticisms by Frederic W.H. Myers, such as that Hyde’s style of speaking is "too elevated" when talking to Dr Lanyon. Stevenson agreed, pleading to Myers in a letter the "white-hot haste" in writing the story. But this seems to me an unwarranted concession – Jekyll and Hyde may look different, but they share memories and Hyde comes to Lanyon as a supplicant needing help. It seems likely Hyde would have drawn on Jekyll’s knowledge of what sort of rhetoric would be likely to convince Lanyon – and, of course, Lanyon may himself have toned down any coarse expressions by Hyde in his report of their meeting. One interesting detail late in the story is the discovery of "of a pious work, for which Jekyll had several times expressed a great esteem, annotated, in his own hand with startling blasphemies" – were these crude obscenities scrawled across the pages, or more considered and cynical sneers? As noted by Chesterton, the story shows not that one man is two people but that two people are one man. Jekyll describes how, as Hyde, he had taken an address in Soho and "engaged as a housekeeper a creature whom I knew well to be silent and unscrupulous" – Klinger infers that this must mean that Jekyll was already leading a secret double-life in Soho before the duality was heightened by his experiments. And Hyde, hunted by the police, wants to transform back into Jekyll – he does not regard the prospect as being the loss of his own self. Klinger’s edition includes textual variations from Stevenson’s notebook and the printer’s copy, both in the notes and in an appendix. There is also a list of "notable stage and screen productions" and then of "notable graphic adaptations" – exhaustive, although as I noted in relation to Dracula, it’s a shame that audio doesn’t get any attention. Illustrations from various editions are reproduced, in some cases side by side so that different interpretations can be compared. There’s also a short foreword by Joe Hill (called the introduction) and a long introduction by Klinger (called the foreword) on how the book came to the written, its public reception (which included "an overflowing congregation" at a Sunday church service because the vicar intended to "preach upon" the book), and summaries of the most famous classic adaptations. ...more |
|
|
Sep 27, 2026 09:37AM
· like
· see review ·
preview book
See a Problem?
We’d love your help.
Let us know what’s wrong with this preview of
The New Annotated Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson.
Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Not the book you’re looking for?
Preview — The New Annotated Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book really liked it
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
In the early 1970s, the rector of the small Essex town of Manningtree complained of being “bombarded with enquiries” about Matthew Hopkins, the notorious witchfinder who had lived in town in the 1640s. This “Hopkinsmania”, as he called it, was mostly
In the early 1970s, the rector of the small Essex town of Manningtree complained of being “bombarded with enquiries” about Matthew Hopkins, the notorious witchfinder who had lived in town in the 1640s. This “Hopkinsmania”, as he called it, was mostly driven by a film that appropriated a title that Hopkins had bestowed on himself: Witchfinder General. Malcolm Gaskill does not deign to cite the film by name, although he acknowledges its “cult status” while noting that it treated the facts of Hopkins’ life in a “cavalier manner”. Such loose treatment, though, has been Hopkins’ posthumous fate for more than three centuries: one early eighteenth-century source noted by Gaskill falsely claimed that Hopkins had been “at last himself executed as a wizard” during the reign of James I (sic), when in reality he had died in his bed of tuberculosis in 1647 while still a young man in his twenties (in contrast, Vincent Price was pushing sixty when he portrayed Hopkins, in the film version hacked to death by a vengeful soldier). Although Hopkins was the devout son of a clergyman (Reverend James Hopkins, a friend of John Winthrop), he did not take orders but rather lived off an inheritance as a gentleman; his older associate John Stearne, with whom Hopkins divided the task of discovering witches across eastern England, had a similar class background. Gaskill compares both men with William Dowsing, who had travelled around the same area a few years before the witchfinders, destroying religious art and monuments. Dowsing has since been dubbed the “Iconoclast General”, and he “paved the way for the witchfinders, mapping areas of receptivity and resistance”. Hopkins and Stearne thus wandered through an anxious landscape characterised by spiritual and political turmoil and apocalyptic anxiety. Although there is a popular image of witchfinders coming into town with an absolute authority to denounce suspects and decree executions, in reality they were private investigators and expert witnesses (“moral entrepreneurs”, we might say) rather than judges, and their efforts depended on the support and patronage of officials such as Sir Harbottle Grimston, MP for Harwich. Concerns about the methods employed by witchfinders prompted a “Commission of Oyer and Terminer” in Bury St Edmonds 1645 to oversee witch trials, but although it reined in some excesses (such as the ordeal by water), the overall effect was to give legitimacy to Hopkins and Stearne; looking back from 1718, a book by the Reverend Francis Hutchinson criticised the commissioners for having “recommended these Prosecutions”. The panel included the Puritan divines Samuel Fairclough and the elder Edmund Calamy, who was pained by the prison conditions endured by suspects. Eighteen suspects were convicted and hanged at the 1645 Bury St Edmunds Assizes, where John Godbold presided as judge, and in total Hopkins and Stearne were responsible for more than a hundred executions between 1645 and 1647; and to this death toll should be added prisoners who perished in prison. Most of the victims, of course, were women, although their number also included an elderly vicar, the Reverend John Lowes of Brandeston. Some women colluded with the witchfinders by taking on the role of “searchers”, undertaking the physical examination of suspects – Hopkins’ assistant Mary Phillips was herself a witchfinder. The strongest voice against Hopkins and Stearne was that of the Reverend John Gaule of Great Staughton: It was not that he was sceptical about witchcraft, still less about the agency of spirits; rather, he objected to witch-hunting as a superstitious reflex that discounted the agency of providence and further destabilized an already chaotic world… Liberty had turned into licentiousness, government into tyranny, plenty into poverty, and peace into war. The revulsion Gaule felt for witchfinders was therefore concerned not merely with their impiety, but with their assumption of authority. Above all, he prayed for an end to the 'Coblers and Tinkers turn'd Preachers, Souldiers turn'd Lawgivers, Subjects turn'd Tyrants, and Servants turn'd Masters'. Gaule did not confront Hopkins or Stearne personally, but he interviewed parishioners and former suspects, and published a book of sermons on the subject. The sheer expense of witchfinding also took its toll on the witchfinders’ credibility: One problem was simply how to feed so many prisoners, and it led to the appointment of an officer to collect bread-money…. The crowd that had enjoyed the executions of John Lowes and the others soon found themselves paying for the privilege, and forced to reconsider the wisdom of witch-hunting in that light. Gaskill’s archival research includes the discovery that a venison dinner likely for the witchfinders in Ipswich “cost an enormous sum: £17.35”. Influenced by Gaule, the Norfolk Assizes of 1647 saw Hopkins and Sterne challenged on their methods and fees, after which Hopkins spent his last days writing a self-justification, a tract “weighed down with blithe evasion, hamfisted wit, and mealy-mouthed qualification”. Stearne also wrote a defence, but retreated into private life. Gaskill’s book is an exhaustive account, at times repetitive and dense in its descriptions of (often bizarre) allegations and charges. However, the measured tone is quietly devastating, and the book’s “English tragedy” subtitle foregrounds the human cost. As such, the book is a fitting memorial to the victims. One interesting aside concerns “elaborate fantasies” published in a 1976 book called Matthew Hopkins: Witch Finder General, by Richard Deacon. This book claimed that Hopkins had links to royalist spy-rings and the astrologer William Lilly, based on a manuscript that “no historian has ever seen” and which is widely regarded as a hoax. Although Gaskill doesn’t mentioned it, “Deacon” was in fact a sometime Sunday Times colleague of Ian Fleming and popular historian named Donald McCormick, whose wide-ranging oeuvre (with many works focusing on espionage) is littered with fabrications and hoaxes. ...more |
|
|
Sep 22, 2026 12:39AM
· like
· see review ·
preview book
See a Problem?
We’d love your help.
Let us know what’s wrong with this preview of
Witchfinders by Malcolm Gaskill.
Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Not the book you’re looking for?
Preview — Witchfinders by Malcolm Gaskill |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book it was amazing
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
The year 1935 was a challenging time to be setting up business as a London publisher, and the difficulties and pitfalls were highlighted by news that the firm of Martin Secker was in trouble and looking for a new owner despite being a “literary sensa
The year 1935 was a challenging time to be setting up business as a London publisher, and the difficulties and pitfalls were highlighted by news that the firm of Martin Secker was in trouble and looking for a new owner despite being a “literary sensation” handling the likes of Compton Mackenzie, Thomas Mann and D.H. Lawrence. However, for Fredric Warburg, who had “blundered” into publishing and knew no other profession, Secker’s sale offered an opportunity to get back in the game after being fired from Routledge. This lively and sardonic memoir covers Warburg’s life and career into the early years of the Second World War, by which time the firm of Secker & Warburg was publishing authors such as George Orwell, H.G. Wells and C.L.R. James, and more generally was recognised as an anti-communist left alternative to Gollancz. Despite the famous surname, members of the banking dynasty were only distant relatives, although Warburg’s London family was reasonably well-to-do. His secondary education was at Westminster School, and while he was there it became normal to read in the school magazine that boys who had graduated just a few years before were now dead. At 18 years old in 1917, he was told he had won a university scholarship, but he was also aware that “the two most brilliant men of the year senior to me” had also won scholarships but had been killed in action before being able to make use of them. Warburg was posted to the Royal Garrison Artillery, seeing action in Ypres. After the war he entered Oxford, starting in chemistry but transferring (to his leisured father’s disquiet) to classics and philosophy. Graduation was followed by “drift” as Warburg considered what civilian career to follow: banking was suggested, but “seemed ridiculous” and “unsuited to the philosopher I foolishly imagined myself to be”. Instead, he found himself “blundering into publishing” through his sister’s husband, a relative of Arthur Ellis Franklin who was working at Routledge, where Franklin was a director. Warburg was dispatched to a job interview at the home of William Stallybrass, Routledge’s legendary managing director. Recognising he was in the presence of “a master of his craft”, Warburg behaved “with reasonable humility” and was offered an apprenticeship. This involved signing a parchment indenture (“possibly the last ever to be signed by a still active publisher”), and a portrait photograph of Stallybrass in the book is captioned “the author’s Master”. The description reflects the formality of the arrangement but also Warburg’s respect and affection for his industrious and sympathetic mentor, “old enough to be my grandfather”, a man who during “the long span of his life must have done as much as any man of his time for the advancement of reading, the enhancement of scholarship and the practice of bibliography.” Warburg describes numerous visitors to the company premises in Carter Lane: Bronislaw Malinowski, who had become a Routledge author because Stallybrass was able to receive him on a Saturday; D. S Mirsky (“one of the few authors who ever expressed his doubts about the commercial success of his books”); Hugh Dalton, then known only as an LSE lecturer; H. W. Newinson, who had first exposed the Belgian atrocities in Congo; Montague Summers (“torn to pieces by the reviewers”, but with “a big sale none the less”); and C. K. Ogden, an “eccentric” and “mysterious” figure who was editor of the International Library of Psychology, Philosophy and Scientific Method (published by Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., then a separate company but under the control of Routledge). Ogden “persuaded with case and celerity most of the greatest academic minds of the period to contribute”, starting with G.E. Moore and in due course Ludwig Wittgenstein, Bertrand Russell, Alfred Adler, G. C. Jung and others. The “vast U.S. market” came into Warburg’s view via John Maccrae of E.P. Dutton, “no scholar-publisher, like my revered master, but a gambler on the big scale”. A painting of Maccrae is reproduced under the photograph of Stallybrass, presumably to emphasise the contrast. Warburg’s own idea was a series of translations, called the Broadway Translations – Stallybrass was supportive, although more cautious about the risk of an obscenity action arising from unexpurgated passages. Warburg’s most significant encounter while at Routledge was when a young woman asked for an interview in the hope that he would provide her with a recommendation for a bookseller’s licence from the Publishers Association, which was required for her to receive the book stock at publishers’ discount prices. To his annoyance, she turned up late, and when she eventually appeared he agreed to give “this beautiful if lunatic girl” what she wanted more out of pity than anything. At the same time, Warburg’s marriage was under stress (his wife’s name May Holt is not mentioned anywhere in the book), and he was having therapy with J.C. Flugel (author of The Psychology of Clothes). The “girl” was an intelligent and acerbic young widow named Pamela de Bayou, and Warburg soon realised he was in love with her. They set up home together, but even after his wife divorced him she resisted marriage until she became pregnant – their only child died shortly after birth. Pamela’s advice and admonitions fired Warburg’s ambition and confidence and guided his decision making, and much of the memoir is a tribute to her personality and influence. The collapse of Warburg’s first marriage coincided with Stallybrass’ death, and Warburg found himself increasingly at odds with his successors – leading eventually to his being fired. His successful bid for Secker was in partnership with a new acquaintance named Roger Senhouse, a former assistant to Lytton Strachey (Warburg is discreet here) who had more recently “been employed at Hay’s Wharf in the London docks on the mysteries of a great import-export firm”. Warburg appears to have been exasperated by some of Senhouse’s notions – such as his initial reluctance to publish people he knew personally, despite his literary connections – but despite their different characters they were able to work together. It was Senhouse who found company offices at 22 Essex Street, premises which for Warburg “had a ramshackle charm much in keeping with the firm that was to occupy them”. Pamela was not the only supportive woman in Warburg’s life: his spinster aunt Agnes Warburg got Secker & Warburg out of a tight spot twice with cash injections, and there was also Tanya Benckendorff, ostensibly the company typist but actually a tireless assistant whose literary connections proved very useful – in particular, her mother, Moura Budberg, enjoyed “close friendship” (more discretion here) with H.G. Wells, and Tanya smoothed the way for Warburg’s approach to the “great writer”. Sadly, Warburg eventually fired Benckendorff over some misplaced documents, a decision about which he writes contritely. Secker & Warburg’s financial prospects were precarious, although one work that Warburg and Senrose inherited from Secker proved to be a bestseller: a translation of Gabriel Chevallier’s satirical novel Clochemerle. Thomas Mann also gave the firm prestige. However, Secker & Warburg’s non-fiction list is what gave the company its identity. Warburg does not belabour his political views, and there are no accounts of youthful activism despite some resentments. As a (secular) Jew, though, he was obviously particularly alert to the dangers of fascism, and Stalin’s willingness to do a deal with Hitler. Warburg notes three books on Spain and the Spanish Civil War. The first, by Edward Conze, was “merely a short preliminary study”; the second, by Warburg’s “old friend” John Langdon-Davis, was not a bestseller, but was a political “bombshell”. Behind the Spanish Barricades “had filled the Communists with joy” (the author also successfully sued the Tablet and the Catholic Herald for libel over allegations that he had condoned church burnings), and blandishments from “party emissaries” followed. Langdon-Davis arranged for Warburg to meet Palme Dutt, who confirmed to him the possibility of an alliance between Nazi Germany and Soviet Union (“at least for the honesty of Dutt’s answer I have always been grateful”). The third book, as one would expect, was George Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia. By this time, Warburg “had embarked on a policy of anti-fascist publishing which paid no heed to communist susceptibilities”, epitomised by André Gide’s Back from the USSR. Through Fenner Brockway, Secker & Warburg became the publisher of Independent Labour Party authors. The most significant connection this brought was with Orwell, who was disillusioned with Victor Gollancz. Warburg describes the details of the spilt as “among the most dramatic of the secret publishing history of the 1930s”, although it’s not all that mysterious. Gollancz had added an annoying foreword to the The Road to Wigan Pier suggesting that Orwell had been playing “devil’s advocate” in some of what he wrote, and he was unwilling to support Orwell visiting the front in Spain. Orwell, writes Warburg, “may be regarded… as a touchstone for testing the relative standards of Gollancz's house and mine”. The natural sympathy between Orwell and Warburg comes through in passage reminiscent of Orwell’s prose, as he describes the malaise of the mid-1930s: Over their breakfast-tables normally sensible folk studied the prophecies of the numerous band of astrologers, eager to find balm for fears they dared not admit feeling. Vegetarianism and Yoga flourished. This was the age of the crank, and crankiness was the last refuge of those unwilling to face realities.This is perhaps a bit rich coming from the man who would later publish Lobsang Rampa. One question is why Warburg never wrote more himself for publication: the book demonstrates that he could have found fame as an author in his own right. ...more |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book liked it
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
In the early 1970s, the young British actor and up-and-coming film star James Fox famously threw over his career for evangelical work among university students in the north of England, initially supporting himself with a mundane day job as a salesman
In the early 1970s, the young British actor and up-and-coming film star James Fox famously threw over his career for evangelical work among university students in the north of England, initially supporting himself with a mundane day job as a salesman for a telephone sanitising service. Fox’s eccentric decision is usually portrayed as some sort of nervous breakdown triggered by the disturbing nature of the film Performance - in which he had recently starred with Mick Jagger – due to which he had become ensnared by some “cult” (I’m sure I’ve read somewhere –incorrectly – that it was the Plymouth Brethren). This, though, is something of a myth, which has persisted despite the rather more measured and nuanced account provided by the man himself now more than forty year ago. Comeback at first glance looks like a typical Hodder & Stoughton Christian memoir, and in the US the work was handled by the evangelical publisher Eerdmans. However, only the last few chapters are concerned with Fox’s religious conversion and what came after, and despite the book’s title his decision to return to acting is dealt with only at the very end. Readers who are interested primarily in an actor’s reminiscences can enjoy Fox’s account of his early life and career without fear of being “preached at”. The surname Fox, of course, is synonymous with acting and theatreland. James’ father Robin was a theatrical agent whose roster included family friend Robert Morley; in due course Robin and Morley went into the production business together, partnering with Robin’s secretary Ros Chatto (the since much-reported intimacy between Robin and Chatto is not mentioned, perhaps because Chatto was still alive at the time). Two of Robin’s sons became actors, while the third (who died recently) was a theatrical producer, and the next generation has produced a whole crop of household names. Fox had a couple of small roles in films as a child, but his parents were less than enthusiastic about his decision to take things further after schooling at Harrow by attending drama school in London – Fox writes that they were “resigned” to their son’s ambition. After a spell of national service in Kenya, Fox took a day job at Fortnum’s and then Marks & Spencer (his parents with friendly with the Sieffs) before Tony Richardson cast him in a small role in The Loneliness of the Long-Distance Runner (this was long before Richardson became James’s brother’s father-in-law). After some TV work (initially as “William Fox” – “James” is his middle name), Fox’s big break came with The Servant, opposite Dirk Bogarde. His career to took him to Hollywood, where he befriended Roget Vadim and Jane Fonda, and then Rome. Fox’s conversion to Christianity came at the end of the 1960s, while he was staying in a hotel in Blackpool over Christmas during a theatrical production of Doctor in the House. In the breakfast room, he met a man named Bernie Marks, who engaged with him in discussions about the Bible. Marks found a receptive listener, but only in part because of Performance: while in Rome, Fox had already written in his diary about “the wasteful, evil life into which I have let myself fall”. The role of Performance was “to turn me from drugs as a means of self-discovery and spiritual discovery and from the free and uninhibited use of sex as a means of seeking permanent happiness”. He had already bought a New Testament six months before meeting Marks. Marks was involved with an American organisation called the Navigators, and Fox went on to meet with American missionaries from the group in Manchester. At one point, he writes, he found himself “drawn into some teaching to do with certain experiences and gifts of the Holy Spirit”, but the comment is enigmatic and he also writes of building relationships with mainstream Anglican evangelicals at St Helen’s Church in Bishopsgate, where Rev Dick Lucas was the vicar. Fox is self-critical about some of his actions shortly after converting: he accuses himself of writing an “insensitive” letter breaking off contact with a friend, and of an uncaring self-righteousness. Fox initially continued with theatre acting, but in Glasgow he was fired from a production after prioritising a Navigators conference over his work, and he then experienced the early death of his father from lung cancer. This brought about his decision to commit to Navigators work, supporting himself first as a telephone sanitiser salesman and then by working for an estate agency. However, fame is difficult to shake off, and Fox recalls one manager who was “incredulous” to have encountered him in business setting rather than on the screen. Fox returned to his profession (aside from a religious film) a decade later, not long before this book came out. He retained some scruples about his choice of roles, and he declined The French Lieutenant’s Woman on advice that he would give offence to Christians. However, he accepted the role of a gay character in a television play by Trevor Griffiths called Country, because he considered it a serious work. As a Christian actor, perhaps he also wanted to signal to friends like Bogarde (who provided the foreword to this book) that he was no anti-gay bigot (there’s also a non-judgemental account of some schoolboy homosexual experiences). While at drama school Fox began a relationship with Sarah Miles, and he later had a girlfriend named only as “Amanda”. Through his Christian work he met Mary Piper, a former theatre nurse at St Thomas’s Hospital in London. They married, and a photo in the book shows them with their four children – one of whom these days is notorious as a far-right activist with belligerent Christian nationalist views far removed from his father’s evangelicalism. ...more |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book really liked it
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
The supposed identification of Count Dracula with the fifteenth-century Wallachian ruler Vlad III Țepeș (“The Impaler”) is today so embedded in popular culture that it is perhaps surprising to learn that there is some debate over the matter. This is
The supposed identification of Count Dracula with the fifteenth-century Wallachian ruler Vlad III Țepeș (“The Impaler”) is today so embedded in popular culture that it is perhaps surprising to learn that there is some debate over the matter. This is despite hints dropped by the Count himself as recorded by his reluctant and bewildered houseguest Jonathan Harker, as well as Abraham Van Helsing’s assertion that “he must, indeed, have been that Voivode Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river on the very frontier of Turkey-land.” As explained by Kim Newman in his foreword to this translation of a Turkish account of Dracula, “literary and film Draculas” of recent decades that reference Vlad owe a great deal to a 1972 study called In Search of Dracula, by Radu Florescu and Raymond T. McNally; however, Newman describes their work as “this by-no-means-uncontentious book”, while Leslie Klinger’s New Annotated Dracula (reviewed here), refers to its “erroneous theory”. In contrast, the Turkish Dracula story presented here, first published in 1928, is unambiguous. The title Dracula in Istanbul is borrowed from a 1953 film adaptation (the first to show the Count crawling down the outside of his castle), but when the book came out it was called Kazıklı Voyvoda, or The Impaling Voivode. The text records Resuhî Bey, a Sufi scientist strongly reminiscent of Van Helsing, immediately recognising the vampire as “responsible for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people, and tens of thousands of Turks, near the Danube River”, and in his pep talk to his band of vampire-hunters he recounts old stories of Vlad’s atrocities and violations of the rules of embassy. While Dracula in London was an exotic foreign aristocrat, in Istanbul he was an ancient national enemy whose defeat is a matter of patriotic imperative as much as public safety and private justice. Unlike Van Helsing, Resuhî was able to rely on local knowledge in the battle against the vampire. As recorded by his old student Afif Bey (a counterpart to John Seward, although without Seward’s drug habit), Resuhî’s father was from Of, and Resuhî grew up hearing his cousins’ “witch stories”. In Turkish terms, Resuhî tells Afif, Count Dracula is a “Cadı” (witch) or “Hortlak” (ghoul), words Afif would have known had he “dealt with the stories (folklore) of Trabzon and its surrounding areas, or even had spoken with people who came from the Rumeli and Skopje areas”. In such places there were societies called “cadıcı” and “hortlakçi” to fight against such malign supernatural entities. According to Ali Riza Seyfioğlu, Kazıklı Voyvoda was assembled from documents “wrapped in old newspaper” that he found abandoned on a Bosphorus ferry. The English-language translation is presented by the American publisher as an “unauthorized version” of Stoker’s novel and as “bootlegged”, but perhaps the 1920s setting allows us to see it (unlike the Icelandic version reviewed here) instead as a sequel: “Failed in London, Try Istanbul”. For some reason, however, Dracula found himself doomed to act out a variation of the scenario he went through in London a couple of decades before (and perhaps before that in Wisborg), with uncannily close Turkish equivalents of all the main antagonists he had faced in England. The 1953 film, directed by Mehmet Muhtar, is the focus of an afterword by Iain Robert Smith, following which some movie stills are reproduced. ...more |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book really liked it
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
Publishers are occasionally shamed into withdrawing fabricated “misery memoirs”, but this is never likely to happen to the works of genre pioneer Beatrice Sparks, who between 1971 and 2005 produced a stream of “edited diaries” and interview material
Publishers are occasionally shamed into withdrawing fabricated “misery memoirs”, but this is never likely to happen to the works of genre pioneer Beatrice Sparks, who between 1971 and 2005 produced a stream of “edited diaries” and interview material that supposedly revealed the inner lives of troubled and tragic American teens. Sparks was denounced as a fraud long before Emerson’s book-length treatment, but publishing executives apparently remain unconcerned about the reputational risk of continuing to make money off a wretched oeuvre that falsely claims the authority of personal experience: a collected edition branded as a series of “Anonymous Diaries” is currently available from Simon & Schuster under its “Books for Young Readers” imprint, while one edition of Spark’s first success and most famous work, Go Ask Alice, is sold by Penguin Random House through its “Vintage Classics” imprint. Meanwhile, Kindle editions in the UK are handled by HarperCollins e-books. The ethical issue has largely been resolved as far it can be by fudging over whether the books should be categorised as “non-fiction” or “fiction”, although the fabulations extend to Sparks’s self-presentation as a credentialed psychologist and to endorsements from non-existent medical professionals with stereotypically American Jewish names. And even if you take the most indulgent view of “artistic license”, nothing can excuse her 1979 Jay’s Journal, which took a genuine document entrusted to her by the bereaved mother of a depressive teen who had died by suicide and turned it into a salacious story of Satanic ritual and demonic encounter – subjects that had nothing to do with the circumstances. Names and details were changed, but only barely, and “Jay” was quickly identified as Alden Barrett of Pleasant Grove, Utah, very close to Sparks’s home in Provo (a city that, according to Emerson, “leads the nation in white-collar crime”, particularly “affinity fraud”). Sparks was a Mormon housewife in her fifties who had done some jobbing writing over the years when she hit on the potential of jumping on moral panic bandwagons. The protagonist of Go Ask Alice is a drug addict, although the drug in question was not, as one might expect, heroin or cocaine or even marijuana, but rather LSD. This was perfect for pitching to Art Linkletter, who blamed LSD for his daughter’s suicide. Sparks had a line to Linkletter through a previous writing gig as part of a team churning out motivational essays that would then be recorded by Linkletter onto vinyl for sale through a multi-level marketing scheme, and through Linkletter’s son Jack she got a contract from Prentice Hall. To her chagrin, however, the book deal meant that the work would be credited to “Anonymous”. Go Ask Alice was a sensation that spawned a TV movie featuring Andy Griffith and William Shatner; her follow-up VOICES proved a dud, but Alice gave her credibility when she approached Alden Barrett’s mother. Emerson keeps referencing to a minimum, and the literary tone is informal and conversational (the author is successful pocaster), even novelistic in places. The author is interested not just in Sparks’s life and works, but also in wider events that contributed to her rise (she eventually reached the National Book Awards). The narrative thus follows some odd twists and turns, including imaginative reconstructions of Albert Hofmann discovering LSD in 1943, and of Richard Nixon formulating his “War on Drugs”. One of Sparks’s early writing jobs brought Sparks into contact with the cartoonist Joseph Barbera; we not just told that Barbera established a line of comic books, but also what was likely going through his head when he decided to do so. This approach does mean, though, that Aldren Barrett’s short life gets the in-depth and sympathetic treatment he deserved. The Satanic Panic, of course, was/is a multi-stranded phenomenon, even if a writer confines themselves just to the USA (Sparks made an appearance in London in 1981, although no details seem to be available beyond a press photograph) there is a great deal of material to sift through. Emerson takes an impressionistic approach, briefly name-checking the likes of the McMartin Preschool, Michelle Remembers, and the career of Ken Lanning. As a comparator to Sparks, Emerson introduces the notorious Lauren Stratford, described holding forth on Oprah as “a kind of horseshit savant, lying about everything you could imagine” (I was sorry not to see a reference here to the famous exposure of Stratford in the evangelical Cornerstone magazine). Gregory Reid, a pastor who championed Stratford, credits Jay’s Journal with allowing his own repressed memories of abuse to resurface. In the last part of the book, Emerson describes how Sparks’s “psychologist” persona was shaped and how experiences with teens at Brigham Young University fed into Go Ask Alice (although for privacy reasons details are changed). He also describes his own visit to Pleasant Grove and to Alden Barrett’s former home. ...more |
|
|
Jun 08, 2026 07:46AM
· like
· see review ·
preview book
See a Problem?
We’d love your help.
Let us know what’s wrong with this preview of
Unmask Alice by Rick Emerson.
Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Not the book you’re looking for?
Preview — Unmask Alice by Rick Emerson |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book it was amazing
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
There are only two Jameses who are generally known to the educated public, and even then many people who read (or watch adaptations of) Henry James don’t know that his brother was the famous philosopher and psychologist William James, while students
There are only two Jameses who are generally known to the educated public, and even then many people who read (or watch adaptations of) Henry James don’t know that his brother was the famous philosopher and psychologist William James, while students who are assigned The Varieties of Religious Experience or some other work of William may not be made aware that he was the sibling of the famous literary writer. Their sister Alice, debilitated for much of her life by illness, has some posthumous fame due to her published diaries, but there were also two younger brothers, Garth and Robertson, who unlike their celebrated older brothers saw action in the Civil War. And Henry James was himself more properly “Henry James Jr” until his writings eclipsed those of his Swedenborg-inspired theologian father, a liberal-minded patriarch whose attitudes towards life were a reaction against his own father, a prosperous merchant and local worthy referred to by Lewis as “William James of Albany” to distinguish him from his grandson. The Jameses synthesises the lives of all seven individuals, along with details about their relatives, spouses and even to some extent their in-laws (Alice’s domestic partner Katharine Loring also gets her due). Henry James Sr was one of eight children borne by Catharine Barber James (William James of Albany’s third wife, following two early bereavements), and his wife Mary Robertson Walsh had sister, Catherine, who was an important presence in the life of the third generation as “Aunt Kate” (although mentioned only briefly, Henry also had a sister, Ellen, who married the son of Martin Van Buren). Aunt Kate makes it onto the cover of the book, as does Alice Howe Gibbens, who married William James. Lewis’s interest in in-laws even extends to a short appendix about the “strange death” by suicide of Alice Gibben’s father Daniel, who got caught up in a Reconstruction-era corruption scandal. Lewis’s task required the assimilation of a huge amount of material, including a wealth of family papers both in archives and in private hands, as well as familiarity with a variety of subjects: readers interested primarily in intellectual and literary themes are rewarded with judicious summaries and analyses of Wlliam’s and Henry’s writings, but they may find material about the younger brothers and the Civil War a bit of sidetrack – although the fact of having had two younger siblings who had seen warfare while they had not had some lasting impact on Henry and James. Lewis’ account of their military exploits is also lively, perhaps enhanced by Lewis’s own experience as a veteran of World War II. Alice James’s ailments are a way into the world of nineteenth-century medicine – Lewis does not speculate as to what diagnoses such as “rheumatic gout” actually were, but the symptoms suggest some form of myalgic encephalomyelitis before her final breast cancer. Inevitably, there are some longeurs, such as William James’ interminably introspective (and indecisive) letters to his fiancée and wife (occasionally enlivened with flashes of barely euphemised sexual desire, or tactlessly frank appreciations of other women – particularly the young Pauline Goldmark). Although Henry Sr inherited just a fraction of his father’s immense wealth, he “is said to have murmured ‘leisured for life’” when a court finally confirmed his entitlement. His son Henry Jr is quoted as saying “we were never in a single case, I think, for two generations, guilty of a stroke of business”, although Lewis sees this as misleading, “for the phenomena of money and business agitated the Jamesian mind… to a degree which it is difficult, or even impossible, to match elsewhere in our literary and intellectual history” (by “our”, of course, Lewis is addressing his fellow American readers rather than compatriots of Charles Dickens). It also overlooks the younger brothers’ post-military business affairs, which were botched – perhaps Henry Jr meant “a stroke of successful business”. William and of course Henry Jr interacted with many currents of intellectual life on both sides of the Atlantic, but the “family narrative” angle means that the primary focus is on the ongoing family dialogue. Even Henry James’s famous friendship with Edith Wharton appears scattered over just a few pages, despite Lewis being the author of a comparably large (and prize-winnng) volume about her. Emerson is sporadic presence; William James studied under Louis Agassiz, and through Emerson he got to meet Herman Grimm (son of one of the brothers) and W.C. Dilthey in Germany. One interesting circle is William James’s association with a group of philosophers in Britain called the “Scratch Eight”, which along with James comprised the “intellectually elusive “ Shadworth Hodgson, Edmund Gurney, James Sully, Leslie Stephen and G. Croom Robertson, the editor of Mind. Gurney, with Henry Sidgwick, were founders of the Society of Psychical Research, a subject with which James became increasingly interested following the death of an infant son; James and his wife Alice were impressed by sessions with the Boston medium Leonora Piper. However, it is disappointing to get only a passing mention of Sigmund Freud, despite the day they spent together shortly before James’ death that is described in Gay’s biography of Freud (reviewed here). Henry James’ correspondence with H.G Wells is quoted, and an encounter with G.K. Chesterton in Rye in Sussex noted, but there is no mention of E.F. Benson. William and Henry’s habits of transatlantic peregrinations go back to childhood: their father seems to have been restless and frequently moved residence, and 1844 saw the family lease a property in Windsor for the summer: “it was called Frogmore Cottage”, Lewis mentions insouciantly, and although he describes the location he doesn’t seem aware of its fame in Britain or the fact that their landlady ultimately would have been the young Queen Victoria. It was here that Henry Snr suffered what he called (using a Swedenborgian term) a “vastation”, later described as “a perfectly insane and adject terror”, a malign presence “raying out from his fetid personality influences fatal to life”. Lewis attempts to interpret the “squatting horror” while observing that “one proceeds cautiously with such occult matters”. William James describes his own later experience of sudden hallucinatory “philosophic pessimism”, although attributed to a correspondent, in Varieties of Religious Experience. Henry James was also interested in what he calls “the visitable past”; in 1870s London he cultivated Anne Benson Proctor, who was full of memories of “Keats and Shelley, Byron and Coleridge and [Walter] Landor”; another Byronic encounter was in Italy with Contessa Gamba, whose husband was the nephew of Byron’s mistress Teresa Guiccioli and who possessed unpublished letters. Recounting the story, Henry was told in turn about one Captain Silsbee, who was said to have lodged with the elderly Claire Clairmont and her niece with the aim of getting hold of letters of Byron and Shelley – the story inspired James’s The Aspern Papers. The last part of the book is an appendix on the “later Jameses”. After such an extensive narrative of nearly 600 pages it is tempting to leave aside an extra essay of 40 pages (in smaller type, to boot!), but it is worth the time and is written in slightly more informal style – it is also here where the author notes his personal contact with some James descendants. William James had four surviving children, and the narrative includes details of their childhood experiences with their parents and “Uncle Henry”. One son, Harry (or Henry III), was a lawyer (and astute investor) who won a Pulitzer for his biography of Charles W. Eliot. A grandson of William James through another son was John Sumner Runnells James, who worked for CIA; this James was an addict and alcoholic, and his daughter recalls he and her step-mother destroying relics of William James’ expedition to Brazil with Louis Agassiz “amid much boozy merriment”. William James’s daughter Peggy, meanwhile, became a university confidant of Marianne Moore. Edward James, a son of Robertson James, offended Uncle Henry by publishing a criminal libel against the Prince of Wales. ...more |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book really liked it
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
In the mid-sixteenth century, a sensational three-volume work published in Venice by Tommaso Giunti transformed Europe's understanding of its place in the wider world. Delle navigationi et viaggi, or "Journeys and Navigations", with cartography by Gi
In the mid-sixteenth century, a sensational three-volume work published in Venice by Tommaso Giunti transformed Europe's understanding of its place in the wider world. Delle navigationi et viaggi, or "Journeys and Navigations", with cartography by Giacomo Gastaldi, brought together an array of travel accounts pertaining to Asia, Africa and the Americas, all translated into Italian and including classified material that had been "leaked" to the work's industrious but initially anonymous editor, a studious Venetian official named Giovambattista (or Giovanni Battista) Ramusio. This Earthly Globe tells the story of Ramusio's life and political times, along with some long digressive narrative retellings taken from some of his sources. Most of the explorers and travellers he drew on were near-contemporaries; one such was Antonio Pigafetta, a survivor of the Magellan expedition. Pigafetta's manuscript Diary was initially of interest European monarchs and the pope more for describing a new route to the Spice Islands than for the extraordinary feat of the first circumnavigation of the world, and Charles V kept his copy under lock and key - early plans to publish it in Venice fell through due to a printer's avarice and the appearance rival volume derived from interview material. Other travellers whose writings made their way into Ramusio's project include Cadamostro, who under the patronage of the Portuguese prince Henry the Navigator had explored West Africa a few decades previously; Hasan al-Wazzan, a captured Muslim diplomat from Fez who had been imprisoned in the Castel Sant’Angelo; a delegation sent by the King of Portugal to make contact with Prester John's descendants in Ethiopia; and Ludovico di Varthema, an Italian who had visited Mecca (disguised as a Muslim), India and the Spice Islands. For China, however, Ramusio relied primarily on rather older source: Marco Polo, famous but long dismissed as a fabulist until Ramusio tracked down an early manuscript copy owned by the Ghisi family. Ramusio and his father Paolo were intimates of the legendary Venetian publisher Aldus Manutis, who specialised in printing editions of Latin and Greek classical works, and the author speculates that a new edition of Strabo's Geography that Ramusio helped bring to fruition following Aldus's death was his "point of departure for a new geography that would take into account the extraordinary discoveries of his time". We are told more than is strictly necessary for the book’s main theme about how Ramusio helped to secure a manuscript of Pliny the Younger#s Letters for Aldus while on a diplomatic mission to France as an aide to Alvise Mocenigo ("whether they obtained them from the resident abbot or whether they secretly smuggled them out of the Abbaye de Saint-Victor with the help of some conniving friar is unclear"); similarly off the point, but interesting, are details of a visit that Aldus received Erasmus, and of how Ramusio's friend Pietro Bembo, at the time one of Aldus’s "star writers and editors", was prevented by the authorities from dedicating a novel to his lover Lucretia (Lucrezia) Borgia – Venice feared the reaction of her husband, the Duke of Ferrara. Di Robinant’s style is informal, but the digressive travel accounts mean that Ramusio himself sometimes disappears from view – and in the case of Marco Polo, who had been dead more than two hundred years before Ramusio’s project was conceived, there’s a sense of a familiar journey being retrod. There is postscript in which the author visits Ramusio’s villa, which by happy coincidence had been purchased by a geographer named Francesco Vallerani. ...more |
|
|
Mar 08, 2026 12:06PM
· like
· see review ·
preview book
See a Problem?
We’d love your help.
Let us know what’s wrong with this preview of
This Earthly Globe by Andrea di Robilant.
Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Not the book you’re looking for?
Preview — This Earthly Globe by Andrea di Robilant |
|
|
Richard Bartholomew
rated a book really liked it
|
Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Rate this book
Clear rating
|
|
As of 2025, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" is among the most popular songs played at funerals in the UK, and jokes from Monty Python's Life of Brian are embedded in the country's popular culture. Meanwhile, one of the film's creators, Micha
As of 2025, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" is among the most popular songs played at funerals in the UK, and jokes from Monty Python's Life of Brian are embedded in the country's popular culture. Meanwhile, one of the film's creators, Michael Palin, is widely regarded as one of television's most genial and sympathetic presenters, meeting all sorts of people as he criss-crosses the globe making travel programmes. This book, by contrast, recalls a time when "Monty Python" was a byword for controversy and offence. Monty Python: The Case Against is a short work, its double-column presentation broken up by reproductions of primary sources scattered through the pages: Hewison is an old friend of Palin since university days, and the publisher, Eyre Methuen, appears to have an extensive archive of legal materials and other correspondence relating to its responsibility for producing Python-related tie-in books. While Brian raised the spectre of Britain's then-archaic blasphemy laws, the books and records (the latter produced by Charisma Records) meant navigating issues relating to "copyright, libel and obscenity", and there were also corporate censorship battles: the higher echelons of the BBC were troubled by some of the material they were broadcasting (although they didn’t always understand it, on one occasion misinterpreting a severed arm in a sketch as a "big penis"), and the "mutilation" of their material in the US led to Pythons acting as litigants for a change. American law does not recognise "moral rights", but judges in New York were prepared to consider that cutting up their work might be financially damaging and that "to call the resulting programme 'Monty Python' might be a misdirection under the Lanham Act". The matter was settled, but the Pythons had "made a contribution to the new laws of the entertainment industry." On the issue of copyright, there was an early skirmish when a firm of ukulele tutors objected to the reproduction of some sheet music in a spoof advertisement; more serious was when a copyright clearance for "Annie's Song" on an LP was disputed on the grounds both that the permission had not been for a parody and that the new lyrics were defamatory of John Denver. A curiosity of obscenity law was that whereas a jury trial might be persuaded to throw out a prosecution case, the law also allowed the police simply to seize materials and ask a magistrate to authorise their destruction. The Pythons did bend when proportionate, agreeing to remove a passing sexual reference from a printed monologue to prevent a publishing schedule being derailed. The battle over Brian, of course, is the most celebrated controversy, and the title for Chapter 5 – "This Sick Enterprise" – is taken from a quote from the Nationwide Festival of Light, which overlapped with Mary Whitehouse’s National Viewers and Listeners Association. A few years previously, NVLA had successfully sued Gay News over a "blasphemous" poem, and the Pythons turned to the paper's barrister, John Mortimer, for advice. Given the litany of comdemnation from various clerics, it is interesting that Graham Chapman received a supportive hand-written letter from a canon of St George's, Windsor (from the acknowledgements identifiable as James Atherton Fisher), who based on his reading of the script and a tape of the dialogue took the view that, while the film may be offensive, it "is not meant to be blasphemous and that it is extracting the maximum comedy out of false religion… and out of all who use religion as a cover for their particular form of sin". The publisher of the tie-in book was also nervous until the film was cleared for release by the British Board of Film Censors (BBFC) as an "AA" without cuts; however, the printer still refused to handle it after taking advice from John Smyth, the barrister who had previously brought the case against Gay News (more recently, it has come to light that Smyth was a notorious flagellomanic obsessed with beating boys, and may have been responsible for a fatality in Africa – the discovery of the scandal led to the resignation of the Archbishop of Canterbury over his knowledge of Smyth's predilections). The final chapter deals with the furore around the release of the film, focusing on the USA and the UK but also surveying other countries. In Britain, local councils could censor what cinemas were allowed to show, creating a bizarrely haphazard approach: Hewison quotes James Ferman, the Secretary of the BBFC as describing West Yorkshire as "the most heavily-censored area in the English-speaking world – and that includes South Africa." The Pythons refused to allow a compromise where some cinemas offered to exhibit the film as an "X" certificate. Abroad, Norway worked around censorship by simply not giving certain lines Norwegian subtitles, which had minimal impact in a country where English is widely understood. As expected, this chapter also includes an account of the famous TV chat-show clash with Malcolm Muggeridge and Mervyn Stockwood. ...more |
|



















