Fairy Stationer

There was a delightful juxtaposition of words in the Grauniad cryptic crossword a couple of weeks ago, where – when solved – one column down read FAIRY STATIONER. This set me to thinking about fairies and their stationery. For one wild moment I wondered if the Cottingley fairies had been affixed to their positions with staples, given that Elsie Wright and Frances Griffiths took their photographs in 1917 and the home stapling machine had been patented by Henry Heyl forty years before, in 1877. But then I slapped my forehead and remembered that of course the girls had used hat-pins.

Would a fairy have any use for staples at all? Or, indeed, for any kind of stationery other than scented notepaper and a ballpoint pen with which to write fairy messages to other fairies, and to such humans as possess the gift, or curse, whichsoever it may be, of being able to communicate with fairy folk? I can imagine these fey flighty bewinged sprites perhaps using treasury tags to fasten together into a sprig the stalks of daisies or campions or buttercups, but surely more robust stationery items such as hole-punches would be too heavy for them to lift? Or is it the case that fairies are deceptively strong, and can use their fairy powers to move, if not mountains, then entire cartons of thick black heavy duty marker pens?

It would be intriguing, upon a ramble through a dingly dell, to stumble upon a tiny little shop with a sign outside it saying FAIRY STATIONER, just as in the crossword. Then one could crouch and poke one’s head in the window and make a quick visual inventory to ascertain which items of stationery are commonly used by fairies, and which are not.

Cottingley_Fairies_1

The Cottingley Fairies : hat-pins, not staples

Exercising The Cranial Integuments

If a thing is made of chocolate, comes from Switzerland, and is shaped like unto a roll, could it reasonably be anything other than a chocolate swiss roll?

So asks Atahualpa Tompkins in his runaway bestseller Mind-Bending Brain-Teasers For The Cranial Integuments, a collection of hundreds of equally diverting thought experiments. It’s a fat book, as fat as the Bible, but not black like the Bible. In fact its cover comes in a variety of hues, shades of Tompkins’ own devising, created from pigments unutterable.

Another of his food-and-drink-based quizzums is:

If it looks like an egg, and has its own nog, why is it not an egg nog?

The best way to read this book is one question at a time. I found, in foolishly trying to read a whole page-worth of queries at one sitting, that my brain overheated and vapours hissed out of my ears and I had to go and lie flat on my back in a pitch black room, pitch black like the Bible, for umpteen hours. “Umpteen”, incidentally, is a number that crops up umpteen times in the book, for example in this brain-teaser:

If a he-man tosses umpteen medicine balls into a waiting bin, how big must the bin be to gather unto itself all those umpteen medicine balls tossed into it by the he-man?

You can see what I mean about the overheating and the vapours and the lying flat on one’s back and the pitch black and the Bible.

The Harlequin Dreams Of Being A Lobster

The first fruits of my lobster research:

The common English lobster, (Homarus vulgaris), as seen on the marble slab of the fishmonger, is very unlike his relatives beneath the waves. The curled up form in which he is seen when so exposed is not that usually assumed in its own element, unless in the act of exerting its immense powers of retrograde motion. These are so great that one sudden downward sweep of its curiously constructed, oar-like tail, is sufficient to send it like an arrow, three- or four-and-twenty feet, with the most extraordinary precision, thereby enabling our friend to retreat with the greatest rapidity into nooks, corners, and crevices among the rocks, where pursuit would be hopeless. His eyes being arranged on foot stalks, or stems, are free from the inconvenient trammels of sockets, and possess a radius of vision commanding both front and rear, and from their compound form (being made up of a number of square lenses) are extremely penetrating and powerful. The slightest shadow passing over the pool in which the lobster may chance to be crawling or swimming, will frequently cause one of these sudden backward shoots to be made, and H. vulgaris vanishes into some cleft or cavity with a rapidity of motion which no harlequin could ever, even in his wildest dreams, hope to achieve. Down among the deep channels, between the crags at the sea’s bottom, alarms, except from the sea robbers themselves, are not to dreaded.

W B Lord, Crab, Shrimp, And Lobster Lore, Gathered Amongst The Rocks At The Sea-Shore, By The Riverside, And In The Forest (1867)

Infants Savants

I don’t drive, and am almost wholly ignorant about cars. Certainly, other than a couple of iconic designs such as the VW Beetle and the Mini, I cannot tell one make of car from another. Thus it was, and remains, inexplicable to me how my eldest son, when tiny, eagerly announced the name of every car he saw. He was two or three years old at the time, not yet able to read, but when we went for a walk, he would point at each parked car we saw along a street, piping up its name. Other than his mispronunciation of “Ford Sierra” as “Fonsierra”, he was unerringly correct. Eventually, he stopped doing this, and moved on to other childish things, straightforward and unremarkable. One’s own child is never unremarkable, of course, but I mean to say that the talents he developed and displayed were not what Charles Fort would have described as “wild talents”, such as that somehow eerie, pre-literate knowledge of cars. Where did it come from?

I had more or less forgotten about this as the years passed, until this morning, when I read:

we moved back to Paris, and there I have, on my father’s authority, a story about people standing him drinks at the café while I entertained the clientele by identifying the marque of each car as it passed on the boulevard: “Renault! Peugeot! Citröen! Simca!” I haven’t evinced any savant talents since, but apparently at two I had this precocious knack – of cars only, French cars in particular.

That is Peter Blegvad, reminiscing in The Bleaching Stream (Journal of the London Institute of ‘Pataphysics, Number 3, Absolu 139). It is precisely the same case as my son – the infant savant, privy to a body of knowledge without apparent provenance, displayed for a brief period when very young. Is this more common than I thought?

Dabbling With Suzanne

Dabbler-3logo (1)

This week in The Dabbler I pioneer a new form of close textual analysis of classic songs, starting with “Suzanne” by Leonard Cohen. And when I say “close”, I mean close – in my attempt to winkle out the deep meaning of the song I concentrate on a single six-word phrase, jettisoning the rest of it. And when I say “winkle”, well, as you will discover when you pore over my piece, winkles and other hardy organic life-forms of the tide pool have a crucial part to play in the heretofore hidden deep structure of the song.

One unexpected advantage of my brain-numbing work was the realisation that there is a connection, albeit tentative and tangential, with my concurrent lobster research. I make no great claims for what we might call “the Suzanne lobster”, but it suffices, I think, that the word “lobsters” appears, not at all gratuitously, in my analysis.

These are hideously complicated matters, but I hope I have been able to shed some little light on them.

Toad Suck Buck’s

august407Hooting Yard’s global dominion is well-attested, and there are readers and listeners all over the world. Some are fortunate enough to live and breathe and have their being in places with fantastic names. Consider the reader who sent me a snap of his membership card for Toad Suck Buck’s, a “restaurant and river vista” in Toad Suck, Arkansas. Toad Suck, I am told, is in a “dry” county, so in order to serve its customers with alcoholic beverages, Buck’s is a “privite” club. I am eager to join, and I bet you are too. Meanwhile, I am thrilled to know there is a Toad Suck Branch of the Hooting Yard Fan Club.

DSC_0008

Two Tinies

Dear Mr Key, writes Tim Thurn, Always keen to keep abreast of the latest happenstances in popular culture, last evening I sat me down with a mug of cocoa and a bag of filberts to watch the Mercury Music Prize awards. I was saddened to see that young pop person Tinie Tempah, who was shortlisted, failed to win. Anyway, as I dabbed away my tears, it occurred to me to ask you if Master Tempah is in any way related to that other excellent tiny, Tiny Enid. Please enlighten me.

Dear Tim, In this bewildering world it is critical that we can distinguish one tiny from another. Actually, that isn’t strictly true, now I come to think of it. What matters is that we can tell Tiny Enid apart from all other extant tinies.

Tiny Enid is a heroic clubfooted infant, usually dressed in a polka dot frock, much given to brave, even reckless, deeds of derring-do, and of pronounced Fascist sympathies.

I am not entirely sure who Tinie Tempah is, but I suspect he may be some kind of homunculus, possibly malevolent.

I hope this clears the matter up to your satisfaction.

One Of Julia’s Favourite Melodies

In an 1829 [stage] adaptation of Walter Scott’s Guy Mannering, a character is lost on a storm-racked Scottish heath, when suddenly: “Ha! What do I see on this lonely heath? A Piano? Who could be lonely with that? The moon will shortly rise and light me from this unhallowed place; so, to console myself, I will sing one of Julia’s favourite melodies.” And he does.

From The Invention Of Murder : How The Victorians Revelled In Death And Detection And Created Modern Crime by Judith Flanders (2011)

The Art Of Tagging

For some reason, quite possibly ignorance, I have never made it my practice to add “tags” to Hooting Yard postages. I shove them into a category, but have always neglected the tags. It is not something I have thought about, until today, when I have realised that a skilled “tagger” can create something approaching poetry.

The friend who I thumped on the bonce with the Hammer of Thumpiness, until she caved in and began blogging, is only six posts in at BlackberryJuniper And Sherbet, yet her grasp of tagging is a wonder to behold. Consider this:

memory

rain

Swanage

wind

What a corker! Time, surely, to eject Carol Ann Duffy* from the Laureateship and appoint my friend in her stead.

* NOTE : The preposterous Duffy’s latest witterings argue that teenpersons’ txt-spk has poetic potential. Shouldn’t she be promoting literacy rather than garbled barbarism?

Lobster Research

Phew! This lobster research is pretty hectic, I can tell you. Progress is slow – I still know almost nothing about lobsters – but I have been indefatigable in tracking down promising materials.

To start with, I am awaiting delivery of this book. When postie totters up the path clutching it in its cardboard packaging, I shall tear it out of his hands and read it from cover to cover. Having done so, I hope I shall know a hell of a lot more about lobsters than I do at the moment.

But of course only a weedy milksop type of researcher would rely on a single source. I have also been poring over the online catalogue of the London Library, looking specifically for books with the word “lobster” in the title, and on my next visit, later in the week, I intend to borrow some or all of these works. There is Elisabeth Townsend’s Lobster : A Global History (2011), Consider The Lobster & Other Essays by David Foster Wallace (2007), and Lucullus ; or, Palatable essays : in which are merged “The oyster,” “The lobster,” and “Sport and its pleasures” by the author of “The Queen’s messenger,” “The bric-à-brac hunter,” &c., an 1878 volume by Herbert Byng Hall. Then we have The Cosmographical Lobster : a poetic novel by Henri Chopin (1976) and Phantom Lobster : A True Story by Leo Walmsley (1933). I think I shall also borrow Crab, shrimp, and lobster lore : gathered amongst the rocks at the sea-shore, by the riverside, and in the forest by W.B. Lord (1867). By the time I have read that lot, I think I will have learned quite a bit about lobsters.

More than I learned, in any case, from a website to which I was directed by Miss Dimity Cashew (aka Pansy Cradledew). Miss Cashew is of the opinion that I am wrong, wrong, wrong in my conviction that there might be such a thing as an “intelligent lobster”. Thus she roamed around Het Internet until she found a site which, she thought, would knock some sense into my cranium. Here we read that

a lobster has a brain the size of a grasshopper’s. The lobster brain is primarily just a collection of ganglia, or nerve endings. It’s evident from the lobster brain’s lack of complexity that a lobster does not do much deep thinking.

That is all very well, but I would lay greater trust in half a dozen books from the London Library than in a webpage of “Riddles, Trivia, and More”. We shall return to this subject when I have done some reading.

Dead Or Out Of England

The splendid people at the increasingly essential Public Domain Review asked me to write a brief piece on a curious compilation of dog anecdotes published in 1895. You will of course drop everything to go and read it, and when you do please pay particular attention to the author’s apology, which I quote in full, and which contains the lovely line “the writers may be dead or out of England”, which somehow suggests that these are equivalent states. Perhaps they are.