View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
The Jura Affair by William Boyd (BBC R4)
My lit crit abilities, forgery nose and AE skills have been brought to the fore with this latest Book at Bedtime. William Boyd is one of Britain's foremost novelists and the book concerns a first edition of 1984 with an Orwell dedication on the title page and worth c. quarter of a million pounds.
The narrator is a would-be author writing 2084, a modern take on the Orwellian dystopia. She's on the tube and a courier accidentally drops the book, which she picks up but by then the courier has disappeared. This was my first objection. The narrator thinks this astonishing coincidence is a coincidence and I thought this a clumsy plot device on Boyd's part. I instantly assumed the book is a fake, and the 'accident' will turn out to be no such thing. Or let's hope not, we're only halfway through the book.
Later it transpires Yale has just purchased for a quarter million a similar 1984, similarly dedicated by Orwell personally. I instantly assume both books are fakes which means an Orwell fakes factory. The first dedicatee is found to have a cemetery headstone in Jura (where 1984 was written) so we know -- but we haven't been told yet -- where the fakes factory are getting their dedicatees from.
The book is quite entertaining but I have to say it is an enriching exercise being ahead of the audience (and, it may be, the author) due to my own training. I do have a small genuine coincidence to report. Aneurin Bevan (q.v.) plays a small part since he was Minister of Health at the time and tried to get some newly available penicillin from America to cure Orwell's tuberculosis. Unavailingly, and Orwell died on Jura in 1950.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Every time I see Digging for Britain in my TV programme guide, my mind reads 'Dogging for Britain'. I must tell Dame Alice this next time I see her. She will be vastly amused.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
Orwell died on Jura in 1950 |
He should have gone to the Jura (Switzerland).
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Ho ho. Who's a clever girl. (Who used to be a chalet girl in Switzerland, nudge, nudge?) Did those elaborate sanatoria work? I've often wondered. I suppose clear mountain (or island or south coast) air made it easier to breathe but it can't have cured the disease.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Boreades

In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
Richard Osman's House of Games, last night.
In the final "Answer Smash" round, as usual, join two things together.
Which Conservative MP resigned as Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in June 2021? |
and a picture of a Cockroach.
It made I larf.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
To be drummed out of one's chosen profession for having a quick smooch with one's secretary is something we have all suffered from time to time. But have you noticed? The secretary is never drummed out of hers. It's one law for them and another for us.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Boreades

In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
I didn't know you had a secretary.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
I used to be one. A temp typist for one of the big agencies, I forget which one. I learned a lot about a great many firms. And about sexism in the workplace.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
The Jura Affair (concluded) (Part One)
This came to an end last night in a reasonably exciting way and has been, all in all, a reasonably exciting book. From a professional point of view I was disappointed that Boyd did not explore something which only we here seem to realise.
When an artefact gets to a certain value it is worth forgers' while to start from scratch. |
Hence:
* A first edition of 1984 is worth, say, £5000
* A first edition with an authorial signature on the title page is worth, say, £250,000
* It is worth forging George Orwell's signature on a first edition of 1984
* It is even more worthwhile forging first edition 1984's, with or without signature.
In the book, Boyd is presuming the Jura forgery gang are getting hold of genuine first editions and forging signatures on them. I find this deeply unconvincing. I don't know what the 1984 First Edition market is like but I would have thought it would become quickly apparent that (a) someone was buying them up relatively wholesale and (b) identifiable unsigned First Editions were re-appearing with signatures on them.
There were however some rueful observations from people in the trade that nobody inspects 1984 First Editions -- or anything else in the antiquarian book trade -- with much care. You just sell them to gawping university libraries to be put under glass. Just as we have been saying for years.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
The Jura Affair (concluded) (Part Two)
There was a massive hole in the plot that was never explained. Or it was a plot contrivance of epic proportions. For the story to unfold the following is required:
1. An Orwell obsessive is sitting on a tube train
2. An Orwell forger happens to be sitting on the seat beside her
3. The OO and the OF get off at the same station
4. The OF accidentally allows a book worth £250,000 to fall out of his rucksack
5. The OO picks it up and hurries to call the OF's attention to his mishap
6. But in that brief interval the OF has disappeared
7. The OO has had ample opportunity to see what the OF looks like but mysteriously identifies Person A she meets on Jura as the OF when it turns out Person B she meets on Jura is the OF.
Now by any measure this is totally preposterous. The only reason the reader might not notice is that it takes place in the first few pages of the book but only become completely revealed several hundred pages later at the end.
But the weird thing is it would only take a bit more ingenuity to line up the elements in a way, not just more believable than a tube train encounter, but far more interesting as well. Somewhere inside the world of Orwell obsessives for instance.
Still, William Boyd makes more money out of his books than I do from mine, by a factor of a million-to-one, so who was right to rely on million-to-one contrivances?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
How to conduct an interview
The right way and the wrong way
Newsnight: Welcome to Newsnight, Ms [Lib Dem Health spokesperson].
There is an awkward silence. Interviewee realises she is supposed to thank Newsnight.
Interviewee: I'm happy to be here.
Newsnight: Surprised?
There is an awkward silence. Is she surprised to be on Newsight? Yes, a bit, but it seems fatuous to say so. She decides she is being asked whether she was surprised to hear about the latest NHS reforms.
Interviewee: Very much so.
Al-Jazeera: Welcome to Al-Jazeera, Ms [Lib Dem Health spokesperson]. Were you surprised to hear about the latest NHS reforms?
Interviewee: Very much so.
But then again Al-Jazeera has been in the news interviewing business a lot longer than the BBC.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Boreades

In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
Cross-threading this from the Politics thread.
Mick Harper wrote: | I thought if I accused both the police and the CPS of criminal conspiracy to pervert the course of justice I might at least get a dawn raid. But no, nothing. Honestly, the inefficiency of this country. |
For a couple of reasons.
1) On the precautionary principle, just in case Mr Harper is away for a while, assisting Surrey Constabulary and the CPS with their enquiries.
2) By example from the world of TV, there are safer ways of accusing Plod, CPS and all and sundry of doing naughty things. Call it a "novel" and backdate it to some era within our own living memory, but far enough back for the prime suspects to not be living anymore. The chosen back story, of people in authority doing naughty things, is actually irrelevant, as people in authority are always doing naughty things.
Exhibit #1 (m'lud) is "The Hour".
Freddie is approached by Ruth Elms, the daughter of a member of the House of Lords who had employed Freddie's mother. She asks him to look into the murder of Peter Darrall (Jamie Parker), a college professor whom she knew. Soon after, Freddie finds her dead in her hotel room, an apparent suicide. |
And so, with a trail of corpses leading to the government, its agencies, and a complicit and compliant BBC.
The back story (in this case) is Suez.
An alternative approach is to date it in the future.
e.g. the year is 2045.
A roguish UK Prime Minister called Benjy Jackson persuades a war-weary UK population to leave the United States of Europe. But is then caught doing dodgy deals, selling deadly weapons to an Eastern European country call Ucrinista, and stuffing the proceeds into a Cayman Island Trust Fund.
Or something equally unbelievable.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Somebody posted up a comment today which sounds as though he thinks I made the whole thing up anyway
Arbaz on Medium wrote: | The police and legal system dynamics feel disturbingly real, especially the way the CPS and Surrey CID maneuvered to get a conviction. Great read.... |
In general, I'm a great believer in the Sleeping Dogs theory of public life. They don't give a monkeys.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Boreades

In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper wrote: | Somebody posted up a comment today which sounds as though he thinks I made the whole thing up anyway. |
Your next "reveal" effort could be on a TV music presenter with a strange attraction to young children.
The DPP’s review into why the CPS did not prosecute Savile in 2009 began in October 2012. The report was prepared by Starmer’s Principal Legal Advisor Alison Levitt QC. Published in January 2013, the report said that prosecutions could have been possible in relation to three of the claims if police and lawyers had taken a different approach. It also concluded that the CPS had “no record at all” of the case, the file having been “destroyed” in 2010. |
Tut, tut, more careless record keeping?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|