Who Turned It Up First?

Dennis ("Demonologist"), in his usual state of superficial pedantry, takes issue with me saying that The Cat's Miaow "turned up" Gerald Isaaman's review of Steve Roud's London Lore: The Legends and Traditions of the World’s Most Vibrant City (2009):

It was "turned up" on the Vampire Research Society's blog long before it did on "Baldry Cat's" excuse of a blog to fuel Farrant's vendetta against Seán Manchester.

He then goes on to quote chunks from an entry (which I had to look up myself, as Dennis was too lazy to provide it) on his Vampire Research Society blog.

There are, however, primary differences between John Baldry Cat's use of the article, and Dennis'.

The most obvious one, for starters, is that Dennis didn't link to the review he quotes chunks from. John Baldry's Cat did.

Dennis also doesn't cite the reviewer's name, merely referring to him as "The person who was editor of the Hampstead & Highgate Express in those far off distant days". John Baldry's Cat actually cites his name, i.e., Gerald Isaaman.

But most tellingly, Dennis omits Isaaman's negative criticisms of the Highgate Vampire Case. John Baldry's Cat, however, prints them in all their glory.

Dennis boils down Isaaman's comments to his description of Manchester's appearance ("Manchester arrived at the office wearing a black cloak lined with scarlet silk and carrying a cane"), to which Dennis adds: "He forgot to mention the top hat and tails that were included with the opera cloak and cane."

Dennis also provides Isaaman's overview of the Highgate Vampire story, but not Isaaman admitting he found it to be "a real hoot, and we played the story for laughs."

So, sure Dennis, quotes from Isaaman's review turned up in your blog prior to John Baldry's Cat's mention. But, at least John Baldry's Cat had the temerity to link and cite the damn thing rather than omit Isaaman's criticisms and his name!

Thus, John Baldry's Cat's coverage of the review was far more substantial and worthwhile than Dennis' own piddling extracts.

A Real Hoot Indeed

John Baldry's Cat turned up a rather interesting book review from the Camden New Journal.

Steve Roud's London Lore: The Legends and Traditions of the World’s Most Vibrant City (2009) is the subject. The reviewer is Gerald Isaaman, who, as it happens, was the editor of the Ham & High when the Highgate Vampire first hit the Press.

He candidly admits the Case was "a real hoot, and we played the story for laughs."

This extract from the review is also quite telling:

Then, as Mr Roud recounts: "The rapid escalation of media coverage, from local press to national press to national television, turned a small local event into a major flap. It was the TV coverage that did the real damage, by airing reports with a spurious 'let the viewer decide' angle, and giving some very silly ideas a national platform."
So it was that publicity provided the oxygen to keep alive a fictional story of a vampire terrorising Highgate, and one that exists today, long after after so-called expert scientific investigations, books galore and outrageous new explanations have, literally, gone round the world.