93!
Because people have been so nice about my media articles collection, I have decided to share some of them with the members. Why not start an "on this day in history..." thread. Some of the articles will be quite interesting, some will consist of just a brief mentioning, some will be reviews of AC's poetry or books, some might even be quite scholarly. Everybody is invited to join in.
I don't have one for each day of the year, but today I can start with one from the New York Times from November 13, 1910, which is essentially a rerun of a short article in London's "The Sketch" from the previous October about the first performance of the "Rite of Saturn" at Caxton Hall. It is quite sympathetic, has a nice (although badly reproduced) artist's rendition of the several scenes from the rite, and was written just before John Bull Magazine started its diatribe against Crowley and the Rites of Eleusis.
Love=Law
Lutz
Has the type been reset, Lutz? Seems very crisp and clear for a 1910 newspaper.
Michael, 93!
It has been indeed, sometimes the originals are barely readable. Also I like to include the cover logo with these posts and moreover I think (I hope) that copyright conflicts are avoided when not using the actual scan (which is a fee-required service mostly), but only quoting the article in a (I think) fair-use manner. More obscure publications or longer articles will probably appear (as long as Paul agrees) as an actual scan.
Love=Law
Lutz
Great stuff, Lutz. Thanks for posting and 93 🙂
Excellent idea, Lutz. I've made this thread 'sticky' (it appears at the top of the list of threads) and have created an 'On This Day' album in the Galleries.
Owner and Editor
LAShTAL
What an excellent, generous gift to fellow LAShTALian's.
Thank you Lutz.
Awesome. Thanks for posting this, and looking forward to more.
93!
Since I have no article for the exact date, here is an article from the November/December 1976 issue of the bimonthly magazine Psychic - The Magazine of New Realities, being Vol. VII, No. 5. Have fun with this rather informed piece of journalistic work.
Love=Law
Lutz
I'm loving this! Keep 'em coming.
Owner and Editor
LAShTAL
93!
Here is another one. Unfortunately this is one I don't have the original of, it is from a collection of typescripts made by Ithell Colquhoun who archived various AC related press articles and which I purchased from Ben Fernee in 2003, when he sold the Ithell Colquhoun collection. So far I never found a copy of the actual magazine. It's still quite nice.
Love=Law
Lutz
Thanks for all that, Lutz! Good of you to have started this thread in a leap year: only 363 articles to go! I look forward to more!
Markus
93!
On this day 113 years ago the following was published.
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
November is not the best month for a daily article, so it's another November magazine issue.
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
Another book review. Enjoy...
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
This is another nice one.
Love=Law
Lutz
Love it Lutz! These are all so wonderful.
From today's piece ("(nobody introduces Crowley)"), that is a memorable quote.
93!
Sorry, an error occurred.
93!
Sorry for the mis-sent article earlier, here it is correctly. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
This one is actually from November 19, but since it is from a weekly, not a daily publication, it's okay to come two days late. It's the start of a well-known three-article series on AC in Picture Post magazine from November/December 1955. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
This is a very good idea, "Simon", and all of the pieces so far have been of a very high standard. Good on you!
Spit, spot!
Norma N.Joy Conquest
Best yet, Lutz!
Owner and Editor
LAShTAL
93!
Here is a newer one for lack of a AC-contemporary article for the exact date. Enjoy!
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
Enjoy!
Love=Law
Lutz
Priceless.
93!
Enjoy!
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
Included are two ones (one from November 24), almost identically, but one withholding a short snippet about some letters and Crowley's out-of-marriage affairs. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
Danke Lutz! Sehr interessant - particularly the fact that even back then various newspapers were writing pretty much exactly the same article. Keep up the excellent work - the articles really are informative!
Markus
Interesting that the Telegraph article adds the detail of Rose "accidentally opening a letter" and thereby "ascertained that he was the father of a child borne by another lady."
Anybody know more about this child or the rumour?
93!
Another day, another article. Again, quite amusing, and astonishingly fair. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
Great, Lutz! You've found some excellent, little-known articles and yesterday's quote made me chuckle: There was a lot of land around Boleskine, but it was mostly perpendicular.
😉
Owner and Editor
LAShTAL
93!
There are more than one articles for November 27, so I decided for the one which has probably one of the funniest captions for a photograph of Crowley. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
Anybody know more about this child or the rumour?
93!
Tomorrow there will be another one on the divorce. It will be a little more detailed (adding witness' recollections) and mentions the letters and the child again. Wasn't it so that AC and Rose agreed on inventing a court case she couldn't lose to save time?
Love=Law
Lutz
Love=Law
Lutz
Very much looking forward to it Lutz. These are priceless.
Without looking anything up, I understood that Crowley said he gave Rose "evidence" of his adultery, which could be offered as evidence in the divorce court. But neither he nor his biographers - that I recall - spelled it out. I don't recall the sense that it was false, since we know in fact that he was a serial adulterer.
This is the first time I've read of what the evidence appears to have really been. What puzzled me is that, as far as it goes, a letter referring to a "child with another lady" does not necessarily imply adultery. Perhaps we are simply to understand this implicitly, perhaps because the papers didn't want to say explicitly what everyone was expected to understand.
93!
More press coverage of the divorce. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
Thanks very much Lutz! I think I have found some more on Miss Zwee, "milliner in Burlington Arcade", and the chauffeur Charles "Randle" (should probably be "Randall").
Miss Zwee appears to be Jane Zwee (anglicized from Janie Zivce), who appeared as a witness with chauffeur Charles Randall and others in a 1908 manslaughter trial against Henry (Harry) Davis, another chauffeur.
Jane Zwee says she is 16 years old, so she would have been 17 or 18 in November 1909.
(From Central Criminal Court Sessions Paper, vol. CXLVIII, pt. 379 (January, 1908), pp. 427-433)
Thursday, January 9, 1908
DAVIS, Harry . Manslaughter of Maria Hannah Munday; the like on coroner's inquisition.
Sir Charles Mathews, Mr. Bodkin, and Mr. Arnold Ward prosecuted Mr. J.R. Randolph defended.
Reference Number: t19080107-25
JANE ZWEE , 162, Vauxhall Bridge Road. I am 16 years old and am living with my parents. I am learning millinery at the Burlington Arcade. I have known prisoner three months. I was introduced to him by Charles Randall, the driver of the second car. On the evening of December 23 I saw my friend Cissie Anderson about 9.45 p.m. in Denbigh Street,. where she lives. About that time I saw prisoner pass up Denbigh Street. I did not speak to him. Cissie and I went to a public-house called the "Constitution," in Churton Street, and saw the prisoner's and Randall's cars outside. They came out, and the prisoner said he had to be at his employer's place in the park in five minutes. Prisoner drove away, and Cissie and I drove in Randall's car to Charing Cross, where Randall stopped at a public-house. We remained in the car. Then we went to Chapel Mews, to a public-house there, where we had two glasses of port. While we were there prisoner came up in his car and Randall asked one of us to get into prisoner's car. I did so, and Charlie and Cissie drove off. Prisoner went inside the Chapel Mews public-house. I do not know what he had. Prisoner said he would catch Charlie up. We went up Grosvenor Place into Grosvenor Street. Randall stopped to let us go by. Then we went into Buckingham Palace Road and worked our way round into Wilton Road. When we got to the top of Hindon Street I saw two women crossing the road. When they saw the car they rushed back to the side they had come from. They were right in the middle of the road when I first saw them. When they got near the pavement the young woman turned round and seemed to push the elder woman towards the car. The elder woman went to run back across the road. The car went to clear her, and the next thing I knew was the woman was underneath the car wheel and the car was on the pavement.
Cross-examined. I did not see prisoner to speak to till about 11 p.m. What we had to drink we had with Randall before prisoner came back.
Re-examined. Warwick Street was rather busy.
CHARLES RANDALL , 11, Elm Mews, Lancaster Gate, chauffeur. My car has been passed by Scotland Yard as a cab for the streets; it is slower than prisoner's car. It will go about eighteen miles an hour. Both the young ladies were going to be set down at the corner where the accident happened. In following prisoner's car along Hindon Street a post van came across St. Leonard Street rather suddenly, and it made me pull up dead, and after that I had to start again at first speed.
From "Old Bailey Online" -
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?path=sessionsPapers%2F19080107.xml
(trial begins about 2/5 down)
Original images:
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/images.jsp?doc=190801070036
Jane Zwee is probably the same as this 1901 Census record for Janie Zivce (Jane Zwee), since she is reported to have been born around 1892, which accords with her being 16 years old in January 1908.
1901 Census record -
If there is any truth to the story about a child with Jane Zwee, then, it should be possible for those with access to the full records to see if any birth records for 1908-1909 list her as mother.
Since it appears that Rose really did visit Zwee, there must really have been a child. So if Crowley was not the father, he must have plotted with Randall and Zwee to present the child as his to make the divorce easier for the judge to agree to. Nowadays I think such a story would just make the problems worse.
93!
Great findings, belmurru. Unfortunately I gave up my ancestry membership.
Anyway, here is the second installment of the Picture Post series of articles from November 1955. Enjoy.
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
Again no clipping for the exact date, so you have to live with this:
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
Another one from a monthly periodical due to not having a publication for Decmeber 1st. Of course this will change tomorrow, when world press became aware of Crowley's death. Anyway, this here is a rather lousy article, on the other hand it is written quite funnily and the author also is usually accepted as a nice guy. That's why I can't understand how Amado made it into this one. Well, working with the press sometimes seems to mean ”give them what they want.” Be that how it may, enjoy!
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
On this day sixty-five years ago, the message of AC's death hit the press, so there are plenty of articles to choose from. Enjoy...
Love=Law
Lutz
93!
A short one today. Chicago was a day late. I find it astounding that so many newspapers in the USA were so focused on this little "inivisibility" thing.
Love=Law
Lutz
Interesting, too, the continuing references to his having travelled to Tibet. This seems to have been quite a persistent rumour, which would explain why Gregorius repeats it.
93!
I have been advised that what I am doing here is basically "blogging" so I moved this series to the Blogs section. On the upper left go to Resources and then Blogs and then THE_REAL_SIMON_IFF. You can subscribe to it too! At the moment I still have some difficulties with the layout, but the important stuff - the press clippings - seems to be there! Today it is the third installment of the 1955 Picture Post articles. Enjoy!
Love=Law
Lutz
Happy Days! Thanks again Lutz.
Lutz, do you have the London Times editorials and letters about Crowley's "band of artists" and Oscar Wilde's tomb sculpture by Jacob Epstein in 1913, between 5 November and 8 November (and any other dates if there are any?)? This is the incident of the tarpaulin over the sculpture and the bronze butterfly/fig-leaf that Crowley stole and wore into the Café Royal, referred to in the Confessions, pp. 644-648 (1969 ed. of course).
Thank you if have them and can post them.