[lit-ideas] Re: The Sect of the Phoenix

As S. Ward rightly notes:
 
>Ashbee, wrote two bibliographies of erotic literature. 
 
I was nitpicking that he also wrote a third (Horn loves these  'scalar 
implicatures' -- "How many wives did Henry VIII have?" "Five" -- "Well,  that's 
true 
-- she had six". 
 
I re-read what I had once read in Kearney, Hist. Erot.  Lit.:
 
"Included in the Ashbee  [we're talking about Henry  Spencer [what a 
prestigious pedigree name -- of Northamptonshire] Ashbee, b.  London 1832-1900] 
bequest [to the Private Case in the Museum Library]  were
 
the first two volumes
 
of his bibliography, his OWN WORKING COPIES that had each been  BOUND into 
two separate volumes, interleaved and annotated, and with extra  illustrations 
and letters inserted. This additional material is of great  interest and 
contains much curious information."
 
Kearney goes on:

"Unfortunately, no similarly augmented copy of the third  volume, which would 
certainly have unveiled the names of many of the later  19th-century 
publishers, appears to exist."
 
McEvoy, can you _prove_ that?
 
"A rumour that it did [exist], and was kept locked up in the  office of the 
Principal Keeper of the Library, came to my ears late in 1973, and  I 
accordingly wrote to the Keeper to enquire after it."

"The reply that I received, dated 4 January 1974, was  disappointing." 
 
     "Dear Sir, 
          I have  looked into the _missing_ copy of "Catena Librorum
           Tacendorum." There _is_ a copy in the room of the Keeper 
          of  Printed Books ... with Ashbee's bookplate and the
          yellow  British Museum accessions stamp dated 10 November
         1900. It is  pretty certainly 
 
                                  the third volume
 
          which  you refer to. It contains *no annotations* whatever and no
           inserted papers; nor does it bear any pressmark and is kept
          in the  Keeper's room
 
                             FOR OCCASIONAL REFERENCE USE (!)
 
            You would, of course, be free to see the copy, if you wish 
            to do so.
                   Respectfully,
                                            etc."
 
-- but not otherwise!
 
Kearney writes: "This was, needless to say, a great blow (cf.  Zeus and 
Pallas)", but in the near future the gap left as as result of Ashbee's  
timidity -- 
if that is what it was -- is to be more than adquately filled by the  labours 
of Mr. Peter Mendes, an enterprising academic [hate that word -- used in  
this context -- sounds pretentiously derogatory], who is well on the way to  
completing a comprehensive bibliographical... -- in which many of the puzzles  
left unresolved by Ashbee will be answered.
 
So the three volumes would be:
 
          "Index  librorum prohibitorum, being notes 
bio-biblio-iconographical and  
critical on curious  an duncommon books, by Pisanus Fraxi.   
 London:            1877,  repr. New York: Jack Brussel, 1962).

"Centuria librorum absconditorum". London 1879, repr. idem JB  1962

"Catena librorum  Tacendorum". London: 1885, repr. idem JB 1962. 
 
"Ashbee's three volumes are in a sense unique" 
 
-- then Garcia Marquez also is. 
 
"and very much the product of his own eccentricity. He was  WEALTHY [how much 
-- now I AM interested. Where was his family seat?  Northants? and where in 
LONDON was he born? I suppose he's buried in  Highgate?] and could afford to 
have them printed to his own specifications  which, in their bold mixtures of 
type style and colour, were as exacting as they  were generous."
 
"Unlike many bibliographies [which are dry], Ashbee's have a life of  their 
own"
 
-- a catalogue raisonne, almost. I love them
 
"While they lack the scientific precision of modern bibliographical  practice"
 
(C'mon -- who wants a MA Lib. Sc! -- and I'm really NOT interested how the  
British Library for Cataloguing Data -- let alone Washington -- wants to  
catalogue these things -- just give me the accession code)
 
"they are nevertheless in advance  of the sort of thing usually passed  off 
as bibliography in the 1870s and 1880s. They are reliable and ... an  excellent 
read. He quotes liberally from books -- a blessing when you see that  many 
only exist in PRIVATE COLLECTIONS, and his comments are often  amusing.
 
"As much as Ashbee himself comes across as the people and books he  
describes" (Kearney goes on to illlustrate with a 1866 book). 
 
On the margin of my copy of Kearney I wrote: 'Implicates!'. The passage  
being,
 
"By Ashbee's suggestion that the authors were capable of better things, he  
is clearly IMPLYING that he knew perfectly well who they were" -- incl. naughty 
 Martial epigrams. "The 'barrister of standing' was F. P. Pike, whom Ashbee  
identifies in the annotated working copy of his annotated working copy of his  
"Index"" 

"Concerning Ashbee's life, much useful information has been gathered  
together by Mr. Peter Fryer [don't you hate that use of "Mr."?] in his  
Introduction 
to "Forbidden Books of the Victorians", an abridgment of Ashbee's  
bibliographies in ONE volume, and Ashbee's DIARIES are at present being edited  
for 
publication by Mr (!) 
 
IAN GIBSON 
 
-- Hooray and welcome to the Cult of the Phoenix. 
 
"But I am reliably informed that they are incomplete, odd years being  
missing, and contain very little concerning his interest in erotica"
 
Yet Gibson, in a sleight of hand seeking only promotion, if you allow me,  
went on to call the poor man, "Erotomaniac" -- I just _hate_ the word 'maniac'  
as it's seldom well used. To me, it just means that Gibson, for all that S. 
Ward  praises him, is a bit on the _boring_ side.
 
But I still need to see the cover to judge the book completely -- :)
 
Cheers
 
J. L. Speranza
The Swimming Pool Library -- Bordighera and 
Buenos Aires,  Argentina




************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

Other related posts: