The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #105162 Message #4022986
Posted By: GUEST,Pseudonymous
09-Dec-19 - 08:29 AM
Thread Name: 2007 Ewan MacColl Bio - Class Act
Subject: RE: 2007 Ewan MacColl Bio - Class Act
I think the points you make are made in the biography, in some detail. One example would be the use of 'collage' techniques. This is one of the many reasons that the book is so interesting. I am not sure whether you have read the book or not, I'm guessing not. Is this correct? But useful links. I'd still say that people interested in this aspect would enjoy what Harker has to say about it.
You refer to my post in which I refer to quotations or purported quotations from you and Pat in the book.
This was a response to your own comment. I referred and now refer again to your post of 8th December, 3.05 am.
"I never really got on with Ben Harker's book - I once did a three page analysis of the factual errors and misinterpretations
I know that he interviewed several people for the book and totally ignored what he was told - this was certainly the case with the interview we gave"
You yourself had said that Harker 'totally ignored what he was told', and that this applied in the case of the interview you and Pat gave.
Now I knew that both you and Pat seemed to have been quoted in the book. I could not see how this counted as totally ignoring what you told him. But plainly you were not happy with what Harker did with the data deriving from his interview with you and Pat.
If the quotations are accurate, then in my opinion, it would not be fair to state that Harker totally ignored what you told him. I felt it was only fair to Harker to point this out. Because even if he only quoted some of what you said then the word 'totally' did not apply.
So the question then arose of why you were dissatisfied with the way what you had told Harker was represented in the book. A possible explanation was that you had been misrepresented, which was why I suggested that the quotations might not have been accurate.
In a friendly spririt, perhaps you could clarify what you meant when you said that Harker 'totally ignored' not just what you and Pat said, but also what unspecified others had said.