Time Traveling With R.E. Prindle  Part I

G.W.M. Reynolds and Charles Dickens

The study of social progress is today no less needed in literature than is the analysis of the human heart. We live in an age of universal investigation and exploration of the sources of all movements. France, for example loves at the same time history and drama, because the one explores the vast destinies of humanity, and the other the individual lot of man. These embrace the whole of life. But it is the province of religion, of philosophy, of pure poetry only, to go beyond life, beyond time, into eternity.

Alfred de Vigny, Cinq Mars, 1826

I have reached the time in life when it’s time to travel back through the years to review my life. While my corporeal years are few compared to eternity my mental psychological and historical life goes back thousands of years but more specifically the last three or four hundred. I am no St. Germain, I don’t claim to have actually experienced those earlier centuries but I have made an attempt to recreate them in my mind. Looking back I find that mankind has made no emotional progress. As my ancestors were so am I, so are we all. If one can’t empathize and sympathize with them one is being snobbish.

I don’t mean to bore you with a mere lineal presentation to the evolution of the human, specifically the European mind, over three centuries. I intend to roam back and forth linking and combining.

In today’s mental climate some may be furious that I would specify the European mind but it is the mind in which my own mind has developed. I have little empathy for the Asian mind, for instance, except as represented by the European experience of it. Nor am I particularly interested in learning another racial mindset when there is so much to be learned of my own.

As a base of reference I have chosen the 1840s and 1850s, a time of great discoveries just before the Darwinian and psychological explosions that were a quantum leap from the past to the present. A leap which in my own time we are in the midst of experiencing. The future will bear little resemblance to the past.   Western Civilization is on the brink of extinction and has no desire to live. The Asian mindset seems poised to be its replacement. Both the US and Europe are on the brink of disintegration. Asian hordes are at the door and breaking it down. Kaiser Wilhelm was right about the Yellow Peril. Thus, it seems that I’m taking a sentimental journey.

The journey will be a literary one for the 1840s and 50s were years of great writers and even greater literary masterpieces.

The decades before the before the 60s and the annunciation of Darwin played John the Baptist to Christ. My life has been lived mostly in the literature of that period. The great predecessor to the period was the beautiful time called the Romantic era. The French and Industrial Revolutions had put a period to what had gone before. Man hadn’t changed but the circumstances of life had. Steam power had entered the picture and with it the coming of the railroads and iron ships, those great dividers between the medieval past and the present. Electricity, the telegraph and photography made their appearance. Between the moveable type developed in the fifteenth century and photographic pictures the past could be captured as it was forever. The movies of the twentieth century, even more effective, were an improvement in film technology.

Science destroyed the belief in supernatural beings, the fairies, the elves, the elementals and, yes, even the gods. To destroy the foundations of their belief was easy but to destroy the need for them has proven difficult. Hence the Romantic era when the mind groped to reconcile fancy with science and created beautiful literary effects. It was then that genre literature began to appear alongside so-called literary novels. Genres were considered inferior to literary novels and still are although why isn’t clear. What is clear is the genre novels rule modern literature.

Perhaps literary novels disguise reality under the appearance of things creating an artificial world that doesn’t exist except in the minds of the believers and they don’t want their illusions disturbed. Hence, the popularity of Charles Dickens for nearly two hundred years. Dickens is no Shakespeare but perhaps even better read. Dickens can make grim facts seem palatable, perhaps because of Dickens authorial and censorial distance from the facts diminishes the reality and more genteel and respectable minds can handle the unpleasantness, which is quite grim, because it is happening to different people under different conditions that bear no relationship to their own lives except to be pitied. Dickens specifically writes for the self-satisfied and well to do. Dickens pretties his characters up.

But for every Dickens who has survived the ravages of time there are many, many more who have sunk beneath the waves remembered only by those who think of a vanished Atlantis. Amazingly one of these writers who crashed beneath the waves during WWI, an English contemporary of Dickens, who was as or more popular than he at the time was forgotten after WWI. I don’t know large the market for Reynolds was on the eve of the Great Destruction but I have a copy of The Rye House Plot bound with Omar. It was advertised as rare but it should have been unique. One Norman Hartley Rickard went out and bought the parts for The Rye House Part one and two on 5/13/14 and the two parts for Omar on 6/16/14 then went to the trouble of having them bound together receiving the bound volume back on 7/22/14. He thought that much of Reynolds on the eve of the war. The novels themselves were printed sometime after 1880 by John Dicks as they advertise General Wallace’s Ben Hur. Both books are more obscure Reynold’s titles so that if they were available at the late date of 1914 indicates fair interest in Reynolds. And then the war came.

During a time of prolific writers Reynolds was extraordinary. He not only wrote at least 43 novels, the novels themselves were of extraordinary length. Of his two masterpieces the first, Mysteries of London runs to 2500 pages of smaller type in the current Valancourt Press edition. His master work, Mysteries of the Court of London is ten volumes running to 5000 pages. He has numerous works running to 1500-2000 pages. These were not merely rambling stories but tight and compact, serious sociological and psychological studies with strong historical connections.

While Dickens and Reynolds represent the English contribution to the period, Reynolds, while being English, was also a Francophile. His writing style is a combination of the English and French psychologies. His is such an interesting case that I might as well devote a little space to it indeed these rambles will center on his career.

Reynolds was born in 1814, being two years younger than Dickens. He came from Kent in the South East of England. Much of the scenery takes place there, especially around Canterbury, in his earlier novels. His home town was called Eastry. His father was a naval officer who died in 1822 when Reynolds was eight; at fourteen he was placed in the Sandhurst Military College by his mother apparently to follow in the footsteps of his father. His mother died in early 1830 leaving Reynolds a complete orphan at the age of fifteen. How this affected his situation is not clear but he either chose to leave Sandhurst or was encouraged to seek a career elsewhere sometime in late July as he turned sixteen. His formal schooling ended there. He was one hellacious reader though.

Some say he inherited twelve thousand pounds, some dispute this, but, at sixteen he must have had had enough money to encourage him to emigrate to a new country with a tender age and no skills. He seems to have existed reasonably well. His inquisitive nature led to him to examine all levels of society. His Pickwick Abroad demonstrates this.

There were large numbers of English people who either moved to France, spent long absences there of fled England for legal reasons. It is this society he depicts there in Pickwick Abroad. There are opinions that he was not a stranger to illegal activities there. Pickwick himself, in the novel, dwelt at the Meurice Hotel. The Meurice was begun by a Frenchman who realized that with the number of English in France they needed a home away from home. He therefore created the Meurice to cater strictly to English tastes. Reynolds seems to have been familiar with both residential customs there and the riff raff who lived off the legitimate residents. One wonders what his exact situation was,did he live or perhaps prey on those who did. He was obviously very intelligent and studious. He must have had abilities because he was able to earn money as a journalist becoming familiar with newspaper practices. On his return to England at merely twenty-three years of age he was entrusted to edit the Monthly Review which he revived and set back on its feet.

There is a question of how long he was in France. The general opinion is from 1830 to 1837. Dick Collins in his introduction to Reynolds’ The Necromancer as published by Vallancourt thinks he arrived there in 1835. That doesn’t seem quite right as Reynolds’ experiences would likely take more time to acquire. Reynolds himself says he lived in France for ten years. To justify that he must mean that he arrived in 1830, left physically in 1837 and lived on mentally for another three years while physically being in England. The extra three years would coincide with his writing which is French oriented through is Master Timothy’s Bookcase. This book would be his mental transitioning from France back to England making up the ten years.

At any rate his knowledge of France and French literature would indicate a seven year residence. He returned to England just as Dickens’ Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club was being published in parts- that is in installments published monthly or weekly. Reynolds had had an active journalistic and literary career in France publishing his first book there in 1935 at the age of 21 and editing an English oriented magazine.

Rather startlingly, even as Dickens’ Pickwick Papers was still in progress Reynolds began a continuation of the novel called Pickwick Abroad that took place, naturally, in France. As might be expected this plagiarism caused an uproar that would mar his career. Nothing daunted by the uproar Reynolds next appropriated the idea of Dickens’ Master Humphrey’s Clock with his own title Master Timothy’s Bookcase. Both plagiarisms were notably better than Dickens’ originals. The Bookcase took place in France and then in a weak conclusion, one supposes, mirroring reality, shifted to England to end with another Pickwick story, The Marriage Of Mr. Pickwick, and several representations of Mortimer’s, the narrator, life in England. As Bookcase appeared at the end of the ten years this might be what Reynolds termed his ten years stay in France.

Then comes a two year hiatus in which Reynolds wrote nothing. Reynolds was well read. He frequently references his reading including Homer’s Iliad, probably Mallory’s King Arthur, Walter Scott much of the Gothic period and the Romantic Era, most especially Byron. Byron’s poems the Corsair and Giaour made a great impression on him and indeed the next couple generations. He was well versed in French literature. Dick Collins in his introduction makes a very telling point for Frederic Soulie (accent aigu over the e) being a direct influence on Reynolds in his introduction to The Necromancer. Reynolds put together a two volume survey of the literature of France published in 1938 composed mainly of extracts with introductions to the authors. I reproduce the intro for Soulie here in full from Collins which fairly accurately portrays Reynolds approach to writing:

Quote:

Frederic Soulie

Turn we now to that young and successful writer, who descends into the vault of the dead and snatches the cold corse from the tomb, to introduce it into his tale, who calls in the assistance of plague and fire to add fresh horrors to his romances; and who delights more in the violated sanctuary of Death than in the splendor and gaiety of the drawing-room. Turn we to him who has revived the midnight terrors, the phantoms, the robbers, the murderers, the executioners, and the violaters of virgin innocence, that were wont to dwell in the legends of the olden times, or in the folios of a German library; whose patrons were Maturin, Lewis and Radcliffe; and whose readers were timid school-girls and affrighted nursery maids. Turn we to him who has regenerated that school of horror which had nearly exploded within the dozen years;–yes, let us turn to him whose favourite subjects are those which we have dreaded to think of at night in the days of our childhood.

The writer of an ordinary novel may possess a weak, pusillanimous and feeble mind, yet produce an amusing tale. His book may be called a good one; and he himself may pass as a man of talent and capacity. But the author of a romance…must own a powerful mind a vivid imagination and a fertile brain; or else his lucubrations will be vain and futile.

His murders must not be told with the coolness of a newspaper report: they must seem as if they were written in letters of blood themselves. The very page, which narrates their tale, must be surveyed with awe and a species of pleasing and fascinating abhorrence—if the reader can comprehend the antithesis—which create much more than a common interest in the mind. The romance writer must indulge in nothing puerile; no tame or vapid description will be pardoned in him: his work must be all fire, all vigour, all energy and capable of producing a species of electric interest throughout.

Such is the system of M. Frederic Soulie exemplified in his Deux Cadavres. This awe-inspiring romance, which seems as if it had been written in a charnel-house, by the light of those flickering candles that in Catholic countries surround the corpse, and by an iron pen dipped in human gore, in the most extraordinary creation of the brain that ever was yet, in the guise of a historical tale, presented to the world. Let the superstitious and the timid beware of it: they would not forget its terrible incidents for many a long night, after they had once perused it. It is a romance which haunts its reader as a man is haunted by a phantom of the victim whom he has slain: it is a book so full of horrors—and all those horrors so natural and so probable—not once exaggerated by the assistance of powers from beyond the tomb—that he, who reads it, lays it aside with the impression that such things might have been, and interrogates himself whether he be just awakened from a nightmare dream, or whether he have witnessed a series of terrible realities.

The scene is laid in England; and the epoch of the tale is the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell. The work commences with the execution of Charles the First, which is described with painful accuracy. This is the first horror. Then comes the desecration of a grave in Westminster Abbey—the parade of a corpse through the streets of London—the hideous ceremony of presenting a jug of beer to the motionless lips of the dead thing, as the procession moves up the Poultry—the visit of two adventurous men to the Chapel in Windsor Castle at midnight—the exhuming of a coffin—the circumstance of one of those men putting his hand to the dead body which that coffin contained and finding by the disserved head that it was the corse of the late King—the journey through dark and dismal roads with that coffin upon a sledge drawn by dogs—rape of a beautiful girl by her lover in an hour of madness—the progress of the plague—murders, duels, riots and deaths—and then the horrid agonies endured by that young girl, who lingered through all the stages of starvation, tied to a tree, till she was wasted away, expired, and found a fleshless skeleton some time afterwards? This is the brief analysis of Les Deux Cadavres: this is the frame-work of the book upon which was built the reputation of M. Frederic Soulie.

Unquote.

This pretty well expresses the style Reynolds adopted combined with his reading of the Marquis de Sade. Reynolds used the episode of the woman tied to tree in Robert Macaire. Unfortunately Frederic Soulie has no translations into English so we can’t enjoy his spectacular style directly.

It appears that this part of quote is an analysis of Dickens:

Quote:

The writer of an ordinary novel may possess a weak, pusillanimous and feeble mind, and yet produce an amusing tale. His book may be called and good one; and he may pass for a man of talent and capacity but an author of a romance…must own a powerful mind, a vivid imagination and a fertile brain; else his lucubrations will be vain and futile….

Unquote.

That sums up Dickens as accurately as possible. If Dickens read this then one can imagine that he would be incensed and develop a deep seated aversion to Reynolds. Indeed, he would many years later say that Reynolds was a despicable person. The quote also expresses a certain amount of envy in his dismissal of Dickens from whom he had just appropriated the format of Pickwick Papers for his own Pickwick Abroad. At the same time the quote illustrates the difference between Dickens and himself.

Reynolds was apparently a theater goer in Paris becoming familiar with the plays of Victor Hugo and Alexandre Dumas, both of whom would be major influences of the period 1840-60 and beyond. Dumas, of course, exists today through his incredible novels, The Three Musketeers and The Count of Monte Cristo. Hugo lives on through his work Les Miserables, recently a very successful stage musical in the US as a revolutionary play. Also making a most profound effect on Reynolds was another extremely prolific author, the great Eugene Sue. In 1843, two years before Soulie died, the parts for Sue’s Mysteries of Paris began appearing and that would galvanize Reynolds back into activity. He immediately began his own first masterpiece, The Mysteries of London. A French writer by the name of Paul Favel also wrote a work titled Les Mysteres De Londres at the time also inspired by Sue. Favel was an excellent crime writer detailing the activities of organized crime through his Blackcoats series. Written sometime after Reynold’s Robert Macaire or the French Bandit in England that mentions Macaire as the leader of a nationwide loose organization of criminal revolutionaries. It begins the story of the great worldwide criminal organizations of today as well as the US’ Statewide and national criminal organizations. The Revolution released them, and Democracy allowed them to prosper.

Reynolds while bursting with ideas seemed unable to express them without a format provided by someone else, hence his use of Dickens’ Pickwick Papers and Master Timothy’s Bookcase as wells as Sue’s Mysteries of Paris—he had to have a format to follow. When Sue’s Mysteries of Paris appeared the plan for Mysteries of London appeared. The basic premise had evolved in Reynolds’ mind, that of two brothers connected to two trees who go separate ways, one of crime and one of rectitude, who then reunite to compare the results of their systems.

This notion may have evolved from Reynolds’ reading of Justine and Juliette by the Marquis de Sade. In de Sade Justine who follows a life of rectitude ends up trashed and her sister Juliette who followed a life license ends up rich and happy. Reynolds reverses the results, complaining that such may be case in individual situations but certainly not systemic.

That is not to say his novels are slavish copies of other men’s work. Oh no, they are amplifications and extensions, completely original alternate versions. Sue, himself had just entered his masterpiece period with The Mysteries of Paris and its successor, the marvelous Wandering Jew. For my tastes The Wandering Jew far surpassed the great Mysteries of Paris and that is saying something in a long way. All these works are massive while the successor to Reynolds’ Mysteries of London, The Mysteries of the Court of London is twice as long as any other novel of the period while its intensity lifts one into the stratosphere. By the time of Mysteries of London Dickens was pursuing Reynolds in an effort to keep up. Reynolds by that time was more successful than Dickens so the latter had even more reason to be bitter.

The novel took four years of serialization to be completed and in that time both Mysteries of Paris and The Wandering Jew by Sue had appeared. The Wandering Jew in 1845, the year Soulie died, so both novels would have had an influence of Reynolds’ novel. For myself, as great as Mysteries of Paris is, I prefer The Wandering Jew. Its style may be offensive and off putting to today’s readers but the book has nothing to do with Jews; it is rather an anti-Jesuit story with the greatest villain ever, the Jesuit priest Rodin and his Invisible Hand.

The story involves a fabulous inheritance due to a number of inheritors including two children from Germany. In order to claim the inheritance they must be in Paris for the reading of the will on a certain date. If they fail to appear the fabulous fortune will fall to the Jesuits. It is Rodin’s task then to prevent the inheritors from reaching Paris. Simply killing them would arouse suspicions hence he has to engineer delays and obstacles hence the Invisible Hand. While without being apparent Rodin’s schemes are always at work.

Here we are introduced to the concept of rather than outright assassination it is better to exploit the weaknesses of the individuals so that they destroy themselves. Hence for one claimant Rodin easily leads him into a life of dissipation in which the man essentially drinks himself to death.

The closer the children get to Paris the more intensely the climax resolves into a final Armageddon in which all of the participants including Rodin and his Invisible hand are killed. The only claimant left standing is a good priest and he of course is a very charitable guy with no other use for the money. With such a model before him Reynolds digs deep keeping his own story racing along but to a relatively weak ending, a slight disappointment very poorly handled. He does much better in Court of London which ends in a real Armageddon.

Even as Mysteries Of London was drawing to a close Reynolds began the eight years of weekly installments of The Mysteries of the Court of London. The latter was a grandiose and magnificent structure. At the time England was only short of a fifty percent literacy rate. So a pretty good living could be made by organizing a group to read these stories to. Thus a man could gather a reading group of perhaps thirty people to whom he read the weekly installment. A really primitive radio setup, eh? I suppose one could organize two or three groups and live rather comfortably. I am not aware of what the readers charged but the penny was divided into half-pennies and even farthings or quarter pennies. For eight years people set aside an hour or two to be read to. This is not unlike todays filmed episodes that go on for years like the Game of Thrones. This is quite marvelous. Reynolds would have been the talk of the town for eight years, actually, combined with The Mysteries of London, twelve years. That’s something of an achievement.

His writing style then was conceived as to sound like he was talking directly to these hearers while always being so intense that their attention did not waver, and he succeeded. One can’t be sure but perhaps the memory of this success drove Dickens wild so that he himself devoted the last years of his life reading from his novels, especially Oliver Twist, to audiences.

Now, Reynolds had a particularly capacious and powerful mind. While he was writing Court of London over eight years he also wrote eighteen additional novels nearly all of which were 600 to 1500 pages. The ability to keep weekly installments in mind and while either consciously or sub-consciously planning several others is beyond phenomenal. While these were coterminous the variety of incident had to be kept fresh throughout the corpus or all would fail. Reynolds was capable of doing that while pacing his novels with fast flowing action. At the same time he is keeping up with social and scientific developments and raising a numerous family. His psychology is usually thoughtful and spot on. He refers, for instance, to Anton Mesmer and his Animal Magnetism that moved toward perfection as hypnotism. While revealing the unconscious, the realization of which would dominate psychology through the system of Sigmund Freud about far off 1920. The unconscious still remains misunderstood.

He makes reference to Franz Joseph Gall’s much misunderstood theory of phrenology, the forerunner of the discovery of the function of brain localities.

His corpus is perhaps too large to be read in full except by the most dedicated scholar, and I mean that in the singular, who would receive no reward for his efforts. The additional reading necessary to understand the full import and value of Reynolds is even more daunting.

The discovery of influences, for instance, and familiarizing oneself with them is a monumental task. Reynolds was born under Romaticism and began his career on the cusp of the Positive period of August Comte and Herbert Spencer.

Indeed Romanticism has never left us. A Romantic revival occurred post-Positivism and the then emerging scientific revelations. Literary styles were changing or evolving through the decades and the epigone of the 1840s and 50s were shadows of their forerunners while still better than the pulp writers they engendered. One of the finest of these was the Anglo-French writer George du Maurier who wrote three classics, almost a trilogy: Peter Ibbetson, Trilby (Svengali) and the Martian. While not as towering as The Mysteries of the Court of London, The Count of Monte Cristo, The Mysteries of Paris and The Wandering Jew they are astonishing works of art.

One of the great journalistic successes of all time, Punch or The London Charivari, the famous humor magazine, was founded in 1842. The magazine remained until the 60s of the twentieth century. During mid-nineteenth century Du Maurier was a regular contributor with both drawings and texts. He probably would have continued with the magazine until his death had not he been rejected for the editorship when it became available. Fortunate for us, for then he turned to writing his novels which were fabulous successes being reprinted until recent times. Like Reynolds his mind was divided between his French and English heritages. Born in France, he was removed to England in his teen years. This was a traumatic experience for him as the cultures of the French and English were so different. Reynolds had the advantage of developing an affection for French culture before he removed from England and although an orphan of only sixteen years he appears to have thought he was moving to a wonderland and was never disappointed. He had the misfortune to have expended his resources, bankrupting himself, thus expediting his return to England.

Du Maurier’s first novel, Peter Ibbetson, would detail his conflict with the English mentality in a beautiful story. As part of the Romantic revival Du Maurier combines the fairy world with proto-science fiction and fantasy. His French childhood in the novel is involved with fairies and his little girl friend Seraskier who reappears in England as the adult Duchess of Towers. Not only that his next novel Trilby is built on a character and situation created by the French Romanticist, Charles Nodier. In his novel also named Trilby, Trilby was a male Scottish fairy. Du Maurier transposes sexes and makes Trilby a woman in his title of the same name.

In Peter Ibbetson, Peter is in the care of his uncle who, upon defaming Peter’s mother, is murdered by him, justifiable homicide by another name; nevertheless he is convicted and sentenced to death but spared hanging through the intercession of the fairy Duchess of Towers.

Languishing in prison he goes bonkers and is transferred to an insane asylum. There he finds that while sleeping he can unlock a door and enter the dreams of the Duchess of Towers. A beautiful hundred pages follows.

Trilby, his second novel, is in one respect a very long fairy tale masquerading as real life. The novel records a fantasy of Du Maurier’s experiences as an aspiring artist in Bohemian Paris. A real font of pleasant memories for George. He remained a Bohemian all his life and made the most of enjoying that life. Trilby was a runaway smash hit equaling in impact Dickens Pickwick Papers.

There is a marked difference between the romanticism of Du Maurier and his contemporary William Morris. Morris writes in an Arthurian mode of pure fantasy while Du Maurier was affected not only by science but the so-called occult world of the founder of Theosophy, Madame Helena Blavatsky. Her The Veil of Isis published in 1873 may very well had had an influence on him. I have as yet no real proof that he read Blavatsky, other than the dream world of Ibbetson and the Duchess, but Theosophy is something that Punch would have been ribald about as well as the Spiritualist Movement.

While Comte’s Positivism did intervene between Romanticism and the Revival the whole fabric of the evolving mindset was blown apart by the issuance of Darwin’s Origin of Species . The Earth trembled beneath the feet of the Victorians and was further shifted by the rapid emergence of psychological analysis. Between Evolution and the developing knowledge of psychology that solidified with Freud’s pronouncements after the turn of the century. The ancient supernatural and fairy mentality had to be reconciled with the new scientific mentality; Mankind would not give up the concepts of the supernatural so easily.

To travel back in time again to the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution: by the time of that revolution the Scientific Revolution had been under steam for some little time. Thus, the European mind was developing rapidly. There are some, blind to reality, who will object to such a fact as racist. Associated with race, it may well be, however the fact is that science developed as with no other race on earth. This is fact. So, the European mind was solving nature’s mysteries. As simple as these solutions were they were mind boggling at the time. The very notion that air has weight is incredible to the mind. Even today no child believes air can be weighed until he is so instructed. The fact that air is made up of many gases and that these gases can be separated and that one of these, Oxygen, was the substance of life must have been just too astounding.

By the late eighteenth century then other mysteries could be explained in other ways than the supernatural. All those wonderful fairies, elves and elementals could be demystified and explained naturally. Thus the Gothic novel came into existence and the Gothic novelists made it a point to explain supernatural beliefs as perfectly natural. Thus, the transition from the Medieval world to the modern or rational world progressed. Lyell challenged the supernatural belief that God had created the Earth four or five thousand years previously. He presented the monstrous belief that the planet was immeasurably much older and that it developed under natural processes.

Inevitably these incipient sciences were primitive and left more unexplained that they explained. Resistance to all scientific revelations was strenuous, the European mind having been deeply corrupted by Biblical superstitions. Slowly the superstitious was being rejected. The wonderful and beautiful Romantic period was a confusion of the natural and supernatural as the supernatural was gradually disproved.

Reynolds, Dickens, Dumas, Sue and many others were born into the Romantic Age, experienced and moved out of it as society evolved. Byron was only one important Romanticist but one who influenced that generation experiencing the revelations of science and technological inventions, such as applications like railroad and iron steam ships and the telegraph.

By 1830 science had a firm hold on the imagination and European society was ready to advance to the Positivism of August Comte who organized the loose sciences into specific groupings or disciplines. Thus, writers, who are on the cutting edge of developments, began to amalgamate these developments. Reynolds wrestles to get all these literary genres that affected him into a coherent whole; no easy problem. He and Eugene Sue were prime examples of making order of European intellectual developments. Reynolds especially was a prominent primitive sociologist and psychologist. This makes his work extremely compelling.

The generation born into the Romantic Age and are bound into the transition from the Romantic to the Positivist were passing their prime and from the stage by the 1860s when their influences were being eclipsed by he march of time and a generation was emerging that handled the same material in a different manner.

In 1859, as the style of writing was changing, Darwin’s Origin of Species was published and that put a definite term to the Middle Ages. It was a new world from the 1860s on. Evolution was the issue while in France Jean-Martin Charcot was making great inroads in the study of psychology. The world could never be seen through the eyes of previous years again. In literature the giants had left the earth, their epigone would be much smaller.

Moving across the water to the New World of the nineteen twenties and thirties we have a strange phenomenon in the career of the short story writer, Damon Runyon. Something that emerged out of the Revolutionary/Napoleonic era that wasn’t so obvious before was the rise of Organized Crime. Dickens touched on it in the career of Fagin/Sikes in Oliver Twist. Reynolds, Paul Favel and Sue developed the phenomenon but by the nineteen twenties and thirties in NYC organized crime was virtually an alternate government. Democracy had no idea how to control it. Frank Costello, a leading Mafioso, wanted to make organized crime a legitimate form of business. In his way Damon Runyon aided and abetted Costello.

Runyon, after a terrible childhood in Colorado was brought East to NYC by W.R. Hearst as a sportswriter for his papers. Runyon because of his childhood had an affinity for the outcasts and outlaws. Once in NYC he made Satan’s Square Mile centered on 42nd and Broadway, known also as the Tenderloin, his ‘home.’ He took up a station at a deli called Lindy’s that his stories made famous as Mindy’s.

He sat and observed this immigrant store of criminals during the twenties, committing their antics to print in his short stories. Not really a very good writer other than that of this criminal milieu, he turned rather gruesome situations into charming stories for the uninstructed; the stories got grimmer as time wore on.

Without his knowledge of the actuality of his stories, as I say, one is charmed. The stories are written in the illiterate immigrant jargon of the times, a weak understanding of tenses and so forth that some, the New York newspaperman, Jimmie Breslin who was there at the time but wrote in the 60s, think that Runyon invented. I have actually heard people speak that way so I think it was the lingua franca of Satan’s Square Mile.

At the time I am writing, the American past of 1900-1950 has completely disappeared. At the time Runyon was writing in NYC, Jewish, Italian and Irish colonies were well defined and not yet Americanized except in a very superficial way. After all, unlimited immigration was only suspended in 1924 so that there were hordes of unassimilated immigrants clustered in their colonies. Dialects were heard constantly. Dialect humor didn’t disappear until after the 1950s. My aunt’s had heavy German accents until they died in the fifties or sixties.

In other words, there were still large populations that hadn’t learned English at all and many, many who had a flimsy grasp of it.

At any rate, Runyon uses this immigrant dialect as the basis of his stories, and it is that that really gives his stories interest. No matter, he sat with these criminals ona daily basis and mostly all day at Lindy’s. Without that there isn’t much there. However, he sat with these criminals as a very successful ‘real’ American. He gradually insinuated himself into the underworld as a sort of consiglieri. He was an important advisor within the underworld. He, really became one of them protected by his association with Hearst.

The stories are entertaining enough but then Runyon tried to make romantic characters of these thugs on the stage and in the movies. The effort revealed the situation as it was without the glamour. In what was supposed to be a comedy Runyon filmed a movie called A Slight Case Of Murder with Edward G. Robinson playing a very convincing Mafia Don. It isn’t charming on film.

Runyon contracted Cancer in the thirties dying in 1946. His era died with him. Organized Crime had become Murder Inc. and there was nothing funny about it anymore. The sort of last gasp for Runyon came in 1955 when a big budget movie in striking technicolor (the movies lost something when technicolor was discontinued) called Guys and Dolls was released glorifying the Underworld. Brando and Sinatra starred. The movie didn’t make it.

It would take the horror film, Coppola’s Godfather to put a romanticized Mafia over a decade or so on.

To slide back a century and a half ago I will now review Reynold’s novel Robert Macaire or, The French Bandit In England.

To be continued in Time Traveling With R.E. Prindle, Part II, Robert Macaire.

G.W.M. Reynolds

A Mind Of Vast Proportions

by

R.E. Prindle

 

G.W.M. Reynolds had a remarkable career. I don’t know how many people have ever read his entire oeuvre, I certainly am not yet close, not even close enough to say closing. Still, I have read a few million words.

His work can be divided into two groupings. The first group is a preliminary to the outstanding second group. It seems almost unbelievable that a human mind could encompass the second group.

Reynolds was only 21 when he wrote his first novel in 1835. That book was titled The Youthful Imposter. This was the first in the group that may be called the French novels.

After a hiatus of three years this was followed by Alfred De Rosann and then his appropriation of Dickens’ Pickwick Papers, Pickwick Abroad, or The Tour of France in 1839, followed by Grace Darling also in 1939 and then in quick succession in 1840, Robert Macaire, The French Bandit In England, The Drunkard and The Steam Packet.

Then came the termination of the French period, Master Timothy’s Bookcase which took place in both France and England as Reynolds had returned to England in 1837. Both Pickwick Abroad and Master Timothy’s Bookcase were based on Dickens stories. Having no further source of inspiration Reynolds went dry for two years.

One imagines he put the two years to good use reading and thinking. Gathering his ideas together without format within which to place them. The bridge between the French group and the Mysteries series was image of two brothers and the two trees that were mentioned somewhat lovingly in Master Timothy.

Then the inspiration, the format, for his phenomenal period from 1844 to 1856 came from France in the fantastic novel of Eugene Sue: The Mysteries Of Paris. In his earlier period Reynolds explained quite clearly that his interest was in solving the mysteries of life. The two brothers and the two trees took immediate form in his mind and he rolled out the story that would consume 2500 pages or so working on many mysteries in the series called Mysteries of London. There was also a Mysteres de Londres published by Paul Feval in France beginning in 1843.

Now, the first premise of Master Timothy’s Bookcase was then of the mysteries or back stories that explained the true stories of certain events so there was a smooth continuation to his Mysteries of London. Once again Dickens was an influence as by 1844 several of his works had been published that dealt with the London sociology and its ‘mysteries.’

The Mysteries of London, a massive novel of 2500 pages in the two large volumes of today published by the Valancourt Press, was serialized over four years from 1844-48 while Reynolds’s supreme Masterpiece The Mysteries of the Court of London was as long running in weekly parts as today’s television series and as popular as Game of Thrones or Downton Abbey, from 1848 to 1856. The two works combined ran for a total of twelve years; a whole generation, almost, was brought up on these bestselling books.

One should also note that as there were no movies or TV at the time and most of the population was illiterate, well paying jobs, on a modest scale, were created as reading groups in which a reader read to a gathered audience. Thus, whether they charged a farthing, a half-penny or a penny, I know not, and perhaps had two or three reading groups, the reader probably lived well, well above their listeners that is.

More phenomenally the beginning and ending of Court of London bracketed eighteen other novels being composed during the same period. Nor were these minor works. Mary Price, for instance, ran close to a million words. Ellen Percy was equally long as was Joseph Wilmot. Court of London was itself five million words. I mean, these are staggering numbers. The Necromancer in the Valancourt edition runs to 600 pages of small print.

When I say bracketed, I mean that the inclusive novels must have involved problems that Reynolds was working out concurrently with the main frame Court of London. In my studies of Edgar Rice Burroughs, that author did the same thing. In his case he was unable to finish the novel that began the series as he solved his mental issues and when they were solved, he was able to finish his book.

While writing these eighteen novels while turning in weekly installments of the Mysteries of the Court of London Reynolds had to be working up two or three other novels at the same time and submitting weekly installments of those. This is a staggering work load. If it weren’t a fact, I would say it was impossible.

One can only marvel at such a capacious mind that had to be cogitating completely different stories and compartmentalizing his mind to keep them separate and coherent. Try that as a mental exercise. Absolutely impossible. The mere speed of writing to accomplish that must have been 60, 70 or even a hundred pages a day, one is stupefied. Reynolds had no problems with carpal tunnel either.

At the same time Reynolds was editing magazines and engaging in radical politics while he and his wife were raising eventually nine children. Reynolds was a superman guided by divine hands. At the same time he was keeping up on his reading and one can find traces of inspiration from that reading all through his works.

Of course, such intense mental activity took its toll on his brain. My reading is that his mind broke, or became worn out, while composing the conclusion of Court of London. Reynolds had kept this story going for eight years meaning that he to keep all the details in mind while writing more than a dozen other novels. Now this additional writing didn’t break his concentration on Court of London and that is phenomenal. The series is divided in two parts, or possible two related novels of five volumes each. The second part can be considered a sequel to the first. As the story draws to a close in his mind he has to bring several different strands including ones from eight years back, but interlocked, to a conclusion. This calls for all his ingenuity and super human concentration. As I read, I reared back in my chair exclaiming: Let’s see him pull this one off.

He announces in the text that he is going to have to concentrate intensively to do that. The astute reader can feel the effort, and he is straining, it’s almost like a runaway train careening down a mountain grade with the engineer struggling for control but then bringing the train safely into the station. I found it breathtaking but I also divined what the effort had taken out of him.

And in reading the chronological list of novels in Stephen Knight’s G.W.M. Reynolds And His Fiction I found my understanding confirmed. Consider that the great Alexandre Dumas pere, had also expended his mental energies and at roughly the same time. He too was exhausted by 60. Eugene Sue completed his last novel and died. All three men expended prodigious mental energies during their prolific careers. Walter Scott also blew his brain out by excessive mental activity.

Reynolds himself would die comparatively young of a broken head, strokes and brain hemorrhage. One can only thank him for his titanic energy during the 1840 and 50s. As a slow writer myself I hold G.W.M. Reynolds in reverence.

A Note On G.W.M. Reynolds On The

Reception Of His Pickwick Abroad

by

R.E. Prindle

 

In March 1836 Charles Dickens began his story The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club. The story was issued in weekly parts concluding in October 1838. The series had been a great success, actually moving fiction into its modern phase. G.W.M Reynolds- George William MacArthur- noting Pickwick’s phenomenal success decided to piggy back on Dicken’s success so he began a continuation of the novel called Pickwick Abroad beginning three months after Dickens last installment in January 1838 in weekly parts through Aug. 1839.

His continuation was a success also. It did dumbfound the literary circles who considered it a plagiarism. For Reynolds his appropriation of the whole of Dickens’ idea and his cast of characters and, indeed, only a couple months after Dickens concluded, Reynolds began. The public must have said something like: ‘Oh, too much of a good thing.’

Reynolds version was running concurrently with the publication of Dickens’ Pickwick Papers in book form. How much confusion and dismay this may have caused was probably profound. Unheard of. The public unaware with what was happening very likely thought that Pickwick Abroad was, in fact, a sequel to the Papers. Whether the sequel cut into sales of The Papers isn’t known; perhaps it augmented them, the story becoming one in the public mind.

Regardless of copyright violations, copyrights being ill formed at the time, the sheer effrontery of appropriating another writers success was astounding and deeply, even viscerally, resented by Dickens as why shouldn’t it have been. Dickens bore rancor in his heart while it was always remembered by the literary crowd as a gaffe on Reynold’s part.

Both men went on to subsequent great success over the next thirty odd years with Dickens being a legend still. Reynolds who was extremely prolific, composing as many as possibly 40 very long titles actually sold more copies than Dickens. As happens to writers who write copiously the mind becomes worn and exhausted by the age of 60; it loses its flexibility. Following the excellent short biography of Dick Collins as published as a forword in the Vallancourt edition of Reynold’s The Necromancer in about 1862 Reynolds had ceased to write novels and apparently through with that line of endeavor sold all his copyrights to his printer, John Dick. They had been associates through most of Reynolds career.

Now in possession of Reynolds’ copyrights Dick accordingly brought out an edition of the entire corpus save Pickwick Abroad. This would seem to mean that publishing that book would be embarrassing, or, perhaps Dickens may even have requested that exclusion. Perhaps so, but it did sting Reynolds to the core. So that his entire corpus would be available one presumes, Reynolds found a publisher to reissue Pickwick Abroad dated 1864.

The book contains two prefaces, the first appearing to be from the first edition and the second from the 1864 reissue. In it Reynolds make no apologies. I quote the second preface in full:

On perusing the work, preparatory to the issue of this present edition, I see nothing that I regret having written, or that I have thought it prudent to omit. The ensuing pages are, then, a faithful reprint of the original edition, without the slightest abridgement: the plates accompanying it are also those which were expressly designed for the work, by Alfred Crowquill and Mr. Phillips.

With these words do I introduce the new edition of “PICKWICK ABROAD” to the public—sincerely hoping that its cheapness will have the effect of multiplying a hundred fold the number of readers.

He wasn’t kidding about the cheapness either.

I think the feeling of insult by Dick’s omission of the book is deeply felt. And who knows but that a great of satisfaction by that omission was felt by Dickens.

There is also an issue of how long Reynolds resided in France. In the First Preface written in 1839 he says he resided among the French for ten years. If so, it was only possible from 1830 when he was sixteen to 1837-8 just before he turned 25. Collins who has researched he issue thinks that Reynolds was only in France for a couple of years from ’35 to ’37. One must choose between Reynolds and Collings. Now, the age figure 25 occurs frequently in Reynolds early writing usually in connection with a death. Psychologically, then, it would appear that the Reynolds of his youth died in 1839 when he was twenty-five and Pickwick Abroad was a success. In fact in the legend of Edmund Mortimer as told in Master Timothy’s Bookcase, Edmund Mortimer the literary alter ego of Reynolds, belongs to a family in which the male dies in his room in his mansion at the age of 25. Thus with the publication of Pickwick Abroad the previous G.W.M. Reynolds in the character of Edmund Mortimer died and the second G.W.M. Reynolds took his place. Reynolds was reborn in his mind in 1839. The legend of the Mortimers then continues into it eighth incarnation and through Reynolds II reborn from the ashes of Mortimer I, the Mortimer line lives on.

Another of the mysteries Reynolds so loved to unravel, this one a mystery of his heart.

The Mysteries of G.W.M. Reynolds

by

R.E. Prindle

Part I

 

It is now over two hundred years past since Walter Scott ended his great series of novels. Closing in on two hundred years since G.W.M. Reynolds began his truly amazing career that puts him in the pantheon of great novelists. Not exactly the household word of his contemporary, Charles Dickens, but after a century of neglect he is now making a belated reappearance. With the rise of on demand publishing his whole extensive catalog is now available although it requires some searching. The British Library is leader in the field.

Unfortunately the BL is reprinting the Dick’s English Library editions that use diamond point for print. At least the books aren’t heavy. For anyone beginning reading Reynolds, Valancourt Press of the US has a beautiful paperback edition of what may be Reynolds’ most popular work, the 2400 page Mysteries Of London. That book was inspired by the French writer Eugene Sue’s great work The Mysteries of Paris.

If your mind is attuned to the period Eugene Sue who was as prolific, if not more so, than Reynolds, is just as readable especially his two great masterpieces Mysteries of Paris and the Wandering Jew. The latter book has nothing to do with Jews, rather the Jesuits, but Sue uses the medieval legend of the Wandering Jew as a framing device.

Sue inspired Reynolds for numerous titles. Reynolds was accused of plagiarizing frequently and this may be true in the sense that he often used their structures. Dumas had Auguste Maquet who researched material and provided a story outline that allowed Dumas to put his entire effort into composition without having to invent the story line so he could clothe the skeleton of the story. In that sense Sue’s Mysteries of Paris provided the format for what was already in Reynolds’ mind.

Sue and Reynolds were part of that crop of novelists born from 1800 to 1816 and either died or petered out about 1860. Their brains were exhausted, worn out by their prodigious output. His contemporaries are the key to understanding Reynolds’ work. They were all essentially sociologists and psychologists. It might be advisable here to note that Reynolds born in 1814 left England at the age of sixteen on his own arriving in France in the turmoil succeeding the French Revolution of 1830 then returning to England in 1837.

Those seven years were the most formative years of his life. Not unlike the end of the century’s George Du Maurier who spent his childhood as a Frenchman then going to England with his French heritage. Reynolds developed an Anglo-French style of writing. His is not the pure English style of the period. It is much richer and fuller. He digs deeper.

As in his 1840 novel Master Timothy’s Bookcase he explains that his joy in life is exploring and explaining mysteries, getting behind the effects and seeking causes. He is not satisfied with surface appearances. He does so with spectacular results. Unfortunately he began his career by plagiarizing the characters and basic plot, such as it was, of Charles Dickens, (born 1812) Pickwick Papers, not to mention parodying Dickens’ title: Master Humphrey’s Clock with Master Timothy’s Bookcase. The loss of credibility cost Reynolds as he was shunned by the literary establishment while opening a feud that lasted their lives through.

Reynolds shows his rue in the 1864 reissue of Pickwick Abroad. To justify himself, in a preface he quotes from ‘a small sample of the favorable reviews which the greater portion of the press bestowed upon “Pickwick Abroad.”

‘From the Sunday Times: “Mr. Reynolds proceeds in his striking imitation of Boz (Charles Dickens). Would it were not so. The writer has powers that may be more worthily employed to working out an original story (which to a certain degree, this is) in an original manner.”’

And then from the Sun: ‘”In Pickwick Abroad” were not the work built upon another man’s foundation we should say it was one of the cleverest and most original productions of the modern British Press. We rise from the first Number with the only regret that Charles Dickens himself had not written it.’

In such a manner Reynolds tries to justify himself. As the work was published serially over twenty numbers and the second quote refers only to the first Number, by the twentieth part Reynolds himself seeks to exculpate his plagiarism, or perhaps, borrowing might be a kinder word. Afterall, Chretian de Troyes work The Holy Grail had four different continuators. Perhaps Reynolds should have described his Pickwick Abroad as a ‘continuation.’ But no, as we will see, he tried to appropriate Dickens characters.

Nevertheless, in his last part p. 607 of the 1864 reissue he writes:

“We must now think of bidding adieu to our friends” said Mr. Pickwick, “and of shortening the hour of departure as much as possible. One of the most important periods of my life has been passed in Paris; and though I have occasionally met with disagreeable adventures, still the reminiscences of them are almost entirely effaced from my mind by the many – many happy hours that I have spent in this great city since the day I left England. The numerous songs, tales, and anecdotes that I have heard or read are carefully entered in my memorandum book; and on my return to England I shall place the whole in the hands of some gentleman connected with the press, and who at the same time is conversant with France, and acquainted with the character of her inhabitants, for the purpose of laying them before the public in proper form.”

“The talented editor of your travels and adventures in England would be the most fitting for such a work,” observed Mr. Chitty. “He is the most popular writer of the day, and from the manner he executed the important task you formerly entrusted to his care and abilities certainly deserves your confidence in this instance.”

“No, –” returned Mr. Pickwick: “I am sorry to say that he declines the labour, and it therefore remains for me to find one who will be bold enough to take it, with the fear of being called imitator and plagiarist before his eyes. I am perfectly aware that there will be much hypercriticism to contend with – that many journalists will be severe, if not actually overwhelming, in their remarks on the new undertaking.”

‘Severe and overwhelming.’ Reynolds must have been bold indeed to continue through twenty parts, reach a conclusion and be off and running in a career that would span twenty-three years and involve from 20 to 35 million words. This guy, Reynolds turned out enormous works one right after the other, without pause and sometimes working on two or three at a time. Just amazing.

His masterwork, The Mysteries of the Court of London ran to ten volumes and about 5000 pages and took him eight years to finish while writing other novels. Marcel Proust is still blushing.

The Court of London is too staggering. There is no let up over the course of the work.

He was fortunate in his choice of wife in that she wrote for herself while also being the first editor who transcribed what must have been scurrilous penmanship as Reynolds must have been turning out thirty to fifty pages a day. The mere editorship must have been a consuming task. In addition, Reynolds kept a close eye on French literature as is evident by who he borrowed from. Sue (born 1804) was a constant source after his Mysteries of Paris published in parts 1841-43. Reynolds must have been reading the parts when issued. Paul Favel (born 1816) who wrote his own Mysteries of London beginning in 1843 which very probably was an influence on Reynolds who was keeping a close eye on literature from France. Favel is quite worthy too.

At least Reynolds implies as much in his 1840 novel Master Timothy’s Bookcase in which his apparent alter ego is the hero Edmund Mortimer. As a foundation for his later work Bookcase is essential reading. A stunning work in itself it is as nothing to Mysteries of London and The Court of London. Reynolds had a very powerful mind. He was capable of extraordinary mental gymnastics discussing the most complicated subjects in readily understandable terms.

Bookcase borrows the title and in a nearly unrecognizable form the method of Dickens’ Master Humphrey’s Clock. There was no need for Reynolds to make reference to Dickens work, or as roughly as Reynolds says he was treated for Pickwick Abroad, it was not enough to make him stop. Indeed the feud or assault continued to Dickens’ death which came before Reynolds’.

In Humphrey’s Clock, a number of old stories, were stored in the clock case from which members of Humphrey’s club extracted stories to read. Reynolds took the notion to a level that was impossible for Dicken to match.

The premise of the Bookcase concerns seven members of the Mortimer family as told through the life of the last Mortimer, Edmund. The genius of the family appears before each generation in turn and offers to give them through life the quality they think will make them happy.

The first Mortimer chose glory, the next literary fame, then love, success in all enterprises, Health, Wealth and finally Edmund the hero of our story chose Universal Understanding. Of course, for each quality there was an upside and a downside; in all cases the downside prevailed eroding happiness and becoming a curse.

Reynolds very cleverly shows the downside of universal understanding. The Genius of the family named Timothy provides Edmund with a magical bookcase that solves all mysteries for him. Like his subconscious the bookcase is always with him providing a written scroll to answer whatever mystery Edmund asks.

If one remembers the US radio commentator Paul Harvey, his shtick was : You’ve heard the story, now, here’s the backstory. Harvey explains the mystery much as Timothy’s magical bookcase does.

One is also reminded of The Divine Pymander of Hermes Trismegistus, tr. 1650. In it the scholar explains how Poemander helped him solve mysteries. Reynolds was very well read so there is no reason to believe he hadn’t read the book. The scholar explains the situation thus:

My thoughts being once seriously busied about the things that are, and my Understanding lifted up, all my bodily Senses being exceedingly holden back, as it is with them that are heavy of sleep, by reason either of fulness of meat, or of bodily labour; Methought I saw one of an exceeding great stature, and of an infinite greatness, call me by my name, and say unto me, ‘What wouldst thou hear and see: Or what wouldst thou understand to learn and know?

Then I said, Who art thou? I am, quoth he, Poemander, the mind of the great Lord, the most mighty and absolute Emperor: I know what thou wouldst have, and I am always present with thee.

Then I said, I would learn the things that are, and understand the nature of them, and know God, How? Said he. I answered that I would gladly hear. Then said he, Have me again in mind, and whatsoever thou wouldst learn, I will teach thee.

And there you have the magic bookcase, the unconscious of Freud, the auto-suggestion of Emile Coue. The biblical injunction: Seek and ye shall find. In a reasonable sense Edmund took the particulars of a situation worked them through on an unconscious or semi-conscious sense just as Reynolds does in his explications.

Thus, through the first couple hundred pages Reynolds has Edmund living his life, meeting people and involving himself in their problems, the back stories of which are explained by recourse to Timothy’s magic bookcase.

All goes well until Edmund is accused of a murder which he didn’t commit but which circumstantial evidence indicates he did. In trying extricate himself his explanations were so vague and bizarre to his judges, but not to we readers, that he is convicted and sentenced to be hanged but then he is considered to be insane and his sentence is commuted to life imprisonment in the Bicetre Insane Asylum.

He is then sent to the famous French prison for the insane where he is considered to be a mono-maniac. He is imprisoned with three other mono-maniacs. Now, Reynolds wants to introduce a discussion of the circulation blood. I think this really clever the way he leads his story to this point, creating a false ending with the monomaniac interlude and then Edmund will be freed from the life sentence when during the 1830 French revolution the revolutionaries throw open the prison doors and unleash a small army of loonies on Paris.

Edmund’s fellow inmate, a doctor, had contested William Harvey’s right to be called the discoverer of the circulation of blood, contending that Plato had been before him. Reynold’s describes the situation:

‘The first (monomaniac) was an old man of sixty-five, with long grey flowing locks, with long grey hair flowing from the back part of his head, the crown and region of the temples being completely bald. He was short in stature, stooping in his gait, and possessed of a countenance eminently calculated to afford a high opinion of his intellectual powers, he was however a monomaniac of no common description. Bred to the medical profession he had given, when at an early age, the most unequivocal proofs of a fertile and vigorous imagination. He first attracted attention towards the singularity of his conceptions by disputing the right of the Englishman, Dr. Harvey, to the honour of having first discovered the circulation of the blood. He maintained that Harvey merely revived the doctrine, and that it was known to the ancients. This opinion he founded upon the following passage in Plato:–“The heart is the centre of a knot of the blood -vessels, the spring or fountain of the blood, which is carried impetuously around: the blood is the food of the flesh; and for that purpose of nourishment, the body is laid out into canals, like those which we draw through gardens, that the blood may be conveyed as from a fountain, to every part of the previous system.”

The young physician was laughed at for venturing to contradict a popular belief, and was assailed by the English press for attempting to deprive we Englishmen of the initiative honour of the discovery. He was looked upon as an enthusiast, and lost all the patronage he had first obtained by his abilities.

Thus, Reynolds as part of his story introduces an extraneous discussion of the circulation of the blood in which he was interested. And then Reynolds goes on to explain the purposes of what will be his own more than vast body of work.

“Of a surety…there are individuals in his world whose motives are so strange that they escaped human comprehension. Many an action in a man’s life is explained by some little sentiment or feeling, lurking at the bottom of his soul, and buried in the most infallible mystery. The most extraordinary and important deeds are frequently regulated or indeed engendered, by motives so trivial that, if judged by the side of other men’s minds, they would appear totally incapable of exercising so powerful a control over a sensible imagination. We are apt to exclaim against the explanations frequently given by romanticists and novelists, to account for the conduct of the heroes or heroines, as unnatural and being at variance with probability; but, in the great volume of human nature, we trace the motives of character, and eccentricities of disposition, which seem to justify the wildest descriptions of the professed dealers in fiction. No romance, which emanates from the imagination is so romantic as the tales of real life. Oh! If the veil were withdrawn from all eyes—if the whole world could read the mysteries and secrets of the heart—how much villainy would be suddenly exposed—how much how many unjust suspicions explained—and how many supposed motives of applause as rapidly turned into evident causes of blame.

So, there you have the goals towards which Reynolds is striving in all his work with his very powerful mind.

After Edmund escapes from the Bicetre Asylum he immediately returns to England. Here the stories of deep mystery end and there is an interlude before a long story titled The Marriage of Mr. Pickwick. Ends the book. I will deal with the Pickwick story in another part.

It would appear that the French part of the Bookcase story represents Reynolds’ sojourn in France in fictionalized or perhaps, hypnoid state. In the interlude Reynolds looks back and examines that stay from a more sober point of view. Here in an interesting interchange between Edmund, already an alter ego, with another man who appears to be a different alter ego. The second alter ego gives a different brief history of what might have been a portrait of Reynolds in France seen from a different perspective. It is well to bear in mind that Reynolds arrived in France when he was sixteen with a very ample inheritance of 12,000 pounds. Such a young sport with money must have been seen as easy prey to sharpers. As his stories are replete with such characters and stories, indeed, Pickwick Abroad is a virtual catalog of sharp and indeed, criminal practices, Reynolds must have had the same approximate encounters. It is most likely that at least one or two succeeded and probably more as he went through 12,000 pounds in six years. Here is the passage; Edmund, the sober Reynolds and Mr. Ferguson, the flighty Reynolds.:

As Sir Edmund was returning home…he stopped for a moment to request a light for his cigar at a lonely cottage which stood on the way to his own mansion. A young man with a pale countenance and yet with an ironical and smirking expression thereupon, answered the knock on the door, which stood half open. The individual immediately addressed Sir Edmund by name and claimed acquaintance with him.

“I have seen you before,” said he:–your face is familiar to me.”

“I reside in the neighborhood,” answered the baronet; “and that may be the reason—”

“No.” Interpolated the stranger. “ I have seen you elsewhere. I never stir out of my own house and therefore well aware that I couldn’t have seen you in the vicinity. I was once a man of the world, now I am a misanthrope.”

“Indeed,” said Sir Mortimer; “and yet,” he added glancing around him, “methinks that for a misanthrope you are tolerably comfortable.”

“It was in Paris that I saw you.” Exclaimed the stranger, without heeding the observation, and having reflected for a moment. “Ah, now I remember you well, and who you are—and the strange adventure which befell you there. But, believe me, I am delighted to see you released from that horrid dungeon into which you were cast. I never believed your guilt,–I knew you were innocent,–indeed, I was fully able to judge of the force of a combination of circumstances, all collected against you, from my own experience in a most extraordinary scene of adventures, and yet”, he added with remarkable rapidity of utterance, which was evidently characteristic of him, “mine was rather a laughable than a serious history. Did you know me by name in Paris? Did you ever hear of Mr. Ferguson, who had acquired the honourable distinction to the name of the ‘Man of the world? No! Well—I believe I was as much entitled to the name as the Barber in the ‘Arabian Nights Entertainments’ was to that of Silent…’

Undoubtedly as a sixteen year old in 1830 Reynolds over the next six years flattered himself as being a man of the world, which he was, he ruefully recalls, as much as the obviously talkative Barber in the Arabian Nights had received the sarcastic name of Silent.

Also Reynolds having read the Arabian Nights shows how he must have passed much of his time in France. The work was translated into French from 1702-1713 by Antoine Galland and first in England as late as 1844 by Edward Lane.

Reynolds was exceptionally well read for such a young man. He was only twenty-six in 1840 when this book was written. He was interested in all the Liberal Arts including psychology as being developed by the great Anton Mesmer and his successors and hence the inkling of the sub- or unconscious. And he considered himself a teacher. Quite extraordinary.

As there will be discontinuity between this period and part two and three I will discontinue here and pick up on the continuation shortly.

 

3477 words

Immigration, Damon Runyon,

And New York City

by

R.E. Prindle

 

In the 2019 March-April issue of Foreign Affairs devoted to discussion of the idea of New Nationalism, Jill Lepore a Harvard Professor of History opens the discussion with an article entitled: The New Americanism. No, she isn’t talking about Pres. Donald Trump. Her proposition is this: Why a Nation Needs a National Story.

Apparently Liberals have given up on the idea that there is no such thing as a nation. Even a social construct needs a reason to exist. I quote here first two paragraphs:

In 1986, the Pulitzer Prize-winning, bowtie-wearing Stanford historian Carl Degler delivered something other than the usual pipe-smoking, scotch-on-the-rocks, after-dinner disquisition that had plagued the evening program of the annual meeting of the American Historical Association for nearly all of its centurylong history. Instead, Degler, a gentle and quietly heroic man, accused his colleagues of nothing short of dereliction of duty: appalled by nationalism, they had abandoned the study of the nation.

“We can write history that implicitly denies or ignores the nation-state, but it would be a history that flew in the face of what people who live in a nation-state require and demand,” Degler said that night in Chicago. He issued a warning: “If we historians fail to provide a nationally defined history, others less critical and less informed will take over the job for us.”

Unquote.

I empathize with Prof. Degler’s concerns, however ‘nationally defined history’ already exists and has existed for some time, it is called the Immigrant Narrative of American History. According to it ‘Americans’ are good people, indeed, the very best but only because we have opened our hearts, minds and national home to immigrants from wherever and whatever condition provided only that they be colored, POC (People of Color); that is, not White. We know by this narrative that Whites have caused all the ills of the world while not deserving to live.

In the nineteenth century, it’s true that after the country became a nation in 1793 the immigrants, much to our shame today, were White, with the exception of African Negroes who were needed for work that White people wouldn’t do. That immigration would have the direst consequences even though the Negroes are good hearted POC who wouldn’t never do nobody no harm.

The principle port of entry was NYC, first at a facility called Castle Gardens and then the fabled sacred site of the Immigrant Narrative, Ellis Island. It was there that the ‘wretched refuse’ of ‘Europe’s teeming shore’ as Emma Lazarus’ poem quaintly expressed it and she pasted it on the base of the Statue of Liberty. Thus the Immigrant National Narrative was enshrined.

They were coming to America as the Jewish poet Neil Diamond sang in the twentieth century from every country in Europe and a great many of them stuck in New York City giving that town its peculiar character.

Immigration was cut off at the knees by Conservative bigots beginning in the 1920s coinciding with that abominable experiment, Prohibition. This was a license to steal for the immigrants. Whoo, boy howdy, was that a combination- immigration and prohibition. A third ingredient was the introduction of women’s suffrage. The ladies obtained the vote. And somewhen at this time the Hero of our national narrative also arrived in NYC, Damon Runyon. He was the redoubtable historian with the national narrative much longed for by Carl Degler.

Damon Runyon sat in his favorite hangout of Mindy’s Deli in the heart of NYC’s Satan’s Square Mile and surveyed the scene. Of course, his history is fictionalized but no matter it is accurate, playfully accurate.

Some will say his history is too one sided but then so are all national narratives, they’re all fictional too, cut to measure from the whole fabric. It’s something like Einstein’s ‘fabric of space and time’ which no one has ever seen or touched but is still an article of faith.

For those who don’t know Damon Runyon, perhaps America’s least known historian, who wrote about ninety years ago, you may have seen an even more fictional representation of the work in the movie Guys And Dolls starring Marlon Brando and Frank Sinatra, two legendary characters that were once flesh and blood, if you follow them, in 1955 nearly seventy years ago if you’re still too young to remember.

So, Damon Runyon sat studying the immigrant type for that is what he portrays. The key nationalities that he describes are the Irish, the Sicilians and the Jews. The main Irish influx arrived in the 1840 and hence were the most assimilated, but only partially so, while the Jews and Sicilians were in the gold rush to America from 1890 to 1914. Those two groups were all only partially assimilated, the Sicilians least of all.

In Runyon’s stories they are all criminals. Like, who else hangs around in Satan’s Square Mile? Runyon really romanticizes these criminal types. Without knowledge of the situation they were all a bunch of lovable guys and dolls. Who could not like the Butch of Butch Mind’s The Baby. The only problem is that Butch is a killer wherein the humor of a thug minding a baby.

I first became acquainted with Runyon’s stories when I was sixteen. Perhaps my attention was called to him by the movie Guys and Dolls that was released at that time. Not being familiar with the context I was entranced by Runyon’s undeniable Flash. I was knocked off my feet and remained so until the last several years. Over time I reread the stories with a fair amount of regularity, each time gaining in worldly experience and a deepening sense of reality as to the deeper meaning of the stories content.

I still read the stories with some regularity having acquired original copies of the collections and a number of collections from a few stories to omnibus comprehensive collections. However when I now read it is with a sickening realization of their underlying brutality. For instance, the story, The Old Doll’s House, that particularly enchanted me, that involves a thug evading a shoot out in the process of which he jumps a wall and seeks refuge in the Old Doll’s house.

The Old Doll, we’re talking Guys and Dolls here and all women are Dolls, is a lady of advanced years. As she is blind she can’t see the thug waving his gun around and pleased to have company invites him to tea. Orienting himself the thug sees a clock that reads 12:30 which is the approximately correct hour. A half hour later it still reads 12:30 and that clues him in to the fact that the Old Doll is blind. Now he won’t have to kill her because she can’t identify him.

The story stops being funny on the third or fourth reading, twenty or thirty years later.

And so with all the stories. Dream Street Rose for instance. On a first reading Dream Street has a figurative meaning but in fact, Dream St. is a couple of blocks in Satan’s Square Mile. When they designate the square mile as Satan’s they aren’t just whistling Dixie either. That square mile was the criminal sink of NYC, the US, the world and without doubt the universe and beyond. The Metropole Hotel was there.

If you start researching Runyon’s characters you find people like the Jewish newspaper columnist Walter Winchell. If you want a fictional portrayal of Walter Winchell view the movie The Sweet Smell Of Success. And then there is the Jewish criminal mastermind called the Brain by Runyon who was Arnold Rothstein. The Brain Goes Home is pretty much a true story. The stories in their own way are real and out of the clothing of ‘poetry’, true.

At this time and experience in my life I find the stories blood curdling, even the Lily of St. Pierre, one of my favorites. You need a little background to understand Lily. St. Pierre is an island in the North Atlantic fishing grounds, back when the cod were plentiful. During Prohibition the Mob moved in and used the island as a way station for booze. St. Pierre et Miquelon was a French administrative unit. So, the world was corrupted by Prohibition and ‘American’ immigrant criminals.

Of course, as ‘Americans’, these partially assimilated Immigrants blackened the eye of native Americans who were tarred with the same brush as these ‘American’ criminals. And in the United States according to the Immigrant National Narrative those natives were styled ‘bigots’ and racists for declining to accept responsibility for what were actually native Europeans activities.

So, Miss Lepore and her hero Carl Degler, the ‘American’ historian may find no national narrative lacking; they’re just not looking in the right place. The national narrative may not be very attractive but then it’s not very American either.  Immigration has consequences.

Slavery In America

February 26, 2019

Slavery In America

by

R.E. Prindle

 

Let’s get something straight about the different forms of slavery that have existed in the United States. In the first place no one has clean hands, just as in Africa, even Negroes had slaves in the US and elsewhere in the New World, even in Haiti. Whites owned chattels in the South, Northern Whites mined Europe to work in their factories as wage slaves to keep labor costs minimal.

Slavery in the US, other than sex slavery that is still tolerated today, had three forms: chattel slavery, indentured slavery and wage slavery.

Indentured slavery was part and parcel of US history from its very beginning. Indentured slavery was White men ‘owning’ White people according to contract. A person for whatever reason indentured himself for a period of years after which he was supposed to be freed. There were many ways for his master to increase the period. During the period of his indenture he was another man’s slave. At the same time adults and children were shanghaied from the streets of London and England for sale in the colonies.

These Whites usually described as indentured ‘servants’ were slaves in fact.   Many, many indentured ‘servants’ worked cheek by jowl with the Negro chattel slaves in the fields. In that manner White women bore many Negro children thus diluting the African blood.

Chattel slavery of Negroes was legal in every English colony, there were no exceptions. In certain States such as Massachusetts and Connecticut chattel slavery was not commercially viable and it fell into disuse. After 1812 Chattel slavery was discontinued at varying times by the various States.  Chattel slavery existed in Northern States nearly to the beginning of the Civil War. Nor did the Emancipation Proclamation pertain to any chattel slaves in slave holding States that were not in rebellion. Thus, only Negro slaves in the deep South were affected by Emancipation.

Now, just as chattel slavery was not viable in States like Massachusetts and Connecticut it did not suit the manufacturing economy of the North otherwise chattel slavery would have existed North of the Mason-Dixon line.

The basis of slavery was providing the producers with labor. Slavery was a labor problem. In the agricultural South, especially in the cotton belt, slavery was the best labor mode possible because the laborers were tied to the land and couldn’t migrate.

Providing for the slaves was the Producers responsibility, hence food, clothing and shelter was provided as a cost of doing business. There were no Negro chattel slaves that went hungry. Conditions might vary but the slaves had to be cared for. If you read in the Negro slave narratives, available on the Internet, you will be amazed at what you find.

One ex-slave didn’t regret slavery that much because he said the you never went hungry in those days. If wanted food you culled a hog from herd, killed it, roasted it and ate it. Whether that was universal or not the chattel slaves did not go hungry or unclothed.

In the North where producers wanted labor at the lowest possible cost they had to resort to wage slavery. The industrialists worked their wage slavery. The industrialists worked their wage slave harder than any chattel slave. The wage slaves worked in horrible conditions for twelve hour a day seven day a week for a pittance. The wage slavers provided nothing but that pittance. Where possible they resorted to using children, young children, and women and paid them even less than a pittance.

The wage slaves then were on their own lookout for food, clothing and shelter. All those indefensible shanty towns. In all cases they were less well off than the Agricultural slaves. The Negroes definitely had it better.

While the chattel slaves were required by law to a certain level of benevolence, the wage slave had no protections whatever. If in desperation they resisted exploitation by trying to organize they were shot down dead. They were blacklisted and were unemployable. Hence a reason for armies of hoboes roaming the land.

The ‘Saints’ from New England, the Holy Abolitionists whose sea captains bought in Africa and sold in the New World, that is North and South America and the Caribbean were also those who sought cheap White labor from European countries. The principle was to have as many different nationalities and languages as possible in order to make it difficult to combine for better wages and working conditions. Slavery was slavery and conditions were harsher for wage slaves than for chattel slaves.

Thus Negroes have no more to complain about than Whites. Slavery was part of the woof and warp of the fabric of American society.

Lincoln freed certain of the slaves in 1860 and then came Henry Ford to ameliorate the conditions of the wage slaves. Lincoln was murdered for his role in ending chattel slavery and Henry Ford has been a victim of horrible character assassination for his role in ameliorating wage slavery. Most likely the reason that good men are hard to find.

Immigration, Al Smith, And The 1928 Election

by

R.E. Prindle

 

People don’t seem to realize that time and changes pass quickly. What was applicable yesterday will not apply to today or tomorrow. Nothing changes society more rapidly than immigration. While attention is applied to race and religion it might better be applied to manners and mores. Whether you think immigration is good or bad immigration changes reality very quickly while all one’s reactions are predicated on a vanished state of affairs.

The cultural changes, that is manners and mores had been occurring at a rapid rate during the nineteenth century and early twentieth century driven by immigration. By 1921 and 1924 unlimited indiscriminate immigration had been limited to more or less controllable numbers. Nevertheless the damage had been done. While the attempt was made to limit the most different mores and manners by favoring Northern European immigrants it was too late. The two chief groups of immigrants, the Irish and the Jews had acculturated enough to challenge the traditional English and Protestant supremacy.

Thus, led by Al Smith, a Catholic Irishman who surrounded himself with Jews the two nationalities were ready to challenge the Anglo-Protestant majority. Note that the Jews are considered a distinct nationality with their own manners and mores acting in their own interests. He, Al, or they chose the inappropriate moment to challenge the Anglo-Protestant majority as the country was in a period of roaring prosperity, had two presidents, Harding and Coolidge and were to be followed by Herbert Hoover who in the circumstances there was no chance of defeating. And so it was that Herbert Hoover became the last ‘American’ president. Hoover was followed by Roosevelt to whom the Jews transferred their alliance while the Irish were forgotten. Thus the Liberal and Jewish combination have written all histories and distorted the old American contribution to founding the US.

Now, in the 1928 election the Jewish-Irish faction could not accept their loss on any other grounds than the bigotry of Anglo-American voters. In fact, Al Smith was merely a New York City machine politician who, used to campaigning in New York chose as his theme song ‘The Streets of New York’ and spoke with a heavy New York City accent. His manners and mores were those of his home town. To the rest of the country those manners and mores were humorous.

The New York accent alone would have made him unpalatable to the rest of Americans who thought that NYC had an economic stranglehold on America. And then the to thrust The Streets of New York into their faces was sheer folly.

Being Catholic, of course, didn’t help Al with the Protestants but it surely was a charm for the Catholics who were the largest religious denomination in America. But there appears to have been no block voting along religious lines. The Economy ruled.

Whether Al’s Irish background swung the electorate against him is open to conjecture but I would put more weight behind that than the religion. At that point, 1928, there was still a strong antipathy between the Anglos and the Irish. Even in 1956 in my home town the antipathy was noticeable. Apart from Jack Kennedy’s being a Democrat and offensive because of his father’s criminal background his Catholicism and nationality was a factor in my voting against him in 1960. The Irish came over to what they call the New Island in large numbers during the potato famine in Ireland in the eighteen forties and beyond. There was immediately a huge conflict between them and the Anglos in which bloody battles were fought largely aggravated by the Irish. Thus the Irish-English conflict was carried to American shores.

With the Irish came the notion that immigrants rights were superior to nativist rights. Hence the political organization known as the Know Nothing Party that arose to oppose Irish violence was demonized out of existence for its efforts to protect American manners and mores and some kind of control of their destiny. They lost that control as the Irish formed a sort of competing government called Tammany that seized control of NYC and retained it until Jimmy Walker the last Tammany mayor was booted out of the country in the early thirties. It was as though the Irish had control of London.

The Irish were then replaced by the Jews who seized both NYC and New York State. As an immigrant group, the Jews, although the smallest national supplier of immigrants also came as the highest percentage of their nation and thus had equality of numbers with the other national immigrants. There were more Jews in NYC than in any other city of the world. The only place with a higher number was the Russian Pale of the Settlement that covered millions of square acres.

The vast majority of Jews arrived from 1890 to 1914. Like the Irish the Jews created a national enclave, or colony, in NYC. By 1913 they were able to effect a socialist revolution by electing Woodrow Wilson as presidient. This revolution, for such it was, has been unrecognized by Jewish and Liberal historians but the Wilson Administration, turned out in 1920, after a hiatus of the twelve years of the Republican Interregnum would morph into the fully fledged socialist presidency of Franklin Roosevelt beginning in 1932 and ending only with his death in 1945. Thus Roosevelt was the undeclared president for life.

So, Al Smith represented the end of Irish dominance in the affairs of NY and the hope of national dominance in a Jewish-Irish coalition. If that attempt had succeeded immigrants would have seized control of the United States of America. An entire new set of manners and mores would have replaced those of the original settlers. Immigration has adverse consequences like it or not.

While there was a conflict then between the Catholic and Protestant religions and between the English and Irish and Jewish nationalities the election itself was determined on the basis of extreme economic prosperity that Republicans could claim as their own and, indeed, it was called the Coolidge Prosperity after the middle Republican president of the Interregnum- Harding, Coolidge, Hoover.

Then came the deluge. Collectivism replaced Individualism and Socialism replaced Laissez-faire, which had been the system of the nineteenth century Gilded Age. A new set of manners and mores appeared based on an immigrant ideal with its symbol of Ellis Island.

A similar transition is occurring today.

Thoughts On Mr. Bezos’ Pecker Problem

by

R.E. Prindle

https://medium.com/@jeffreypbezos/no-thank-you-mr-pecker-146e3922310f

Let’s keep the ball rolling on this issue that Mr. Bezos has brought to our attention.   We have little idea of the behind the senses activity so we can only deal with what is public.

It seems that the Mr. Bezos owned Washington Post has been attacking Mr. David Pecker’s publication the National Enquirer, itself owned by a corporation calling itself AMI.

The sin of the NE as identified by Mr. Bezos is being in contact with Saudi Arabia. This seems strange as the Saudis are publicized as one of our stalwart allies, second only to Israel. It is difficult to see the offence even if it relates somehow to Pres. Trump. Yet this seems to be the basis of Mr. Bezos’ and the WP’s complaint.

There does seem to be some involvement with government investigators between Mr. Bezos, the WP and the Mueller outfit.

Mr. Bezos make this incomprehensible statement:

Quote:

Federal investigators and legitimate media…suspected and proved that Mr. Pecker has used the Enquirer and AMI for political reasons.

Unquote:

I have always held Mr. Bezos in high regard for his unbelievable commercial success but here he makes the incomprehensible statement that it is wrong that newspapers have political reasons in publishing. Has Mr. Bezos never heard of the Editorial page? Are not stories and their characterizations used for political purposes? Do not newspapers endorse and recommend their favorite candidates? Good Lord, doesn’t Mr. Bezos own the Washington Post and use it for defaming Pres. Trump?

Actually, he does know it. (One wonders if Mr. Bezos doesn’t also own the Medium site, the site on which he chose to expose himself.) Mr. Bezos calls his ownership of the WP a ‘complexifier’. In other words it compromises him.

Quote:

Even though the Post is a complexifier for me, I do not regret my investment. (The Post loses tens of millions of dollars a year; some investment. More a vanity and/or political project.)

The Post is a critical institution with a critical mission. My stewardship (note the word) of the Post and my support of its mission, which will be unswerving (and) remain unswerving…

Unquote.

Very well, but can’t Mr. Pecker say the same about his relationship with the National Enquirer. Is the NE really any less legitimate than the WP? Is Mr. Bezos mouthpiece any less reprehensible in its political ‘mission’ to discredit Pres. Trump?

Mr. Bezos then says:

Quote:

Back to the story: Several days ago, an AMI leader, (Editor I presume Mr. Bezos means) advised us (us being whom?) that Mr. Pecker went “apoplectic” about our investigation. For reasons still to be better understood, the Saudi angle seems to be a particularly sensitive nerve.

Unquote.

Why should it? Didn’t Pres. Obama make an obsequious bow from the hip while placeing his hand in the Saudi king’s hand as a sign of fealty?

There we have the crux of the matter. Mr. Pecker’s counter attack. Apparently fighting back is not kosher to Mr. Bezos.

After having been married to a lovely lady for twenty-five years, and building the most successful gigantic business on the planet Mr. Bezos decided he needs a hot babe and so he went out and bought one (for lack of a better word) not only that he bought a married one.

In this romance Mr. Bezos, who is perhaps one of the top ten tech wizards in the world inexplicably sent and exchanged pornographic photos with his Hot Tamale. These emails and photos were then given or sold to the NE by someone.

Mr. Bezos believes that the Pres. somehow hacked them. Where they came from is beside the point but the NE categorically denies they got them by hacking. Using Occam’s Razor the most obvious suspect is the Hot Tamale. After all if you had bagged a guy worth 150 billion dollars wouldn’t you want the world to know? What Hot Tamale wouldn’t? Anent that we have heard no objections from the husband and no filing for divorce.

In frustration the NE tried to negotiate with Mr. Bezos offering to squelch publications if he gave up his unwarranted persecution of them on the WP.

Mr. Bezos chooses to call this offer extortion and blackmail. Mr. Bezo’s will hopefully pardon a knowing smile on our part.

One wonders at what strategic moment Mr. Bezos will choose to announce his candidacy for President of the United States. I think you just killed your chances, Sir.

Eugenics and Dysgenics Part 2b-10

The Mysteries Of The Second Thirty Years War

by

R.E. Prindle

Continued from Part 2b-9

Gustavus Myers was an insignificant gadfly although a figure in Jewish circles. He had first come to notice after the turn of he century when he published his book The History Of The Great American Fortunes. Fortunes, that is great big piles of money, the kind Walt Disney’s character Scrooge McDuck used to roll around in. And American which is to say not Jewish. No Jewish fortunes are considered by Myers with the possible exception of Jay Gould.

The book which was a defamatory work against the great swashbucklers of the Gilded Age met with some success but it was a nasty work that raised more ire than praise.

Since that first book, which was at least interesting, he had turned out a succession of flops that mocked, debunked, defamed and ridiculed everything American, that is not Jewish, from the Supreme Court on down. The books really have no claim to be histories and are unreadable even to scholars, but in my case duty is duty and I have read them. Myers’ fame was more apparent in Jewish circles than American ones.

And now his fellow Jews needed his services for a specific purpose. Daniel Guggenheim of the Guggenheim Foundation sought him out. He commissioned Myers to write a volume defaming Nativist Americans as objects of hatred. The result, published in 1943, would be The History of Bigotry In The United States. A rather singular one-sided study. Sordid but effectual. I first heard of the book from a sixth grade teacher (1949-50) who thought it was a wonderful book.

The book is in two parts, a description of old organizations like the Know Nothings and the APA until it finally gets to its immediate object, the defamation of the Nativists indicted for treason and who were just about to be tried. The book was too little too late as the intended victims escaped not only without a conviction but a trial. Their careers were ruined of course and their futures disappeared. The important thing to remember is that the book was commissioned by the Jewish establishment.

-VIII-

We now come to the end of this essay, the death of FDR and the disposition of Germany.

One views the power of the US and the Soviet Union over Germany in its defeat with horror. Both the US and the Soviet Union were under Jewish influence, so the Jews have to accept responsibility for the actions of both their surrogates. The deep hatred of the Jews for Germany has nothing to do with the so-called holocaust. Their hatred began much earlier. Of course, Luther was adamantly opposed to Jewry in the sixteenth century. Any such opposition is portrayed by the Jews as unreasoning bigotry. However, the Jewish nation, even though Stateless, had its own objectives that required submission by the Other. There has always been a conflict for supremacy. The modern form of the conflict between Jews and Germans, as two distinct nationalities, did not start with Hitler but can be traced back to a man called the Jud Suss, Joseph Oppenheimer, who flourished in the 1730s and 40s organizing the modern Jewish approach to the conflict with the Germans in Wurttemberg and Frankfort on the Main.

His importance to the struggle can be easily seen in his prominent revival in Weimar and Nazi Germany. I have given a more detailed account in my essay Jud Suss. http://reuprindle.blogspot.com/2016/11/a-review-lion-feuchtwanger-jud-suss.html

During the Great War a Jewish writer by the name of Lion Feuchtwanger wrote a play titled the Jud Suss that was ignored at the time. But then in 1926 he published the propaganda novel Jud Suss that sold very well both in Germany and abroad. That meant that translations into other languages, most notably English had to be prepared in advance hoping for the success of the novel. Published in Weimar Germany the novel was turned into a movie filmed in England and released under the title Jud Suss in England and Power in the US in 1934 after the advent of the Nazis. Thus the film was a direct challenge to Germany. To have been released in 1934 the film had to be conceived in 1933 as Hitler took over the government of Germany. There are no coincidences here. These events were all planned.

Thus, the film seems to have been a direct challenge to Germany as to who would rule, Jews or Germans. The insult was deeply felt by Germans, so much so that in the midst of WWII Joseph Goebbels, the German propaganda minister commissioned a German version of Jud Suss telling the story from the German side.

As I have pointed out, Theodore Kaufman published his book Germany Must Die in 1940 when only the Jews were involved in the new war while at that time the US was overwhelmingly unconcerned with involving the US. The question of exterminating the Germans must have evolved in Jewish minds much earlier than 1940. Kaufman’s book was merely an open suggestion or perhaps a hint of what was in store for the Germans when the US would be drawn into the war.

Of course, the Jews were already leading FDR into actual hostilities at sea when he ordered US warships to sink German submarines. Roosevelt said the US border was the Rhine River and the Rhine was deep within German borders. Is it any wonder that Hitler called Roosevelt a warmonger?

FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury with the exception of his first year in office was the militant Jew Henry Morgenthau Jr. Interestingly Morgenthau said that he really didn’t want the job but that he was on duty. That means he was posted to the Treasury by others, that is the Jewish shadow government. That also means that Roosevelt was following orders and indeed FDR seriously considered the extermination of the Germans. The callous disregard of all life by these people, both German, Soviets and US with allies makes your blood run cold. How necessary was it that tens of thousands of US men be destroyed or that American society should be disrupted for essentially Soviet and Jewish purposes?

By 1940 when Roosevelt won his third term violating all US mores, he was already debilitated and unfit for office so if he was already a mere Jewish puppet he became increasingly debilitated and unable to function before his death. Morgenthau, then, progressively usurped presidential powers while expanding the role of the Treasury Department into all areas of government.

Especially as the third term wore on FDR may as well have been comatose. Morgenthau, aided by Harry Dexter White, devised his plan to dismember Germany and exterminate the Germans echoing Theodore Kaufman’s 1940 book. For Americans involved the plan was horrific and breath taking, but so long as Morgenthau was in control of FDR there was little that could be done although the issue was lambasted in journals by various writers.

In 1945 Morgenthau published his book Germany Is Our Problem with a watered down version for public consumption. Had he spoken candidly the American reaction would have thunderous. Thus, Morgenthau set the stage for the extermination of the Germans. FDR, incapable during the last year or so of his presidency, having been elected for his fourth term, was never to enjoy it. Perhaps realizing his coming end, he retreated to the comfort of his women at his spa in Warm Springs. Always hopeful that the waters would cure his crippled legs he may have wished to die beside his only hope. Thus, surrounded by a bevy of women including his ex-mistress and great love, Lucy Mercer, his brain and heart gave out and he mercifully for the US and Germany slipped away.

History records the country’s grief, but it ignores the fact that there was a lot of joy of Mudville when FDR lay down his bat for FDR had struck out.

The incoming president, VP Harry Truman, had been left ignorant of nearly everything that FDR had been doing so his entry into office was nearly a tabula rasa. He was aware of the Morgenthau plan however and the reaction it had caused in Congress. Morgenthau’s days were numbered, and he left the government permanently shortly after Truman took office. That didn’t mean that consequences for the Germans weren’t draconian. Indeed, horrific conditions would exist before any amelioration until 1950 when he US realized it was shooting its feet off.

Looking back nearly a century later when one considers the situation in the light of the cold grey dawn blame for the war is not so easily to be affixed. Germany had attempted a preemptive defensive war because it was most immediately facing the Soviet Communist menace. Stalin was massing Soviet troops at the Polish border in preparation for an invasion of Central Europe. Any Soviet invasion would have been genocidal in nature fully supported by Soviet Jewry. Indeed, when the Soviets invaded Poland shortly after the Germans, masses of significant Poles were murdered along with the entire Polish Army officer corps. They were all dumped in their many thousands into a common grave in Katyn Forest.

If one traces the lead from that example it follows that the same would have happened to the German military, while very likely hundreds of thousands would have been murdered in an orgy of slaughter the Jews would have considered revenge. And that was before the so-called holocaust. Subsequently millions would have been shipped off to the gulags. Hitler was not the demon of the era.

While it isn’t kosher to speak the obvious truth and, perhaps, risky, nevertheless historical integrity requires the historian to write without fear or favor.

There was no real reason for the war to have involved the US, England, France or any of the Western countries. Hitler was willing to take on the savage Soviets alone. Always remember the Soviets had already murdered tens of millions of the Russian people while millions more were held in barbaric concentration camps in the Soviet gulag where they were systematically starved and worked to death. All the West had to do was remain neutral and let the Nazis at it. Common sense required England and France to avoid war at all costs. The manhood of both countries had been bled white in WWI a mere twenty years earlier. They were financially bankrupt. They borrowed billions that they knew they would never repay or even make an attempt to. They exhausted US resources and sacrificed US men for their folly. And then the US had to spend additional billions to put them on their feet after the war. US troops and munitions prevented the Soviets from merely demanding submission that the West would have granted. And today they insult the US president. Then and subsequently the Jews functioned secularly, the supernatural was no longer invoked.

Part 2b-11 follows.

Eugenics and Dysgenics

Part 2b-9

The Mysteries Of The Second Thirty Years War

by

R.E. Prindle

Continued from Part 2b-8

-VII-

The Conquest Of The World/The Concept of Aggressor Nations

 

The histories of the period from 1933-1945 are thoroughly unreliable as recorded by historians, mainly Jewish and/or Leftist writers. A key concept of the period was the Rooseveltian conception of ‘aggressor nations.’ The concept of aggressor nations simply refers to any nations opposing the Leftist agenda. In Roosevelt’s lexicon there were only three aggressor nations, Germany, Italy and Japan. In Hitler’s terms the big war mongers were Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin that he considered aggressors. Hitler feared Communism, the others feared Fascism, and Fascism, after all is merely a variation of Communism. Ideologically there must have been something else going on.

Nowhere are the Jews denominated an aggressor nation while they were the motive force of the Second Thirty Years War. Bernard Baruch a leader of the International Jewish community, and possibly the leader was in collusion with the leading US Jews to direct US policy and lead the country into war against Germany. The attitude of what became the Allies was neither understanding nor kind.

There were calls from all sides to commit genocide on the Germans and this long before the so-called Jewish holocaust. German hatred began when Bismarck united Germany in 1866. Prior to this unification Germany had been a congeries of small principalities of the Holy Roman Empire, often seen as a joke, Ruritanian principalities to laugh at.

After the unification German hatred began in earnest from Russia to England. After the Soviet Revolution Stalin began a campaign to commit genocide of Russia’s German populations. Of a sudden Germany was not only an economic competitor but the master competitor with the West, that is France, England and the US while being the superior of Russia. There is much evidence that WWI was as much about competition with England and France as with other issues.

To attribute the insanity of WWI solely to the Germans was an injustice of criminal proportions. To impose impossible economic burdens on Germany when an armistice, not a victory, was declared was a crime of even greater proportions. Turning the French Senegalese soldiers loose on German women ought to have been punished.

So, in 1933 as Hitler assumed the reins of government, the Jews as an aggressor nation were in control of Russia, would be in control of the US in March after Roosevelt’s inauguration and were active in all countries under the guise of the Third International directed from the Socialist power center of Moscow.

Prior to Hitler’s election, the Jews by their own admission had control of Germany. One may then partially interpret their deep hatred of the man, Hitler. The Jewish attitude to Hitler, and indeed, all Germany was evidenced by the fact that the Jewish spokesman, the US lawyer and AJC executive, Samuel Untermyer, declared war between Germany and the Jews. This would have been a meaningless gesture had not Untermyer believed that Jews were directing Roosevelt and through Roosevelt the full power, such as it was in 1932, of the United States.

Considered objectively, the Jews had been conducting a civil war in Germany from the 1917 Soviet Revolution to 1933 when the Germans under Hitler triumphed. As the leading part of this Communist Party street fighting between the Judeo-Communists had been raging for over a decade. The true nature of the Nazis was their conflict with the Jews and Communists for supremacy. All Western Europe, that is England and France, had to do was step back and let Germans, Soviets and Jews go at it.

As the English and French would not commit to peace with Germany Stalin was able to cleverly clear the way, to force, Gemany to attack France and England to protect his back by signing the German-Russian pact. Remembering WWI Stalin may have thought that the three countries would wear themselves out making them easy pickings for th USSR. The easy conquest of France may have startled Stalin. Even then the German’s could easily have defeated the Soviets except for the interference of the US. What dog did Roosevelt have in the fight? Very tragic.

In the US then, the Jewish war on or takeover of the US was being conducted according to the total war plan of Bernard Baruch’s WIB minus the shooting. The European War was a shooting war but the US war was asymmetrical. The US absorbed in the fantastic notion that immigrants renounced their customs and heritage upon setting foot on the Magic Soil were saps for Jewish machinations.

Every war has to have its evil enemy. In Germany Hitler concentrated on Jews while in the US the Jews found the Fascist or Nazi success in Europe the reason to call all opponents to their plans Fascists, Nazis and un-Americans. The House Un-American Activities Committee was a plan of Jewish congressman Samuel Dickstein to denominate American dissenters as un-American covert Fascists and Nazis and to put them in concentration camps. The result was that the Roosevelt Administration made war on Americans who dissented from his rule. HUAC was created by Roosevelt and Dickstein to specifically attack dissenters while Communists were favored.

Fortunately, Americans in Congress were wary of HUAC and so instead of appointing Dickstein, much to his chagrin, as head of HUAC the task was given to the patriot Martin Dies of Texas over the objections of Roosevelt and the Jews. Dies interpreted his job to mean rooting out both Fascists and Communists who were in fact un-American while the dissidents were not.

A group needs figureheads more real than vague terms like Fascists and Communists, so that hatred was directed at Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh and the Catholic radio priest, Charles Coughlin. These three men were chosen to be reviled and execrated although they were innocent of any wrong doing whatsoever. There is absolutely no evidence, no reason to think that they betrayed the interests of the US to anyone. Of course, Jewish-Rooseveltian propagandists succeeded in destroying the credibility of all three men.

Since 1933 the Jewish objective had been to get the US to attack Germany. At that time when the Jews controlled the US and USSR while being, at least dominating in France and England the only obstacle to their plans was Germany. Thus, the Jewish-Rooseveltian goal was to draw the US into a war on Germany. The American people, however, recalling WWI unpleasantly had absolutely no desire to engage in any war at all. To consider Germany as a threat to the US was ludicrous. So while Ford, Lindbergh and Coughlin were taking the heat they were in tune with American desires.

The opposition barely restrained Roosevelt whose administration proclaimed that the US’ first line of defense was the Rhine deep within German territory. Well before 1942 US warships were patrolling the Atlantic sinking German submarines, so the declaration of war in December of ’41 merely authorized Roosevelt to throw off the disguise.

Of course, the dissidents would organize as the administration more and more revealed its intent. The dissidents did organize into a group called the America First Committee. They strenuously opposed US involvement in the European War, they were therefore demeaned as Isolationists as though that presumed that everyone else was Internationalists like themselves. Every opposition group requires a good pejorative label. Thus the discussion was narrowed to two viewpoints. The leaders of the AFC would turn out to be Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh the two great bete noirs of FDR and his Jews.

Charles Coughlin, who was known as the Radio Priest, having a radio audience in the millions, in a country of merely a hundred million gauges his significance. He had no political organization however, indeed neither he nor the AFC made any attempt to organize a political party, hence power, being content to merely making noise.

By a few misjudgments, Coughlin sacrificed his position leaving himself open to attack. His programs had been carried over the CBS radio network owned by the Jew William Paley. Paley censored Coughlin closing the network to him while Jewish appeals to the Pope to silence Coughlin also had effect. By 1940 Coughlin was a nullity.

Ford, but more especially Lindbergh was another story. Lindbergh had become a great hero, idol actually, in 1927 when he became the first person to make a solo flight across the Atlantic- New York City to Paris. He became a Golden Boy. While a hero to millions Lindbergh also became an object of envy to a large number of men. He was deemed Lucky Lindy as though anyone could have duplicated the deed. Perhaps, but it was Lindbergh’s modesty that won the hearts of the world. As is, or was, well known, the Lindbergh’s first baby was kidnapped and perished. The press would not leave Lindbergh alone and so he fled to England for peace and quiet which he found.

As war appeared more likely he was asked by Roosevelt to review German air strength which he did. In the process he became familiar with the actual political situation in Europe. His evaluation was different from Roosevelt’s. While in Germany, the Germans were as taken by him as everyone else. He was given a medal in commemoration of his trans-Atlantic flight.

Back home in the US Lindbergh having considered the European situation first hand, came to the conclusion that the US should not interfere in any war. This sensible understanding was interpreted by Roosevelt, who ardently desired war, ardently he did, and was doing his best to provoke the Germans, as pro-Nazi and openly denounced Lindbergh as an actual Nazi.

This deranged desire for war may have been an indication of his desire to reclaim his manhood from polio. The desire seems to have a compensatory foundation.

This fit in perfectly with Jewish needs for a villain to hang their hatred on. They thus began to defame Lindbergh and provoke him as an actual Nazi agent.   According to their propaganda Lindbergh was going to run for president against Roosevelt, win, and become a Nazi satrap of the USA. This notion was taken seriously, advanced. even though Lindbergh had made no effort to establish a political organization. A propaganda novel was written called Keeper Of The Flame and a movie subsequently made to defame him. Not even content with that, sixty years later the Jewish writer, Philip Roth, wrote a book, The Plot Against America, that repeated the same thesis, defaming Lindbergh’s fading memory.

While the Jews make much about the so-called genocide of themselves it is established that the Jews called for the genocide of the Germans publicly, first in a book supposedly written by some Jew from the colony of Newark by the name of Theodore Kaufman titled Germany Must Die.

It is inconceivable that Kaufman came up with this thesis out of the blue in 1940 or that it was his own idea. His articulation must have come from a decade or even decades long Jewish fantasy. Surely, he was provided notes or perhaps merely handed the manuscript and told to put his name on it. This obscure book from a nonentity in Newark, one is amazed that it found a publisher, did not disappear without a trace as one might have expected. No, it received massive exposure. Time Magazine reviewed it favorably naturally, while many newspapers gave it favorable mention. Even President Roosevelt began to consider the notion.

How did Kaufman propose to exterminate the German people? Why he believed that the people would be disposed of in a generation if the males were all sterilized. Bear in mind the book was published in 1940 and the US didn’t enter the war until the eve of 1942. Quite singular don’t you think? Where would the Jews get the power to sterilize German males? Obviously they would be directing their militarily powerful American subjects.

The NSDAP soon learned about Kaufman’s Germany Must Die and they knew that some doofus in Newark was not acting on his own. To be sure, the threat to commit genocide on them influenced their own notion of the Final Solution. Why was the US involved in this fight?

Nor was Kaufman’s book an isolated incident. Indeed, the Morgenthau Plan was proposed in Morgenthau’s book Germany Is Our Problem, copyright 1945. Who is the ‘our’ referred to in the title, certainly not the US, obviously the Jews. Once again the US was called upon to eliminate the Germans and Germany from the face of the earth. It would be the Americans who did it, not the Jews. In that way the Jews could maintain their innocence.

Henry Morgenthau Jr. was FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury and according to Morgenthau the assistant president. If not earlier, in FDR’s last two terms he was completely in the hands of Jewish handlers if not their surrogate. Indeed, Morgenthau considered himself a co-president with FDR. Bernard Baruch was frequently referred to as an assistant president as well, perhaps mockingly. This was in the critical period of war’s end when Jewish plans were to be put into effect. Morgenthau’s plan called for the elimination of Germany as a country along with its people. Truly, when Hitler said that he knew that if the Germans failed their heads would roll in the sand. And there were twenty millions of Russians starved to death to prove it.

But, to return to Lindbergh and Ford. In a country in which the executive could eliminate people at will there can be no doubt that Ford and Lindbergh would have been disappeared along with the whole of America First. But was that possible? Could that happen here?

A strange thing happened to the Jewish mind that coalesced in 1940. The Jews believed that they were the true Americans; that the beautiful thing called America was their creation, considering Roosevelt as their creature, any who opposed his administration, that is themselves, were actually Fascists and Nazis and no longer true Americans. Ford and Lindbergh were actually Nazis in their minds out to subvert ‘their’ America and turn it into a dependency of Nazi Germany.

In 1940 the Nazi-Soviet pact was still in force yet there was still no outcry against the Communist USSR, the full force of hatred was directed only at Germany. By Germany I do not mean Nazi Germany but Germany and Germans as a whole. Thus they actually urged the genocide of Germans. Even today a great effort is made to convict every German, living or dead, as participating in the so-called genocide of the Jews.

It is a great mistake to not recognize the true nature of WWII, a war that is still raging.

So, just as the Jews would be rounded up in Germany in later years so the Jews wanted US dissidents rounded up and put in concentration camps as early as 1940. While urgent to themselves the notion was incomprehensible country wide. However, after the shooting war began, all of the most prominent dissidents were arrested and indicted on criminal charges. This was too much for many in the government who delayed the trial until 1944 when with victory imminent interest waned and the matter frizzled out.

Still, in 1940 the actual interference of the America First Committee prevented the administration, the Jews and the British from joining together in the war. It is necessary to point out that the vast majority of the country supported he AFC position. The administration still had their ace in the hole, anti-Semitism, if they could get the card played.

Lindbergh helped out on 9/11/41 with a speech in Des Moines Iowa when he said that the only people who desired war were Roosevelt, the Jews and the English. There it was, anti-Semitism, or seemingly so. Lindbergh and the AFC were discredited but that still wasn’t permission to mobilize. That came a couple months later on 12/7/41 when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Even then that was no excuse to enter the European war. That happened a few days later when Hitler declared war on the US because of treaty obligations with Japan. Silly, but he did it. That ended US involvement even though Hitler’s declaration was futile. He had no means to attack the US.

Ever since the Balfour Declaration issued unilaterally by Great Britain and binding on no one else, that essentially guaranted Palestine to the Jews, they had seriously been working toward seizing the Arab territory to rename it Israel. The main provocateur was a man called Chaim Weizman. While the pot was stirred up by WWII which everyone knew before a shot was fired that Germany would lose, Weizman unconnected to any government, working strictly as a putative representative of the Jewish nation, unaffiliated, was working behind the scenes to move the political situation toward securing Palestine as the possession of the Jews. He collaborated, that is conspired, with US Jewish agents that included Ben Hecht the playwright and Meyer Lansky of the Jewish Mafia. These men conspired to move armaments to Palestine in violation of US laws. Had Roosevelt lived, the establishment of Israel would have been a given but his successor Harry Truman required some cozening or threats, that is manipulation, so that by 1948 the Jews achieved their goal and Israel was a fact. WWII had been a success. Thus, by using their criminal underground and political above ground agents the Jews acted as a unit world wide.

Back to 1940 and the elimination of the dissidents. As I said, by 1940 he Jews actually considered themselves as the real founding fathers, the real Americans of the US. The dissidents had been successfully portrayed as Fascists if in not outright Nazis and hence un-American; Immigrants had displaced natives in their own homeland and really with their own consent no less than the Jews would oust the Palestinians from their homeland.

The problem was how to dispose of those natives. It was easy enough to get the Roosevelt government to indict them, but it was necessary to get public opinion to condemn them. All enemies must be hated and quite frankly Ford and Lindbergh were still great American heroes but they did run with the so-called Isolationist crowd. Therefore the Nativist or Isolationist crowd had to be slandered as a whole.

The American public had to be persuaded to see the Nativists, today called Conservatives, as the Jews saw them. The Jews were, of course, absolutely convinced of their own virtue so that Nativists were ipso-facto anti-Semites. The idea then was to make it virtuous to hate Nativists. Hatred had to be created and it had to legal.

The Roosevelt administration had begun with a hate campaign against their predecessors, against the Old Guard of the Gilded Age, against Wall Street. A hate campaign against Roosevelt’s opponents, that is Nativists and Isolationists was an easy step. And the man to lead it was available. He was a Jewish writer by the name of Gustavus Myers.

Continued in Part 2b-10