Eh? Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

RAMSEY CAMPBELL » Discussion » Eh? « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 03:26 pm:   

"Presumably you think Ramsey Campbell is a better writer than Robert Aickman because he started writing horror stories fifteen years earlier?"

News to me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 03:35 pm:   

Eh?

Is sourgrapes back in business again? He's been quiet for a while. bliss
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 12.165.240.116
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 04:45 pm:   

Can't they both be good?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 207.61.175.43
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 04:46 pm:   

I believe this is in reference to the situation with Allyson and the BFA she won. I've been thinking a lot about his lately, but I keep holding my tongue because I don't want to be misunderstood, but maybe I ought to just say it so I can finally get is out there.

The reason for my hesitance is the likely confusion of what I'm saying -- a general statement --with the specific incident -- Allyson's win. I'm not going to talk about Allyson, though I'm going to talk about a situation that is very much like hers. But, again, let me make clear I'm not talking about Allyson's specific situation. The merits of "Bull Running for Girls" is not part of this. Rather, I'm going to talk about the way non-juried awards like the British Fantasy Awards and the Stokers work (to my knowledge).

It seems to me that anything awarded by a group that does not read all the nominations is horribly flawed, and no result can be treated as anything other than suspect. If an author does his or her job -- promote his or her work to the best of his or her ability -- the author gives him/herself an unfair advantage. Let me stress: this isn't the author's fault, rather the fault of the system in place. After all, if one author can get a book into the hands of 100 voters, and another can only get a book in the hands of 10, the first author has a better chance at winning the award. The votes of the Stokers, for instance, aren't asked to read all the material. Instead, they must base there vote on the books they've procured on their own. If the voter has not procured "book X" then how can it be voted for? If, as a voter, I only own three of the nominated 5 books, how can I in good conscience vote for two I don't own? And this doesn't even take into account whether I've read those three or not. An author who does his or her job right and promotes the work, or a publisher who does the same, gets that book into enough hands that the voter might say: "Well, I only read three books, but I own this fourth, so I'll vote for it as well."

The problem is this: regardless of the quality of that promoted book, because of the nature of the award -- inherently flawed -- any product of the process can be called into question. Stephen Jones won a BFA for Best New Horror, but did it win because it was the best anthology, or because most members who voted had a copy? There's no way to be sure.

I know juried awards have their own issues -- primarily bias, I'd think -- but it just seems the safer way of doing this. At least then you have a group who has read all the books and can then make a judgement among them.

These are my thoughts, anyway. I'm happy to discuss them... as long as they aren't misconstrued as a comment on whether Allyson should have won or not, because they aren't about Allyson at all; merely spawned by her predicament.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 04:53 pm:   

>>>I know juried awards have their own issues -- primarily bias, I'd think -- but it just seems the safer way of doing this. At least then you have a group who has read all the books and can then make a judgement among them.

Well, is it realistically possible for any juror to read every likely candidate each year? I very much doubt it. They probably manage far more than the average voter in the alternative system, but they're still certain to miss out on a lot of good potential winners, surely - simply by the sheer impossibility of reading everything.

I'd say the problem lies with the medium: books take a bloody long time to read. Nobody could ever get through enough to offer a completely fair judgement.

Music and films, both less time consuming, perhaps suffer this problem to a lesser degree, each being more digestible within any timeframe.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.143.178.131
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:03 pm:   

I think the Clarke's have a system whereby the publishers submit their works to a jury who then create a shortlist of titles they will consider (how they do this I'm not sure) and then they read only those on the shortlist and pick the winners from that. That means they don't need to read all SF and F published that year, rather what they have selected for the shortlist.
I agree with Simon on the whole. I think the BFS awards do need a bit more structured. At least they're nowhere near as messy as the Eagle Awards which are an utter joke.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:08 pm:   

>>>I think the Clarke's have a system whereby the publishers submit their works to a jury who then create a shortlist of titles they will consider (how they do this I'm not sure) and then they read only those on the shortlist and pick the winners from that.

Well, other than reading them to assess worthiness, what other system can there be?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 213.219.8.243
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:11 pm:   

One could lick the pages to see which book tastes best.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:11 pm:   

Here's a question I can't personally answer, so I'd appreciate someone in the know helping me out: are music and film award processes are any more likely to produce worthy winners? At least in them there's a chance that all voters have managed to consume most of the candidates.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 89.242.178.204
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:15 pm:   

I think that the original comment by CB was in relation to Mark Samuels calling me a middle-aged newcomer who'd let my early success go to my head. I think it stoked up some longstanding issues between CB and MS, and allowed CB kick in again.

My fault, ultimately, for making a public criticism. Oops. Sorry, folks!

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:41 pm:   

The BFS system is where all the members are a jury deciding on the winner. Juries should see all the evidence. I said this in public a few years ago.

This is what I added as a 'comment' in September to my 'Bull-Running' real-time review here: http://weirdmonger.blog-city.com/bull_running_for_girls__by_allyson_bird.htm:-

"In answer to Mark Samuels (BFS member) and Johnny Mains (non-BFS Member) - who have gone out of their way to express their conviction that this book is an unworthy winner of the BFS Award for best collection - I would say that that is a moot point. I hope I have shown above that, although BULL RUNNING is imperfect (as I point out in various places in the review), the aftertaste and its resonating emotion outweigh the imperfections, given a proper study of the book. That is not to say that the other contenders for the prize (which, other than the King, I have also done real-time reviews for in the past) are not worthy winners, too. It's just that it's feasible that ALL of them are worthy winners and it was the voting that decided in the end, as it should."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:43 pm:   

Sorry that link doesn't work. Here it is again:
http://weirdmonger.blog-city.com/bull_running_for_girls__by_allyson_bird.htm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 05:52 pm:   

Where has this sprung up from again?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 06:00 pm:   

Mark Samuels blogged and linked to Simon Kurt Unsworth's blog. Simon blogged and then Chris Barker posted on Simon's blog and then on Horrorwatch.

Thanks Des. As always - I appreciate in the above what you said about BLOOD IN MADNESS RAN.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 207.61.175.43
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 06:49 pm:   

Assuming no one can read all the books (though I contend that a good deal of them can have their fates decided within the first few pages) perhaps a solution is one where the membership recommends, then the jurors read from that pool. Would that work?

Also, SKU, I started my message with the intention of commenting on why new writers winning awards might too be suspect, but I realised all I was doing was explaining the phenomenon rather than commenting on it, so it seemed pointless to add it.

I'd be happy to get a BFA of course (vote "Cold to the Touch" next year!) but like most awards they really don't mean that much. For some award-winners, it barely registers a blip in their sales.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 89.242.178.204
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 06:53 pm:   

I haven't managed to read CTTT yet but will of course vote for it as Simon will likely be the prettiest of the nominees.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 207.61.175.43
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 06:57 pm:   

That's the only criterion that counts, if you ask me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 07:01 pm:   

I've done a real time review of CTTT, too. :-)
I did not imagine its author being 'pretty'!
See below:
http://weirdmonger.blog-city.com/cold_to_the_touch__by_simon_strantzas.htm

This was my final word on the 'Bull-Running' matter here:
http://weirdmonger.blog-city.com/ellen_datlows_honourable_mentions.htm

Since then, I have simply noted that Allyson has had a story accepted by Ex Occidente and a story collection by Dark Regions.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 07:02 pm:   

>>>Assuming no one can read all the books (though I contend that a good deal of them can have their fates decided within the first few pages) perhaps a solution is one where the membership recommends, then the jurors read from that pool. Would that work?

Might be as close to a 'fair' system as we can get, but I still maintain that the length of time it takes to read a book is the real problem with annual awards. I don't think there's any really satisfactory way around that. Unless we employ readers in a full-time capacity to spend a few months reading everything until they're zapped (as happens with the Booker Prize judges - those guys and gals dream words on pages towards the end of the process).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joel (Joel)
Username: Joel

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 217.37.199.45
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 07:03 pm:   

Briefly – there's no point in stirring this up again – it's beyond debate that people will not vote for a book they have not bought and read. It's therefore true that decent sales figures are a precondition of winning a British Fantasy Award. However, having read a book, people also have to like it. This cannot be guaranteed by anything other than their experience of reading it. Where someone has put a lot of work into selling a book, that will objectively give it a head start – but unless the book is enjoyed, in the end that won't be the key factor. And attacking the collective taste of the BFS is a little pointless: we could all set up our own individual awards to celebrate our favourite books, but what would that be worth?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 07:06 pm:   

Hear Hear, Joel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 07:10 pm:   

At the WHC in March, I intend to buy Mark and Allyson a drink together. Sincerely.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 07:23 pm:   

>>>Briefly – there's no point in stirring this up again – it's beyond debate that people will not vote for a book they have not bought and read.

Well . . . it's well-documented that when many people are completing a form (or whatever) which has multiple categories, they fill in the ones they can - in this case, they vote for the books they've read - and, for the purposes of completion, make up the rest according to intuitive hunches.

(I'm not talking about the BFS, incidentally; I'm just referring to what I know about questionnaire oriented behaviour.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 12.165.240.116
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:09 pm:   

Saying that one work of art is "the best" in any medium, within any timeframe, is a fool's game anyway. The best at what? In what way?

Awards like these are meant to promote the industry: The Oscars, for instance, are meant to draw attention to Hollywood cinema; the Stokers are meant to promote literary horror (although they give awards for things non-literary, literary horror is clearly their main focus); the BFAs are meant to draw attention to literary horror, sf, and fantasy by British writers. That's all. The winners' names are given to the media, some of whom publish the results, providing a nice bit of publicity. Depending on the award, and the medium involved, the winners might find themselves in the pleasant situation of drawing more of a paycheck than usual, but that's about it.

Because of this, and because of the attention provided the award-winning work and its author, winning such an award is still an honor, to be sure. But to think that such a book (or film) is "the best" is pure hogwash. The methods of selection, then, don't matter: a shortlist is chosen, a winner is chosen, an author is honored. But more importantly, the industry gets publicity, and all who work within that industry benefit. Randomly chosen "winners" would do the same job. So what difference does it all make? It's nonsense. Why bother arguing about it?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 207.61.175.43
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:15 pm:   

I'd go so far as to say that when filling out the forms, they would start with the books they like, leave off the books they hated or don't own, and if there was still room include books that they were lukewarm on, rounding off with book bought but not read (giving them the benefit of the doubt). After all, if there's five boxes to fill, people want to give 5 answers unless explicitly told otherwise (which I don't recall the ballot doing... though I'm happy to admit I'm wrong).

So we're clear, again, I'm not saying the system has failed at any point. Rather, that because the potential is there, it gives ammunition to those who want to question its results.

But maybe my initial instinct was right and I shouldn't have bothered saying anything. It certainly seems the less controversial route in hindsight.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 207.61.175.43
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:24 pm:   

So what difference does it all make? It's nonsense. Why bother arguing about it?

Welcome to the internet, Chris.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 12.165.240.116
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:33 pm:   

>> Here's a question I can't personally answer, so I'd appreciate someone in the know helping me out: are music and film award processes are any more likely to produce worthy winners? At least in them there's a chance that all voters have managed to consume most of the candidates.

I don't know about music, but given the awards handed out at the Grammys each year, I'd say the selection process works very poorly indeed.

Re: movies, well, that's different. The Academy Awards are extending their "Best Picture" candidates this year from five to twelve, and I have no idea how this will affect things. That being said, the films chosen as "Best Picture" in recent years, are lackluster indeed. Because the "Best Picture" Oscar is the one that gets the most attention, Academy voters are usually very careful to select a winner that is (a) at least somewhat critically acclaimed and (b) (more importantly) best represents the aims, interests, and heritage of Hollywood and The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. By (b) I mean: films with a liberal viewpoint; films (often with historical settings) that have as as large a canvas as possible; films with serious intent (comedies rarely win), often with schmaltzy or saccharine resolutions; films that are ambitious but not too avant-garde in approach: In other words, the Academy usually selects the film from the shortlist that would best serve as an "ambassador" to the world, the one best capable of representing the interests and ideals of Hollywood outside the US.

Films that fulfil these criteria almost always win out over more critically acclaimed fare. This is why "Forrest Gump" beats "Pulp Fiction," why "Crash" beats "Brokeback Mountain," why "The English Patient" beats "Fargo." (That being said, I have no idea why "Shakespeare in Love" beat "Saving Private Ryan." But there you go. The exception that proves the rule.)

Additionally, because the Academy's interests lie chiefly in American-made, big-budget films, Best Picture Oscars rarely go to independent films. And to limit the influence of non-American films, the rules and contraints for nominating foreign-language are as abstruse and complex as possible.

The end result is that you usually get a "Best Picture" that isn't great, but isn't too offensive, either. As I said in my earlier post, though: To call such a film (or any film) the "best" is pure hogwash.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 12.165.240.116
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:35 pm:   

>> Welcome to the internet, Chris.

The great thing about the Internet is its levelling effect; online all opinions are equally worthless.
-- Grant Morrison
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chris_morris (Chris_morris)
Username: Chris_morris

Registered: 04-2008
Posted From: 12.165.240.116
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 08:38 pm:   

Sorry, I should have looked this up first, but:

The Academy Awards nominees for Best Picture are increasing this year from five to ten, not, as I said earlier, five to twelve.

I am shamed. I regret the error.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.58.46
Posted on Monday, December 21, 2009 - 10:21 pm:   

I don't think the Oscars deserves much in the way of anything since they have a separate category for 'foreign films'. Then again, the Caesars celebrate the best in French, usually, so maybe it's a moot point.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 08:14 am:   

For the record, I thought the quote with which I began this thread was rather funny, like so many from its source.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 11:47 am:   

The message below from me on the MS blog has not been published by the moderator. It must be an oversight as a later message has now been published.

=====================================
des Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

December 21, 2009 at 11:04 pm
In answer to Mark Samuels and Johnny Mains – who have gone out of their way to express their conviction that BRFG is an unworthy winner of the BFS Award for best collection – I would say that that is a moot point. I hope I have shown in my earlier review that, although BRFG is imperfect (as I point out in various places in the review), the aftertaste and its resonating emotion outweigh the imperfections, given a proper study of the book. That is not to say that the other contenders for the prize (for which, other than the King, I have also done reviews) are not worthy winners, too. It’s just that it’s feasible that ALL of them are worthy winners and it was the voting that decided in the end, as it should.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 12:10 pm:   

Absolutely, Des. Well said.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Barbara Roden (Nebuly)
Username: Nebuly

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 142.179.13.171
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 05:54 pm:   

Gary Fry wrote: "Well, is it realistically possible for any juror to read every likely candidate each year? I very much doubt it. They probably manage far more than the average voter in the alternative system, but they're still certain to miss out on a lot of good potential winners, surely - simply by the sheer impossibility of reading everything.

I'd say the problem lies with the medium: books take a bloody long time to read. Nobody could ever get through enough to offer a completely fair judgement."

I have to disagree somewhat, Gary. The year I served as a World Fantasy Awards judge - 2006, reading books published in 2005 - I counted more than 300 books that came into the house (novels, collections, and anthologies), not to mention all the chapbooks, magazines, journals, and a box of printouts of material that had appeared online. I began reading in mid-January, when the first books started hitting, and didn't finish until the end of June.

Did we (by which I mean myself and the other four judges) receive EVERY SINGLE BOOK that could have been considered? No. This despite our best efforts to alert the committee to the existence of books we knew we should see and which hadn't been sent. (For example, Jeff Vandermeer spotted Peter Raftos's THE STONE SHIP while in Australia, told the rest of us about it, and the committee got us copies.) Small press publishers who might not otherwise have sent us books were approached, and many came through. On the other hand, some publishers were (we know) approached repeatedly, and still declined to send books (Fedogan and Bremer was one such). We can't consider what doesn't get sent. Same goes in spades for short stories, of which we read hundreds. Did we miss some? Undoubtedly. Does that matter? Of course. But considering the sheer quantity of material we DID read, I think we can say in all honesty that we did our best to make an objective decision based on our extensive reading of what was published in the field in 2005.

Did I read every single thing that was sent to me? No. I did read every collection and antho cover to cover, but when it came to novels, it was fairly obvious early on that not every one needed to be read (a World Fantasy Award winning novel is unlikely to be found in a box containing 20 Leisure mass market paperbacks, 18 of which feature sexy vampires and werewolves battling it out on the streets of LA, or sexy female demon hunters involved with sexy vampires). In the matter of short stories: well, once you've read a few that have struck you as good enough to go on a shortlist, it becomes obvious when others don't hit this standard.

Did we miss a few things? Certainly. Did we miss "a lot". I honestly don't think so. And I think the system works, inasmuch as you have a small group of people who are knowledgeable about the genre reading the largest possible representation of the genre from a given year, and making an assessment based on that.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Matthew_fell (Matthew_fell)
Username: Matthew_fell

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 142.179.13.171
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 06:58 pm:   

To add to what Barbara wrote, the World Fantasy Award nominations also include the high-flyer from the Readers' ballot. So, it's possible that, should there be something the judges missed which the readers think is good, that something could still receive a nomination, and certainly get the judges to look it over in their final deliberations.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Jensen (Stevej)
Username: Stevej

Registered: 07-2009
Posted From: 82.0.77.233
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 07:29 pm:   

Remember all those (mostly groundless) accusations of rampant sexism in the genre? With those accusations in mind, let's just take a look at the latest round in the seemingly eternal battle between BRFG's admirers and detractors...

The battle is all very civil - to an extent - and each point is made by men who, despite their highly different views on Allyson Bird/BRFG, address each other by their forenames, lest anyone mistakenly believe that they are really hostile towards one another. Likewise, in a very blokey, common sense way, their mutual anger peters out into vague promises of 'sharing a pint' at the next convention...how noble, how macho; how refreshingly down to earth these recognised giants of literature are.

And yet, Allyson's book is explicitly or implicitly criticised as if it were the work of a child; and yet this award-winning book, written by a new writer and published by a relative newcomer, is ludicrously slated as if it were a piece of garbage promoted by the combined Satanic market forces of Simon Cowell and Max Clifford; and yet...virtually no-one bats an eye when, instead of keeping his opinion to himself, some superstar in his own mind describes Allyson's award as 'a f***ing travesty'. And then we're back to the 'all guys together' attitudes, as if it's all a merry jape, not to be taken seriously.

I guess these critics are right in one way: they can't be taken seriously, not when they consider Allyson Bird as a softer target than their fellow writers, and not when their oh-so-learned opinions are the equivalent of crude graffiti on a toilet wall.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Jensen (Stevej)
Username: Stevej

Registered: 07-2009
Posted From: 82.0.77.233
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 08:02 pm:   

Oh, and congratulations to those 'gentlemen' who are confirming, on a daily basis it seems,
every nauseating cliché about British horror writers. Look - they're even talking about a woman
as if she wasn't actually there, while they sup their 'real ale' and put the world to rights...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 08:45 pm:   

Steve, sorry, but I think you're missing the point a little here. I wasn't going to get into this debate again, but I think I have to now. Have a read of Simon's first post on this thread again - he DEFINITELY WASN'T trying to open up the debate about Ally's award again, just talking about the awards system generally.

The points made about the awards systen GENERALLY here are all fair enough in my opinion - there are pros and cons for BOTH ways of doing it, either readers/members voting or a panel of experts (or some mixture of both). I do believe the BFS thought through all these arguments previously and have decided, so far, to go with the readers/members voting system - but that might change at some point I guess.

Definitely nobody here now is talking about Ally as if she wasn't here.

And as for not batting an eyelid when Johnny Mains made his comment about the award, well, that's not true - we certainly did. That was what sparked the whole thing off if I remember correctly?

But sorry if I've misunderstood what you're saying here - I'll buy you a pint some time to make up for it!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Jensen (Stevej)
Username: Stevej

Registered: 07-2009
Posted From: 82.0.77.233
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 08:50 pm:   

Hi Caroline. :-)

Don't worry, I even confuse myself. I should have explained that I was referring to the latest fiasco at Mark Samuel's blog, not the RCMB.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:00 pm:   

their oh-so-learned opinions are the equivalent of crude graffiti on a toilet wall

Welcome to the internet: a toiler wall that spans the globe. I'm off for a dump.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:00 pm:   

their oh-so-learned opinions are the equivalent of crude graffiti on a toilet wall

Welcome to the internet: a toilet wall that spans the globe. I'm off for a dump.

(edited for spelling)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:19 pm:   

>>Hi Caroline. :-)

Don't worry, I even confuse myself. I should have explained that I was referring to the latest fiasco at Mark Samuel's blog, not the RCMB.<<

Hi again Steve - I should have said, we haven't seen you around here much lately. Been busy writing?

Anyway, no wonder I didn't understand your post - I haven't seen Mark Samuels blog (don't even know where it is), so no worries there. I'll still buy you a pint some time should our paths ever cross in "real life".
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 99.227.90.149
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:28 pm:   

Have a read of Simon's first post on this thread again - he DEFINITELY WASN'T trying to open up the debate about Ally's award again, just talking about the awards system generally.

Phwew! Thanks, Caroline. I was ringing my collar there a minute.

If I may make a quick point about Allyson's credentials: regardless of what some think, more than the BFS members who voted have spoken highly of the book (most obviously, Joe Lansdale) so even if you're one of the ones who didn't like it, you have to accept that others might. I don't necessarily agree with everything chosen for the "Year's Best" anthologies, but that doesn't mean my opinion is the right one and the editors are wrong. Rather, there's something that does click with me.

As someone said above I think -- the "best" is all subjective anyway.

Anyway, shut up about Allyson and start talking about awards, even though in hindsight I should have kept my mouth shut. It seems inappropriate to complain about an award in a place with winners of said award. It's basically saying "Joel, Ramsey, Allyson, etc. your award is a piece of shit" which (despite not being what I meant) is a bit of an asshole thing to do.

My apologies, all.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.147.146.19
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:32 pm:   

Steve - well said, mate. But let's be honest, it isn't just MS blog, and JM's comments, it's more than that.

Caroline - I'm afraid Steve was right first time, and no amount of backtracking excuses the ho hum attitude currently undertaken by some. Too many hopeful placement of stories in the future has perhaps, shall I say, restricted, people from coming to Ally's defence.

Mains and Samuels have every right to have opinions, and to think what they like. Of course they have. But Mains clearly sees himself the John Lydon of the genre. He believes that if people are offended by his use of language, than he makes a significant point about the offended. That he is merely wasting his time speaking down to a group of cronies and toddlers. If Mains is half the writer he believes himself to be, then the least he can do is show dislike and criticism in a manner that befits a writer of his 'stature'. Then again, what the fuck do I know. I'm obviously a cretin for daring to say anything.

Everybody here has said that award systems need refining, restructuring, whatever...but since when did such comments as hurled by Mains become productive or even fair.

I was told he was a good writer, but on this evidence who the fuck would want to read his work. Then again, he doesn't need imbeciles like me reading his work, does he?

If this is how the genre works, the SP, then who the hell can be bothered.

I joined up on RCMB for one reason. And that was because of Ramsey. I thought, naively it seems, that Ramsey was a representative of a larger group of people with similar values. I thought there would be a solidarity of sorts, sure there would be competition, but I thought since Ramsey could take the time out to help so many upcoming writers, that surely lesser known writers would at least be civil.

Guess that makes me the fool.

It's a fucking shame. This place used to be a great place to chat, but of lately it smacks of double standards and people covering their asses for fear of upsetting future editors and their like.

Well, fuck that. I'd rather have dignity and my priorities straight, than kiss ass to sell a story.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.147.146.19
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:45 pm:   

Oh, and before I forget. CB might be a pariah in the genre for all manner of reasons, and I'm in agreement that he probably deserves much of the derision, but how ironic that apart from Simon K (a gent and not afraid to say something), that CB nailed it on the head about having the cake and wanting to eat it, too.

(Yes, I'm aware he mentioned Ramsey as he usually does...but none of us take that seriously anymore...)

How strange that it took the professed enemy of so many to say what so many are afraid to say.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:56 pm:   

Er .. Frank .. the argument isn't here on the RCMB - it's on somebody's blog, just a few people "throwing rattles out of prams" and embarking on name-calling (yes, I couldn't resist temptation - I found the blog and took a look). The vast majority of people I've come across in the genre - either online or in "real life" - are just the kind of decent, honest folk you describe. If there are one or two who start slinging mud around, that doesn't tar everyone in the genre, surely?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 09:59 pm:   

My last post was in respect of your first post, Frank, by the way. I think I'm getting really confused here again - not sure what's going on at all ..
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 10:07 pm:   

Just wanted to say thank you for all the kind words and support some of you have shown. I don't expect everyone to like my work but it is clear that there are certain people with an agenda and an axe to grind...if they want to lower themselves to being outright offensive - so be it...it just reflects on them.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.147.146.19
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 10:09 pm:   

Caroline - it isn't directed at you. And I am well aware of what's going on. I know what blog, and what persons.

And I am talking about a number of people and not just two individuals.

It seems to be a case of staying silent, but emailing behind the scenes to keep one's hand in. That in itself is far worse than what Mains has said. He might be a c**t for the way he has conducted himself, but better to know your enemy, than have to smile politely in case you don't make the next important anthology.

These people know who they are.

PS: I guess it's about time for this thread to be moderated, isn't it.

PPS: And yes, there are a lot of decent and lovely people out in the SP, but it appears they are dwindling under the mass exodus of much larger groups such as 'cover thy own ass in case of failed placement of work'.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 10:25 pm:   

Frank - so you're not saying people HERE are "covering their own arses, etc"? It sounded for a horrible minute like you were saying there was a problem like that here on the RCMB.

Just ignore me, I'm confused. I guess I should keep up to date with all the slagging matches which are going on in various parts of the internet, but I really can't be bothered with it ..

On a funny note (well, it appeals to my juvenile sense of humour anyway), does anyone think World Horror Con is going to degenerate into one mass punch-up in Brighton next year?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 09:00 am:   

Barbara, above I said . . .

>>>Unless we employ readers in a full-time capacity to spend a few months reading everything until they're zapped (as happens with the Booker Prize judges - those guys and gals dream words on pages towards the end of the process).

From what you describe, it sounds like you did something close to this, so fair play to you. (Although Leisure publishes the likes of Gary Braunbeck, Jack Ketcham, T M Wright, Melanie Tem, Thomas Tessier, Tim Lebbon, and next year Ramsey Campbell, so your blanket dismissal of a box full of their titles would surprise me.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.157.25.162
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 09:55 am:   

I've just added this on the MS blog addressed to Johnny Mains:

...please read my review of BRFG some time. It’s of course not the last word on the book but just my detailed review (written before it won the award). But it goes into far more length than your ‘f…ing travesty’ or ‘paper bag’ – and if a book is worth having public arguments about, it’s worth more than throwaway lines, I feel.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 10:18 am:   

"Oh, and before I forget. CB might be a pariah in the genre for all manner of reasons, and I'm in agreement that he probably deserves much of the derision, but how ironic that apart from Simon K (a gent and not afraid to say something), that CB nailed it on the head about having the cake and wanting to eat it, too.

(Yes, I'm aware he mentioned Ramsey as he usually does...but none of us take that seriously anymore...)

How strange that it took the professed enemy of so many to say what so many are afraid to say."

I can only speak for myself here. I didn't say anything because I simply didn't know enough about this aspect of the situation to comment. I still don't.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stephen_theaker (Stephen_theaker)
Username: Stephen_theaker

Registered: 12-2009
Posted From: 62.30.117.235
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 10:55 am:   

Hi everyone - long time reader, first time poster!

I'm running the BFS awards this year, and was involved last year in making a lot of changes to them, and then later I updated the constitution to reflect those changes. I also set up the online voting for voting on the shortlist last year, and totted up the final scores.

One of the main changes to the awards last year was to add voting on the shortlist. Reading everything published in a year isn't practical for many people, but once it was narrowed down to a shortlist lots of people had a go at reading what they could. This seems to have been very popular, with voting levels on the shortlist about 50% higher than on the longlist. I think a shortlist encourages people to go out in search of books and stories more than a longlist, where it's impractical to do much more than vote for what you've already read.

The idea of having panels does come up quite often. I bought a batch of old newsletters on eBay last week and I was a bit surprised to find the BFS already tried it. In the March-April 1976 newsletter there's a letter from the vice president apologising for the poor quality of that year's winners: Moorcock's The Hollow Lands, The 2nd Book of Fritz Leiber, Savage Sword of Conan and Monty Python and the Holy Grail...

...which goes to show you can't always tell how well regarded things will be a few years down the line. Anyway, as a result of those "embarrassing" results, a panel system was introduced for the following year's awards. Not many people volunteered - barely enough to fill the panels. It obviously didn't stick, but unfortunately that's where my newsletters run out - it would be good to find out why and when it was dropped.

I don't really like the idea of introducing panels for the BFAs. My feeling is that we're a society, and voting for the awards is one of the things our members do together - it doesn't need very much more justification than that. Also, gathering panels and getting them to read all those books is a big thing to do, and as mentioned above it's something the World Fantasy Award already does. Finally, I think of our voters as effectively self-selecting panels anyway, now that we've introduced the shortlist voting. The people who already know what's what (or who have been prompted to hunt down the nominees) in each category step forward and vote.

However, one other change we made to the awards constitution this year was to say that our members have the final say on procedure, at the AGM. So if members want a particular change very badly, they just need to persuade other members.

On last year's voting forms, there wasn't much evidence of people ticking boxes for the sake of it. I don't deny the psychological pressure is there, but not many voting forms were returned with a vote in every category. Some people voted exclusively in the literary categories, others in the media ones.

Best magazine and best small press were among the most popular categories with voters, perhaps because you don't need to have read any particular book or story to vote in those categories.

Anyway, bit of a long first post, but thanks to Gary for letting me on board!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mick Curtis (Mick)
Username: Mick

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.176.126.207
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 10:59 am:   

I'm completely confused by all this - I've just read some bloggy stuff - who on earth is "Johnny Mains"? Or is that his real name?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mick Curtis (Mick)
Username: Mick

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.176.126.207
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 11:04 am:   

Stephen - my post was written whilst you were posting yours - I wasn't referring to you when I said I was confused, but to the thread as a whole.
Welcome, btw!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.147.78.84
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 12:15 pm:   

Ramsey - I only mentioned your name in case people think I'd forgotten how crafty CB can be when dragging your name into such matters, of which you remain completely unconnected. I thought it pertinent since I was clearly highlighting CB's response to Mark Samuels, and therefore agreeing with CB. Which I still do.

I am dismayed and shocked at what has taken place because God knows a lot of horror writers and people are marginalised by 'outside forces', and therefore I stupidly presumed concordance of some kind between people.

Criticism from outside of the genre has largely been negative over the years, if not decades, and I had expected criticism from within to have carried nobler intentions, to have employed more intelligent voices and to have adopted a critical stance built on constructive, not destructive, opinions.

I also want to make it clear that I have not spoken so harshly in defence of Ally because she is a woman. Yes, she is a friend, and that does play into it. But my disgust is not biased because I see myself leaping to the defence of the 'helpless lady in distress syndrome'. I recall having defended people in the past, none of whom were women. This is an issue of decency.

Mains is NOT Harlan Ellison.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 99.227.90.149
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 01:41 pm:   

It's sad, Frank, but true that the genre is made up of the same thing the rest of the world is made up of: people. People running the gamut of faults and pettiness and jealousy and cruelty. They're same people you sit beside on the bus and dine with on holidays. They're people. Getting mad at them for not fulfilling the idealised notion you have of them is like getting mad at a lion for eating a gazelle. They -- I mean we (you, me, the rest of us) -- are what we are. All we can do as rational beings is try to understand what makes us do what we do, react as we react, and if wrong course-correct along the way.

But, please, take the blinders off. The horror genre is no different than any other group of people. On the bright side, like any other group of people, there are extreme sinners and a few saints and the rest of people are somewhere in the middle, doe-eyed and sheepish, trying to struggle through.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Jensen (Stevej)
Username: Stevej

Registered: 07-2009
Posted From: 82.0.77.233
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 01:56 pm:   

What I find amazing, ludicrous and disappointing is this: the notion that BRFG only won the Award because of some all-powerful publicity campaign. Given that AB was a newcomer (compared to small press 'big names'), so to speak, and that Screaming Dreams Press has nowhere near the 'clout'/prestige of the more well-known publishers (PS Publishing as a random example), I find this notion laughable and disingenuous in the extreme.

Regardless of the quality or otherwise of Allyson's book, this whole controversy reeks of bitterness, hypocrisy and, yes, sexism of sorts - after all, who could wish for a softer target than a woman? A woman writing in a male-dominated genre, a relative unknown published by a fledgling press?

This faux outrage from some 'critics' disguises their true motives; motives which seem to be entirely self-serving.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.234.139
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 01:56 pm:   

Simon - I never had the blinkers on. And I don't live in a world in which ignorance has blinded me to real human nature. I have never had an idealised picture of anyone, either in this industry or any other for that matter. My upbringing, which has taught me a lot about what to expect and what not to expect, hasn't deluded me into thinking that everybody possesses ideals. I know that.

What I am talking about is the importance of their being a modicum of decency in this industry for which many of us are responsible for. I am not promoting we all hold hands and start singing 'praise be to god', or that we all go and live in a commune somewhere, and I'm not advocating rules or stipulating what any individual is allowed to say or isn't allowed to say. I'm talking about doing things the right way. We are supposed to be friends on this board.

Christ. A large percentage of this board have flown across the world to meet up with one another. It should count for something. I believe, sorry, that we have let Ally down.

I would have, and will, and would, leap to anybody's defense on this board.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:00 pm:   

>>>We are supposed to be friends on this board.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't presently see any lack of "friendship" among members of this board. Or am I just confused?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:01 pm:   

>>>I believe, sorry, that we have let Ally down.

How do you mean? Sorry, I'm very confused here.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.234.139
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:23 pm:   

Prof - I don't think I need to elaborate. And if that confuses the matter further, then fine. Maybe I should have said, no, I should have said that this isn't directed at everyone.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:30 pm:   

I still don't get it - the whole "this board should be feel guilty" thing - but maybe that's just as well. Merry Xmas, all.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.234.139
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:31 pm:   

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't presently see any lack of "friendship" among members of this board."

With some I'd say it was a perceived friendship. With others, not.

Prof - since when have such simple straight-forward matters confused you so easily. Why be so obtuse? It doesn't suit you. Just say what you think. I'm not going to burst into tears if you tell me I'm wrong and full of shit. You're entitled to give me up the banks if you believe it's appropriate.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:34 pm:   

Frank, this is simple: I haven't a clue what you're on about. I'm making these comments because, as moderator here, I feel an obligation to. If there's a problem with the board, I'd like to know. If not . . . well, I'll just bow out. I guess I should anyway.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:38 pm:   

I should add that other than what's on this thread I know next to nothing about the issues which have been 'discussed' elsewhere. I guess that's why I confused. Ho hum.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 02:45 pm:   

I'm just assuming that Frank is talking about events on other forums coz I've got no idea what's going on either. Although I have noticed that HW has posted such a vitriolic attack on mark Samuels that it almost reads as a defence of the BFS - which is rather amusing if hypocritical - but what else do you expect...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Jensen (Stevej)
Username: Stevej

Registered: 07-2009
Posted From: 82.0.77.233
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 03:05 pm:   

One of the saddest things about the BRFG debate is that it makes so many appear unprofessional - no wonder mainstream journalists take no interest in our endeavours except when there's controversy to be stirred up.
This in-fighting does none of us any favours...

That, and the fact that titles such as Ass Goblins of Auschwitz (I only wish I kidding about this) gain publication only makes small press writers, editors and publishers look squalid and unworthy of attention; and this despite the sterling efforts of those who respect the genre and highlight deserving talents and their works. All too many love Horror in an ironic sense, not in a genuine way, and sadly these people often overshadow the more respectful and respectable amongst us.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 03:06 pm:   

"Ramsey - I only mentioned your name in case people think I'd forgotten how crafty CB can be when dragging your name into such matters, of which you remain completely unconnected. I thought it pertinent since I was clearly highlighting CB's response to Mark Samuels, and therefore agreeing with CB. Which I still do."

Fair enough, Frank, but I feel bound to say this. The very same "Dwelleronthefringes" posted a personal attack on Ally (or a satire, as he would no doubt call it) on Horrorwatch just a couple of months ago. Some might call this even-handedness. I don't. It's my observation that he will simply say anything that he thinks will cause trouble.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 99.227.90.149
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 03:13 pm:   

It took me a long time to realise this, but there's no wrong way to love horror, Steve. The genre is all-encompassing, as it should be. Those who love it ironicly have just as much right to it as anyone here. To exclude anyone who doesn't view the genre as you (general "you") do is what's strangling it to death in the mainstream. If you (general "you") want more people to like the genre and respect it, then you have to open the doors to all types of fans.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 99.227.90.149
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 03:15 pm:   

The very same "Dwelleronthefringes" posted a personal attack on Ally / on Horrorwatch just a couple of months ago.

True. In fact, I think I was grouped with her in that same post.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 05:09 pm:   

Hi Stephen T - you've popped in to see us on a very strange, volatile and confusing thread.

Gary, Frank - yes, I'm still confused too. That's what I was trying to say yesterday. It sounds like Frank is saying there's something unfriendly and unprofessional going on HERE on this board, and I haven't seen that at all. I've only seen two or three other people not on this board, engaging in name-calling, etc, on another part of the internet. Those people aren't representative of the horror genre as a whole as far as I'm concerned.

Mick - Johnny Mains is, as far as I'm aware, his real name and he's the brains/workhorse behind a new Pan Horror-like anthology being launched at next year's WHC (there's a thread here about it somewhere), and has also been responsible for persuading Pan MacMillan to re-release the original PBoH1 (next year too, I think?). He's actually done a hell of a lot himself for the genre - it's a pity he seems to be making enemies for himself too with his outspoken comments.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:24 pm:   

Consider me another confused RCMBer...

Just to try and get some perspective here, I'll repeat what I said privately to Ally the other day:

It seems to me that Ally has somehow become a scapegoat in some greater game other folks are playing - or some weirder argument they're having.

If it's any consolation, nobody's even reading this stuff apart from Chris Barker and those here on the RCMB who keep stirring it back up. Everyone else in genre fiction is oblivious...

Now, can we all just let this drop and give Ally a break? As far as I can see, she has more important things to worry about - like sorting out her new projects.

Contrary to Frank's conspiracy theory, some of us like to stay out of this kind of thing purely because it's undignified and rather pathetic.

For the sake of full disclosure, I'm friends with Mark Samuels, Johnny Mains and Ally.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.163.170.46
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:26 pm:   

Hear Hear, Zed.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:29 pm:   

I've been trying to keep out of this, Des, but I fear it's all becoming silly - and possibly reflecting badly on both Ally and the owner of this forum.

Time to put it to bed, methinks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Huw (Huw)
Username: Huw

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 218.168.186.150
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:30 pm:   

What Zed said.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 99.227.90.149
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:32 pm:   

I'm the culprit for stirring it up here again and again I apologise for it. Even though it wasn't my intention to converse about "the situation", I should have know it would have drifted there. I agree with McMahon that we should drop it.

As for credentials, I'd like to think I'm friends with both Ally and Mark as well. Never met nor had any contact with Mains.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:36 pm:   

I thought you were Mains, and Zed, and Fry...

I think you might be me as well but I'm not sure.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon Strantzas (Nomis)
Username: Nomis

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 99.227.90.149
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:37 pm:   

Nah. Too good looking to be you as well.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:41 pm:   

'and possibly reflecting badly on both Ally and the owner of this forum.'

I haven't done anything and neither has Ramsey.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:47 pm:   

I'm friends with everyone. Except for that unutterable **** Gary McMahon.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:50 pm:   

I fuckin' give up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:51 pm:   

Is there an emoticon for a bared bottom?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gcw (Gcw)
Username: Gcw

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.155.105.158
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:56 pm:   

"Contrary to Frank's conspiracy theory, some of us like to stay out of this kind of thing purely because it's undignified and rather pathetic."

Quite.

We have been here before, the only people who benefit from this pointless-point making are the sad individuals who seem to have too much time and internet access on their hands.

Just think what work they could create if they could direct all that negative energy into something positive.

A pity really.

gcw
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 06:56 pm:   

Just put your author photo up, mate.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stephen_theaker (Stephen_theaker)
Username: Stephen_theaker

Registered: 12-2009
Posted From: 62.30.117.235
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:14 pm:   

Johnny Mains seems to sincerely think the book is rubbish - it doesn't seem to me that it's such a big deal if he says so...

I don't agree with him about the reasons why it won, but half the fun of awards is trying to figure out why the results go the way they do. To take a less controversial example, reading all last year's nominated novels, though I enjoyed them all, Ramsey's book was absolutely remarkable. Why didn't it win? Maybe because he won the year before, or maybe because someone who'd read all his other novels wouldn't have been struck by all its good qualities at once in the way I was, with it being the first of his novels I've read.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:29 pm:   

Thieving Fear, Stephen? A fine if very idiosyncratic book. I've always thought of it as one for his hardcore followers. Mebbe I'm wrong.

Check out The Grin of the Dark, tho . . .
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.23.53
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:40 pm:   

Ramsey - I know only too well that CB's involvement wasn't at all aimed at defending Ally. I know how he works. But all the same, his comments to MS are, in my opinion, justified, even if they are his way of making things worse. I have no sympathy for MS. He had no professional dignity when it came to Ally, so why should CB's comment be any less dignified. This is not about CB, it's about professional conduct, which MS and JM, apparently important figures in the industry, have neglected.

Prof/Caroline: to clarify: I think that 'we' could have leapt to Ally's defence a lot quicker.

It's as if people are afraid of saying in public because of Mains and Samuels.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Frank (Frank)
Username: Frank

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 188.146.23.53
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:45 pm:   

I've said what I'm going to say.

Zed - conspiracy theory is somewhat exaggerated. But fair enough.Point taken.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stephen_theaker (Stephen_theaker)
Username: Stephen_theaker

Registered: 12-2009
Posted From: 62.30.117.235
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:48 pm:   

I think that was part of what I loved - it was so uncompromising in its determination to make the reader feel the characters' misery.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gcw (Gcw)
Username: Gcw

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.155.105.158
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:49 pm:   

"Prof/Caroline: to clarify: I think that 'we' could have leapt to Ally's defence a lot quicker."

Or alternatively, that would have been playing into the hands of the people who thrive on all this crap.

As we are anyway.

gcw
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:51 pm:   

>>>I think that was part of what I loved - it was so uncompromising in its determination to make the reader feel the characters' misery.

Well, Stephen, there's this chapter in The Long Lost . . . [shudder]
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gcw (Gcw)
Username: Gcw

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.155.105.158
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 07:54 pm:   

Gawd....

Not THAT Chapter.

Best Chapter in a Ramsey book?

gcw
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 82.3.226.105
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:00 pm:   

Could be, indeed. Although I also love the desecration scene in The Influence.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zed (Gary_mc)
Username: Gary_mc

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 81.96.240.106
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:09 pm:   

Although I also love the desecration scene in The Influence.

Brrr...that's one hell of a scene.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ian Alexander Martin (Iam)
Username: Iam

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 64.180.64.74
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:17 pm:   

I've not weighed in about this anywhere (other than a rather bland comment on the BFS forum), for the simple reason I've not read Allyson's book. I've not read a word of her fiction either, other than the tale in the BFS annual due to me proofing and typesetting it. Having it gathering dust on my shelf, I fully expect to enjoy BRFG in various amounts much like a Marillion album: some are good tunes, others aren't, perhaps that 2nd disc wasn't required, etc. Even if I do find a majority of it less than thrilling, so what? It's hardly earth shattering in its destruction of
'proper living' is it?

Simon Strantzas (that's the pretty boy over there in the corner being quiet again) makes damned good points on awards systems being rubbish no matter which structure is used. Wide-spread membership voting results in a popularity contest, with the inherent 'best-selling' titles influencing just as much as 'nicest person' can influence the juried system. The Oscars are a case in point when you see Marisa Tomei win probably due to Judi Dench and Helen Mirren (I think) splitting the "thinky vote". It doesn't matter which way of determining the winner, you end up having a mistake of a result depending on the viewer's taste matching the results. Just because I think someone's writing is better than someone else's matters very little about "the best" label being applied. As pointed out, it depends on where you're standing, don't it, eh? [adjusts flat cap]

So…

Once I've caught up with the august Des's experience by actually reading the book, I fully expect to enjoy it and let the author what I thought.

Were I actually talented enough to be a fiction writer, I might actually worry about offending potential publishers, but as I'm a publisher/editor, perhaps I ought to point out that I don't really care much about someone's opinion beyond how easy it is to work with them and how much I happen to like their work in front of me. Hmmm… perhaps I ought to be more out-spoken and 'Sex Pistols-ish', then, if I've nothing to lose…

Let's try this… BOOBS!

That was fun.

As for 'friendships', I wish to be clear that I intend to punch Simon Stratzas, Gary McMahon, and John Llewellyn Probert in the eye at World HorrorCon, purely because I love them so very much. On the other hand, I'll be bedding both Allyson and Ramsey (preferably at the same time) because they both arouse me so.

And now I shall leave you all with that mental picture of terror, apart from the observation about how odd it is that this thread began as a bit of African Banking Scheme SPAM from Ramsey's in-box.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ian Alexander Martin (Iam)
Username: Iam

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 64.180.64.74
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:19 pm:   

Ah, pardon me, we didn't start this from SPAM, but an actually relevant comment Ramsey spotted elsewhere. I merely jumped to the conclusion that things went off on a tangent for some reason. That never happens here. No!

I blame McMahon and his underclothes distracting me, the raving hussy!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Jensen (Stevej)
Username: Stevej

Registered: 07-2009
Posted From: 82.0.77.233
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 08:47 pm:   

As for 'friendships', I wish to be clear that I intend to punch Simon Stratzas, Gary McMahon, and John Llewellyn Probert in the eye at World HorrorCon, purely because I love them so very much. On the other hand, I'll be bedding both Allyson and Ramsey (preferably at the same time) because they both arouse me so.



Quote of the Year!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Bacon (Stevebacon)
Username: Stevebacon

Registered: 09-2008
Posted From: 90.210.209.138
Posted on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 - 10:11 pm:   

...which will adorn the cover of Ally's new collection.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ian Alexander Martin (Iam)
Username: Iam

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 64.180.64.74
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 03:25 am:   

I'd be very pleased if it adorned the next novel of Ramsey's actually. No point in half-measures, eh wot?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 08:01 am:   

"To take a less controversial example, reading all last year's nominated novels, though I enjoyed them all, Ramsey's book was absolutely remarkable. Why didn't it win?"

Because Graham's was better!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stephen_theaker (Stephen_theaker)
Username: Stephen_theaker

Registered: 12-2009
Posted From: 62.30.117.235
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 08:46 am:   

Certainly enough people thought that. I can send you a list of their names if you like.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 11:11 am:   

Mark Samuels has removed the post and comments (some very offensive) from his blog and has stated that should he be recommended for BFS awards he will ask that his name be removed from consideration.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 11:37 am:   

More lies on Horrorwatch from the usual source, though. Remember Goebbels' principle of lying - I'm sure this funny fellow does.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2009 - 12:44 pm:   

You mean you haven't used your position as president of BFS to pressure them all into giving you awards? Bloody hell I'm disappointed in you.

Fancy using your talent as a writer as a method of winning awards. It's disgraceful if you ask me...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 05:34 pm:   

Strangely enough, it looks like he's deleted the comments now.

What a silly sausage he is.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 09:45 am:   

To be fair, Horror Watch now offers a revised version of the comment I quoted at the start of this thread. The comment is still inaccurate, though.

The notion that my quoting the comment was an attempt to incite hatred seems extraordinary even in terms of Mr Watch's highly individual view of the world.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ian Alexander Martin (Iam)
Username: Iam

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 64.180.64.74
Posted on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - 08:27 pm:   

I took it that Mr. Aikman began his writing while in nappies, while you waited until your early teens to begin authoring works, therefore making Mr. Aikman now in his early 20s, and you in… erm… your mid-30s…?

Anyone willing to go for that…?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Thursday, December 31, 2009 - 01:20 pm:   

I do think Mr Watch's comment about Aickman's Fontana anthologies is a dazzling example of his fondness for making statements that only the uninformed will find meaningful.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Skunsworth (Skunsworth)
Username: Skunsworth

Registered: 05-2009
Posted From: 89.242.178.204
Posted on Thursday, December 31, 2009 - 01:38 pm:   

I'm never defending anyone again. Ever. At all. In private or in public. Nope.

S
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Thursday, December 31, 2009 - 01:44 pm:   

Well it's not your fault that Ramsey is obsessed with Chris Barker and attempts to incite hatred against him at every turn...

Or is that the other way round?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Thursday, December 31, 2009 - 01:49 pm:   

"I do think Mr Watch's comment about Aickman's Fontana anthologies is a dazzling example of his fondness for making statements that only the uninformed will find meaningful."

To be fair, perhaps it's simply that he is uninformed - he often is.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Monday, January 04, 2010 - 05:49 pm:   

I would like to take this chance to say a few words.

A few lessons have been learned from this interesting little aside, the main one is that I will learn to reign it in in future and when I am being critical, not to swear or to be overly harsh just to get a rise. That was childish and rather self indulgent.

However, this does not equate to an apology to Allyson Bird, nor will it ever be, but a recognition that mistakes have been made on my part.

My stance on BRFG has not changed, I still feel the same way about it. I hope that the next collection I read of her stuff will change my perspective of her writing.

As to several charges made that I am sexist, can help in future with people's careers etc, please let me state the following.

1: I am currently working on publishing the complete works of Mary Danby in late 2010. I feel that she is one of the most talented female writers of the last 30 years and am honoured that she chose me to bring out her works.

2: I am at the beginning of my career in the horror genre, and probably one as an editor rather than author. Weirdly, I have been made aware that with my current nudge into the mainstream with the re-issuing of the Pan Horror 1959 it may potentially make me seem like a juicy bet to some. It really shouldn't. I have a lot of work to do, and a long way to go to prove to myself and to others that I am worthy of doing the job, and doing it well.

The nudge might just be all it will be.

3: I have a big mouth, and it gets me into trouble but certain members of this board have blown up the CHARACTER of Johnny Mains into an even funnier one than the caricature I portrayed which is very interesting to see but shows their inherent lack of understanding of who I am.

4: I am aware that my path will cross with Allyson Bird and some of her friends at WHC. I will be civil and polite and I will not bring up the subject of BRFG unless you want me to. You have my word on that.
}
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.153.232.112
Posted on Monday, January 04, 2010 - 06:03 pm:   

Welcome, Johnny.
I still hope that, one day, you will read my review of BRFG if only for the sake of curiosity. It is obviously not the 'last word' on the book and I know you will not change your view.
Look forward to seeing you in Brighton.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 03:33 pm:   

"However, this does not equate to an apology to Allyson Bird, nor will it ever be..."

I'm sorry, but I think you should apologise. Of course you're entitled to your opinion of her book - Lord knows, some folk hold my stuff in even lower regard, and that's their right - but some of your comments were simply offensive. They certainly offended me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 03:40 pm:   

Well, with every respect to you Ramsey, you'll just have to stay offended and my 'Travellers by Night' will probably never be signed by you.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 04:34 pm:   

I wasn't asking on my own behalf. I'm saying you were offensive to Allyson and should apologise.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 04:47 pm:   

Before this blows a hoolie, this is my last ever post on Allyson.

No apologies, no kowtowing to anyone and no sweary, bludgeoning posts if talking about someones work.

Finis.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.146.253.74
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 05:10 pm:   

Johnny, I still think your separate and cumulative 'f...ing travesty', 'paper bag' and 'coma' comments on Mark's blog were quite beyond the pale. Comments that were nothing to do with the book, but, ostensibly, with some other agenda. I agree with Ramsey that you need to apologise to Allyson for that as one human being to another. Just to draw a line under it. You agreed you made mistakes. But no apology?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mick Curtis (Mick)
Username: Mick

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.179.207.45
Posted on Tuesday, January 05, 2010 - 05:53 pm:   

Johnny - it's not 'kowtowing' - no-one is suggesting you apologise for not liking Ally's work; rather for the extremely rude way you put your opinions across. I'm sure that, if the internet didn't exist and you were discussing the book face to face with Ally, you'd not use such terms.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ian Alexander Martin (Iam)
Username: Iam

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 64.180.64.74
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 05:03 am:   

"Johnny_Mains" (or whatever your real name is, I've honestly given up trying to sort that one as a'nerwbie' around here):

This may come as a shock to many, but I was also offended (yes, it is possible) and agree with Ramsey, Mick, and Des. Not on behalf of Ms Bird, but because no individual's work should be subjected to that sort of un-restrained and aggressive attack; no matter how much you might not care for it. Say what you will about her writing, but remember that there's not only an individual behind it, there's also a line betwixt the quality work per se and the sort of character attacking slagging-off you engaged in.

Be a grown-up, apologize to the lady, learn your lesson, and think thrice before trying that sort of shite again, or I'll get Zed to come over and poke you in the eye for me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Matthew_fell (Matthew_fell)
Username: Matthew_fell

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 142.179.13.171
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 07:14 am:   

I've held off, but I am going to add a two-pennorth. Frankly, Johnny, I don't give a shit about what you think of Ally's collection. I haven't had the chance to read it, so I can't comment on it one way or the other. But - as I've said elsewhere - the fact that you don't like that particular collection is one thing. The fact that you are rude, abusive, and personally insulting to the author is another. You're entitled to your opinion about her collection. But, quite frankly, if you're not man enough to apologise for the personal insults you've levelled at her, I think you should fuck off out of here.

And, no, I don't want to discuss this with you in a Facebook chat. Okay?

Christopher
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Matthew_fell (Matthew_fell)
Username: Matthew_fell

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 142.179.13.171
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 07:18 am:   

Oh, and Johnny: I see you must have 'unfriended' me on Facebook. Thanks, 'cos I was just about to do the same to you.

Christopher
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 09:23 am:   

Christopher, put your handbag away.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.10.7.83
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 10:48 am:   

No more of this, please. It's getting nasty now.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 11:29 am:   

It doesn't matter to me if Johnny Mains doesn't like my work - I remind myself that many people do (including many members of the BFS). You can't please all. Joe R. Lansdale, Laird Barron, Pete Tennant (Ellen Datlow giving me 6 honourable mentions) members of this board and many people have told me just how much they like it. Over a dozen editors have told me they like what I do. These constant attacks from a source, clearly with another agenda, are hurtful and malicious and a writer should not be treated in this manner.

I must say thank you to those who have seen all this happen and have actually said that it is cruel and wrong.

And as for Johnny Mains dismissing Ellen Datlow as nothing to do with the U.K. horror scene - well that is just plainly ridiculous and insulting to her - too.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.109.153.58
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 11:49 am:   

Yeah, just a little, especially as Ellen edited one of the Solaris collections on our list.
For what's it worth I think that to use derogatory language to anyone concerning their work is far from constructive. It's also a case of burning your bridges so is doubly destructive.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 12:49 pm:   

There is no agenda Ally. I've just been rather vocal about your book in a rather crude manner, which I appreciate was wrong. It's not your fault that your book was badly edited, I gather your editor was really ill at the time. So, with that taken into consideration - I cannot believe that your collection (which no doubt you poured your heart and soul into) won a BFS award. But it did, and that's it.

I have always been of the opinion that I hope your next works are more polished than BRFG and if they are, I'll say that they are.

If this is truly the state of the small press, then look at us - all wanting to be big fish in a small pond, shitting yourselves when a 'NOBODY' comes and throws a stone into it. Because that's all I am. I am just an idiot with an opinion, and what happens? Ramsey bleeding Campbell unsheathes his sabre for a poke, Christopher puts in his rottweiler teeth and tries to have a bite...

I'm aware that toes might be trodden upon and this will no doubt haunt me for a little while longer - but I want to say the following to anyone who this might mean anything to.

Because you have a 'big name' lending a quote for your book, does not mean that it's a good one. Same as having a big name introduce your novel, collection etc.

Just because you have the backing of a few people in certain forums does not mean that you are liked outside of those forums. Those people just won't tell it to your face.

Chris Barker may be as mad as a bag of snakes, and may turn on you like a rabid dog, but you know something - he's refreshing, keeps you on your toes, and even if 99% of what he says is bullshit - you know that 1% is the cold stone truth, and that's something you can't run away from.

There's a reason that the mainstream laugh at the small press and this is the only industry I know of where this kind of stuff happens. Yes, I was wrong in being sweary, but take that away and my message still stands.

While my legacy may only amount to having one book self published and an introduction written for another- that's something I can happily live with; I only ever did my antho as a thank you to the Pan authors who I adored while growing up.

But to everyone else - yours has forever been tarnished now and long after your gone and dust you will forever be remembered not for your writing, but for being covered in Bird shit.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 12:53 pm:   

And one last thing: Christopher, I'm surprised that one can be so abusive while complaining about other people's behaviour elsewhere.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 12:57 pm:   

"But to everyone else - yours has forever been tarnished now and long after your gone and dust you will forever be remembered not for your writing, but for being covered in Bird shit."

That end has been the focus of your attention since September, and you have failed.

Don't lock this thread - Gary. Let everyone see him for what he truly is.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 01:02 pm:   

Or disappear it or censor it like some other people do. I know you or Ramsey would not do that.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.10.7.83
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 01:09 pm:   

I'm asking that folk remain civil. I don't see this at the moment, Johnny. Please do.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan (Jonathan)
Username: Jonathan

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 91.109.153.58
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 01:29 pm:   

"There's a reason that the mainstream laugh at the small press."

I sort of work in the 'mainstream' and I certainly don't. I grew up reading small press stuff and I hope that I have helped the authors I've enjoyed in that field and published in ours achieve wider sucess and recognition. In my opinion the small press is a fertile breeding ground and often produces gems we rarely see in the wider market.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 01:33 pm:   

"But to everyone else - yours has forever been tarnished now and long after your gone and dust you will forever be remembered not for your writing, but for being covered in Bird shit."

Utter nonsense, but perhaps you mean it as a joke.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.146.253.215
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 02:12 pm:   

This is not a divisive issue, in my view, where one camp faces another camp. Horror genre (worldwide) is bigger than that. It is a simple issue. I met Allyson briefly about three years ago (and I reviewed BRFG recently before the awards for it was announced) and I've never met Johnny (but see what might be a welcome resurgence of a certain sort of horror via his enthusiasms). I do not feel that I have any axe to grind.

Simply, then, just based on the evidence of the VoE site and comments to Mark's blog post (now deleted): Johnny made comments ('sweary', as he puts it, only in one instance) about a book, comments that personalised the author's ability to write in objectionable words and on more than one occasion, including reference to a 'coma patient'. This does not seem right to me, from any internet user, let alone from someone in the professional world of publishing.
This seems to me, on reflection, to require a fulsome unconditional apology. And I cannot now understand why one hasn't been given.

Another debate is the book itself. And if public rows are deemed worthwhile at all about a book, then I feel the discussion needs more than just insults but a detailed addressing of the text.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 02:24 pm:   

"There's a reason that the mainstream laugh at the small press."

That bemused me too, Jonathan. Which small press? Arkham House? Ash-Tree? Ex Occidente? PS? Some small publishers certainly have published rubbish on occasion, but so have the biggest ones. And PS (whom I'm citing simply because as one of their authors I'm most aware of the way their books are received) are frequently reviewed in Publishers Weekly, for instance.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:15 pm:   

Oh dear, I wasn't going to post on this - just quietly PM Johnny behind the scenes - but I was too late and yet more damage has been done by his last post. So, may I offer some observations as what I consider to be an "outsider", as my involvement in the field (a free-to-read ezine and a few shorts if anyone will publish them) doesn't make me a player in the genre at all ..

There are a number of facts here as I see them, and I think it would benefit some people to stand back, take a look at themselves, and reflect on these. Sorry, this is going to be a long post - please bear with me.

FACT 1 - Johnny doesn't like BRFG. That isn't a problem. Everyone has a right to express in public their views on someone's published works - BUT to do so in a professional, constructive and non-offensive manner. I don't think anyone here is saying Johnny needs to apologise for not liking the book - that's not the issue at all (the issue is the MANNER in which it was done - more on that in a bit).

FACT 2 - Johnny (and others who've criticised Ally) doesn't like the way the book was marketed - "too aggressive" was the term someone used I think? Well, fact is, in the small presses, you HAVE to market your work to as wide an audience as possible. If people don't know about it, they aren't going to buy it - simple fact! All small press authors publicise their work as much as possible - they have to because of the very nature of the genre/small press market. Johnny - you yourself are doing the same with your forthcoming book - eg. posting here about it, fixing to do a launch/signing at WHC, etc. Publicising your own book isn't something to be condemmed, it's an absolute necessity in this business.

I think the reason Ally has been singled out for this relates to the big bust-up on the Vault forum towards the end of 2008 (where Johnny spends a lot of his online/on forum time). Then, Ally, Des, myself and fellow Pantechnicon editor, Trudi Topham, were all criticised for publicising our own work too much on that board. But none of us knew at the time that this wasn't welcome there. In fact, it's still somewhat confusing to me since some people there ARE allowed to publicise their books!

But Ally's publicity was much more obvious than the rest of us, with the large banner you had, Ally, which was prominent with every post you made. This raised a lot of hackles there, and Ally seemed to be criticised more than me, Troo or Des because of this. I think this is why there is the (mis)perception that Ally publicised her book "too aggressively".

FACT 3 - so, there's nothing wrong with constructively criticising a book (no-one is saying that), and I've tried to make the point that marketing one's own work is very much the done thing in this business - not to be complained about as everyone does it, and HAS to do it. BUT the problem is the manner in which all these criticisms have been made. If the manner in which it is done is offensive and causes upset to the person concerned, then any right-thinking person should realise this is wrong and apologise for it IMHO.

Des sums it up perfectly in his post above:
"Simply, then, just based on the evidence of the VoE site and comments to Mark's blog post (now deleted): Johnny made comments ('sweary', as he puts it, only in one instance) about a book, comments that personalised the author's ability to write in objectionable words and on more than one occasion, including reference to a 'coma patient'. This does not seem right to me, from any internet user, let alone from someone in the professional world of publishing.
This seems to me, on reflection, to require a fulsome unconditional apology. And I cannot now understand why one hasn't been given."

Now, there are three people who seem to be causing upset (and I don't just mean to Ally here, clearly Ramsey is being targetted too) - Johnny, "Horrorwatch" and Mark Samuels.

I don't think any of these three people can help the way they are, the things they say, the way they behave. People here who know Mark have commented that he's a really nice guy (I've never met any of the above three, so I can't comment on any of them myself), he just says things he later regrets every now and again.

Similarly, Johnny has admitted here that he has a "loud mouth", and I applaud him for his honesty and guts in coming on here and saying that. But what were the consequences of your comments, Johnny? Upset and hurt, that's what.

What I reckon all three of you need to do is to:

a) consider the effects of your words/behaviour on other people. If it causes offence or upset then it's clearly wrong and apologies for that offence/upset are due

b) consider the effects of your words/behaviour on you yourself. You're all in the genre/small press business. You NEED to sell your books. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever from your point of view to alienate people - the very people you want to buy and read your books, and;

c) consider the effects of your words/behaviours on the genre as a whole. Anyone looking in on this would be thinking "what the hell ..?" and "what kind of crazy people make up that genre?". This looks to me, and I'm sure to others looking in, like very unprofessional behaviour and it really is giving the genre a bad name.

Anyway, that's it from me on this matter. I hope I haven't made any enemies by this post - I have no intention of doing so - but I just had to say it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:28 pm:   

"Now, there are three people who seem to be causing upset (and I don't just mean to Ally here, clearly Ramsey is being targeted too) - Johnny, "Horrorwatch" and Mark Samuels."

Fear not! I've yet to be upset, and of these three only Mr Watch has had any kind of a go. But otherwise I'm in accord with you, Caroline.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.146.253.215
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:33 pm:   

That, Caroline, is a fair and sensible account, although I recall the VoE situation a year or so ago being very complex. Many issues and personalities mixed up. [VOE did have a private workshop specially designed for one's own work, for example.]

I tried to simplify the issue and thanks for quoting my post. And indeed it is a simple issue, I feel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:35 pm:   

Hi Caroline.

The banner was made for me by Martin Roberts to help because Steve Upham was in hospital. A thread was set up for me on the vault and I was invited in. As the good reviews came in I posted them not thinking that the last 30 posts would show just me in a discussion with people. Some days only I would post (the vault is a much busier place these days) since they had that discussion about what they wanted. They decided they didn't want 'modern' horror.

Johnny Mains became abusive (one particular post he removed himself - it was so bad)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:37 pm:   

...sorry that should have read...since THEN they have had that discussion about what they wanted.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:41 pm:   

Have I got that right about the modern horror etc...Caroline? It is a long tme ago now.

And I should have said 'some days I would have news and posted in quick succession' - instead of 'only I posted.'
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:51 pm:   

If posting on a couple of forums is aggressive marketing and makes a person worthy of the kind of abuse I've seen floating around, then that fucking stephen King must be a right twat - the amount of marketing his books get... he gets his books metioned everywhere, I've even seen them reviewed on TV!!! the evil fucker.

What a bastard he is, let's all kick his head in, the aggressive marketing cunt!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.146.253.215
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:57 pm:   

Thank heaven the world doesn't revolve around this thread. Let's get on. This is becoming an even simpler issue: i.e. a serial issuer of public personal insults - deemed by the person who made them as mistakes and deemed by the insulted person as 'cruel' and 'wrong' - should unconditionally apologise for them to the person insulted. No?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:58 pm:   

Now that made me laugh...

To add to what I've said. All they had to say was please remove the banner and I would have done. In fact a vault member (Rog) helped me try to link the bugger up etc...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 03:59 pm:   

Sorry Des - was replying to Weber.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johnny_mains (Johnny_mains)
Username: Johnny_mains

Registered: 01-2010
Posted From: 82.22.70.137
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 04:03 pm:   

I have emailed Allyson directly, and as far as I am concerned, this matter is now closed.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.10.7.83
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 04:05 pm:   

Great. Thanks, all.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 04:12 pm:   

Yes - Johnny has apologised for any offence caused.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey)
Username: Ramsey

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 195.93.21.74
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 04:20 pm:   

I'm glad to hear it, Ally, and that you made it public.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Allybird (Allybird)
Username: Allybird

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 80.43.214.156
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 04:25 pm:   

I know Ramsey...I know.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 05:30 pm:   

Excellent news! Now, are we going to see Johnny and Ally kiss and make up in Brighton, that's what I want to know? (only kidding - can't resit )

Des, Ally - yes, I know the Vault spat was more complex than just about too much "marketing". It was, indeed, about all that "new horror" stuff (whatever that might be?) as well. I was just picking out the bit relevant to this current argument.

It's all water under the bridge now anyway - lessons learnt, etc, etc. Let's all move on and live happily ever after ...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Des (Des)
Username: Des

Registered: 06-2008
Posted From: 86.146.253.215
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 05:37 pm:   

Seriously, I'm going to buy everyone involved a drink - together. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gary Fry (Gary_fry)
Username: Gary_fry

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.10.7.83
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 05:50 pm:   

And twenty straws for the coke.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stephen Theaker (Stephen_theaker)
Username: Stephen_theaker

Registered: 12-2009
Posted From: 62.30.117.235
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 05:54 pm:   

Blessed are the cheesemakers!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mick Curtis (Mick)
Username: Mick

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.176.5.66
Posted on Wednesday, January 06, 2010 - 07:14 pm:   

Good stuff - well done all. Des, any chance of a pint, mate?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ian Alexander Martin (Iam)
Username: Iam

Registered: 10-2009
Posted From: 64.180.64.74
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 01:29 am:   

Hooray!

What's this about "cheese makers", big nose?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Craig (Craig)
Username: Craig

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 75.16.78.94
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 01:44 am:   

Next up: Weber & I on one side, and... on the other....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mick Curtis (Mick)
Username: Mick

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.176.5.66
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 01:52 am:   

Don't pick your nose.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 01:35 pm:   

>>Next up: Weber & I on one side, and... on the other.... <<

ME!! I'll fight you both to the death, Craig!

Ian - it's a deliberate malapropism (is that the right word?). Stephen means "Blessed are the peacemakers". You clearly don't understand the English sense of humour!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston)
Username: Weber_gregston

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 194.176.105.56
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 01:52 pm:   

Caroline - Ian was giving the next line from the Life of Brian sermon on the mount audience scene.

Blessed is the greek
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carolinec (Carolinec)
Username: Carolinec

Registered: 06-2009
Posted From: 82.38.75.85
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 04:20 pm:   

Ah! I obviously don't understand the Canadian sense of humour - silly me.

(and it's a long time since I saw Life of Brian too)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mick Curtis (Mick)
Username: Mick

Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 86.176.5.66
Posted on Thursday, January 07, 2010 - 04:35 pm:   

Ah, I'm glad they're getting something 'cos they have a hell of a time.

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration