On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 2:20:18 PM UTC-7, NancyGene wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 7:07:47 PM UTC, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 3:04:14 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 7:38:55 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 10:49:45 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 10:32:19 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 6:50:53 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > > > > > > Of the 18 poems identified as being by John Francis O’Donnell at the “Digital Victorian Periodical Poetry Project” site* (https://dvpp.uvic.ca/prs_417.html), only one has his actual name, one has his initials, and one has a pseudonym. Sixteen are listed as being in the “Chambers’s Edinburgh Journal,” and two are listed as being in “Once a Week.” “Wooed” in “Chambers’s Edinburgh Journal” is credited to “Caviare.” “Dulce Domum” in “Once a Week” is credited to “J.F. O’D.” “The Hostelry” in “Once a Week” is credited to J. F. O’Donnell. The fifteen other poems credited to him by “DVPPP” have no author listed.
> > > > > > Well done. I think you should mention that all of the poems with no author listed are from /Chambers's Journal/. I
> > > > We did, as above. See the number “Sixteen.”
> > > > > It also may be nice to note that /Chambers's/ routinely published poems without a byline. (Since either you or your monkey were claiming that as a "proof" that the journal didn't know who the author was, it would be nice to have that cleared up.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > No one said any such thing, lying Dunce.
> > > > We never said that the journal didn’t know the identity of the author. Subsequent publications didn’t know who the author was (because it was unattributed). That the “Chambers’s Journal” published some poems without including the author’s name does not mean that they always did that or had a policy of doing that. We see many of their poems with one or two initials at the bottom, the author’s abbreviated initials or name, or the full name. Mr. O’Donnell published poems under the pseudonyms of “Caviare,” “Monkton West,” “Tom Hood,” and “M.W.” If those names or initials ended the poems, we could figure out who wrote it. With nothing at the end of the poem, it remained anonymous.
> > > > > > > Since the poems range from 1861 to 1877, Mr. O’Donnell must have seen at least some of these publications and been aware that his name was not listed as being the author of the poems. This is a bad thing over 150 years later. It was not good even in his lifetime, since many of his poems seem to have been labeled as “anonymous” or just attributed to the journal that it was in.
> > > > > > Did it ever occur to you that O'Donnell didn't care about seeing his name in print? That he used pseudonyms deliberately?
> > > > > Had you the ability to understand what you're reading, you would have known that the question of whether Mr. O'Donnell had requested to be published anonymously was not broached.
> > > > He wanted either his name, pseudonyms or initials there, because he used them. Of course he used pseudonyms on purpose. Duh. George Dance, how can you propose that he “didn’t care about seeing his name in print?” He certainly wanted to see his poems in print.
> > > > > > > Under “notes and attribution research” on the site (done for each “Chambers’s Journal” poem), “DVPPP” says about “July Dawning:” “Poet attribution: the Chambers’s Journal ledger entry lists the author as John O’Donnell, with payment of 15s (NLS 341/310). (AC).” Therefore, the team must have had access to the Journal’s archived payment books at the National Library of Scotland. These are not on-line.
> > > > > > Before there was "on-line" there was something called "mail". Did it occur to you that the book editor, Frank T. Kelly, who knew O'Donnell and was familiar with his career, just might have written to /Chambers's Encyclopedia/ and confirmed the authorship (if he wasn't already aware of it)? I know that spoils your monkey's story (that Kelly was given a box of old newspaper clippings by O'Donnell's son, and just went off and published them all as O'Donnell's poetry), but are you yourself willing to concede that Kelly at least did not "fuck up" (as you people like to put it) and actually did some work?
> > > > > >
> > > > > 1) Had Mr. Kelly written to Chambers's for confirmation of authorship, there would have been no need for Chambers's to report how much Mr. O'Donnell had been paid. NancyGene's conclusion that Mr. Kelly had obtained access to the Journal's payment book is the logical one to be drawn.
> > > > It was actually the “Digital Victorian Periodical Poetry Project” which obtained access to the payment ledger at the National Library of Scotland, not Mr. Kelly. There isn’t any indication that Mr. Kelly ever saw the payment ledger, and there is no bibliography or list of sources for the poems in the back of the “Poems” book.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) The story about the box of newspaper clippings was introduced into the discussion by... George "BM" Dunce.
> > > > > > > It is not clear whether the poem is named in the ledger or just that O’Donnell was paid for a poem. It may be that Mr. O’Donnell was classified as a staff writer at the publications.
> > > > > > O'Donnell was not a staff writer for /Chambers's/ -- at the time the poem was published, he was dead. working for the NZ agent-general in London. That's your next step, if you're really interested in this stuff -- read the poets' bios.
> > > > He obviously wasn’t working while he was dead, as you (George Dance) say above. The poem was published in the July 4. 1874 “Chambers’s Journal.” O’Donnell died in May of 1874. However, “July Dawning” (the proper name for the poem) got into the Journal somehow. It also didn’t have an author listed. “July Dawning” wasn’t the first poem of O’Donnell’s that the Journal published--that was in 1861. The last one they published, again without an attribution, was in September 1874. Staff writers and columnists submit their work in advance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > The poem first appeared in Chambers's shortly after the poet's death. He may well have been a staff writer at the time that his poem was written.
> > > > It is entirely possible that he was a staff writer on the Journal. He was such at “The Nation” and “Duffy’s Hibernian Magazine.” He was also editor and sub-editor at other publications. https://www.dib.ie/biography/odonnell-john-francis-a6693
> > > > > > > We don’t know why he would not have insisted on having his name accompany the poems or the /Journal/ did not include his name with his poems.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Two questions, two answers. (1) /Chambers's/ published all its poetry without bylines, not just that one and not just his; (2) O'Donnell began using pseudonyms when he was living in Ireland and writing for /The Nation/. His name was not included on his poetry by his own choice.
> > > > That’s not true, George Dance. In just a cursory look, many poems in Chambers’s had the authors’ names or initials there, including the first ones by O’Donnell. Mr. O’Donnell used pseudonyms if he was writing about political matters. That did not include his general poetry (mass-market?).
> > > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for that information, Mr. Dunce... however, I still do not know *why* Mr. O'Donnell would have chosen to be published anonymously, nor *why* Chambers's would not want to credit the authors of the poetry they published.
> > > > George Dance is wrong about that.
> > > > > > > In “The Cabinet of Irish Literature,” edited by Charles Anderton Read (1880), Vol. IV. (T. P. O’Connor), 1880, pp. 162-163, either Mr. Read or Mr. O’Connor writes:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > “JOHN FRANCIS O’DONNELL.
> > > > > > > Born 1837 — Died 1874.
> > > > > > > […] It would be impossible to enumerate all the periodicals to which he contributed both prose and verse. He had a very ready and an extremely versatile pen. […] His verses were always welcome to Charles Dickens, who was a helpful admirer of the poet; and a large number of his poems were published in Chambers’s Journal. In 1871 he published ‘Memories of the Irish Franciscans’—a volume of verse suggested by the well-known and able work of the Rev. C. P. Meehan on the Franciscans. After years of literary drudgery, Mr. O’Donnell received an official appointment through the assistance of Lord O’Hagan; but he enjoyed his fortune for only a few months, and died in the May of 1874. […] It is a subject of great regret that his poems lie scattered over numberless periodicals, and under various noms de plume.”
> > > > > > > https://books.google.com/books?id=IKICAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA162&lpg=PA162&dq=%22A+minute+gone.+She+lingered+here,+and+then%22&source=bl&ots=9vWHOVvG15&sig=ACfU3U0UEkn6d7VZL63Lz_njjnYZn99EDg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiL4dLWtsGAAxXJk2oFHXtIChMQ6AF6BAgIEAM#v=onepage&q=%22A%20minute%20gone.%20She%20lingered%20here%2C%20and%20then%22&f=false
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Therefore, this is the reason why so many of Mr. O’Donnell’s poems are labeled as “anonymous.” Also, his son must have had to gather together the clippings from the “Chambers’s Journal of Popular Literature, Science and Arts” and identify them as his father’s.
> > > > > > All the Introduction to O'Donnell's book says about the clipping isthat they were "a collection of his father's verses cut from magazines and newspapers." What makes you think the son "must have" gathered them together? Why couldn't the father (the poet) have done that himself while he was alive?
> > > > Because when Mr. Kelly was putting together the collection of poems, he had a devil of a time finding them and compiling them. See the introduction to the “Poems” book and what we quoted above. The poems were not in a neat little journal, but scattered about in different publications and clippings and not readily identified.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Here is the passage that NancyGene is responding to, Dunce:
> > > > > "It is a subject of great regret that his poems lie scattered over numberless periodicals, and under various noms de plume.”
> > > > > The author is expressing regret over the (then) fact that the authorship of many of Mr. O'Donnell's poems would forever remain unknown. Had a complete collection existed (whether in the form of original manuscripts, or newspaper/magazine clippings), there would have been no need for this regret.
> > > > George Dance may suggest that they look on Mr. O’Donnell’s hard drive for the poems?
> > > > >
> > > > > And, one should remember that the poem in question appeared posthumously. A dead poet is not going to be able to clip his unattributed poem from a magazine.
> > > > Also, the poems continued to be published in the Journal four months after O’Donnell’s death, with no author listed. Mr. Kelly did not have the payment ledger, or at least did not mention that as a source.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ergo, the author's "regret" that many of Mr. O'Donnell's poems will never be recognized as his, coupled with the fact that the poem in question appeared posthumously, make it clear that Jr. O'Donnell would have been responsible for having identified the poem as his father's.
> > > > > > > Never let your poetry be published in any form without your name being firmly attached.
> > > > > > Lots of people don't attach their names to their poetry. Some people publish anonymously, some use pseudonyms. Who are you to tell people what names to use on their poems (especially when you don't follow your own advice)?
> > > > You are using diagonal reasoning again, George Dance. All of our poems have “NancyGene” firmly attached to them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Are you really *that* dense, Dunce?
> > > > That’s a joke, right, Michael?
> > > > >
> > > > > NancyGene publishes under a pseudonym. I publish under a pseudonym. In both cases, our poetry is attributed to us, and our authorship, thereby established.
> > > > > > > Unfortunately, with the style of placing the author’s name at the end of a poem, it is easy for editors to lop that right off.
> > > > > > I don't believe for a minute that /Chambers's/ cut O'Donnell's name by a clumsy accident like that. I doubt that editors go around doing it today. I think that telling writers that happens is seriously misleading.
> > > > Yet it happens, and poems and sayings are frequently circulated without the original author being credited. We have an instance right here on AAPC, where the always-aware Will Dockery credited Anne Waldman with a poem that was actually written by Karen Tellefsen: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/p1S1lxS2VCU/m/6rDCJGOHCQAJ
> > > > Ktell had put her name at the bottom of the poem and it had gotten separated (lopped off).
> > > > > >
> > > > > When certain do-it-yourself editors make mistakes like "Mamories of the Irish Franciscans," one doesn't doubt that they might leave an attribution off by mistake (or, as in the case of Mr. Cohen's poetry, intentionally).
> > > > > > > We put our name at the top, under the title.
> > > > > > To me, that looks very narcissistic; as if you believe that you, as the author, are the most important thing about the poem. Of course, others' views differ. For instance, to the monkey pack you run with, the author is all-important in judging a poem: if the author's an ally it's a work of art, if he's an "adversary" it sucks.
> > > > We are ensuring that our authorship stays with the poem.
> > > > > >
> > > > > 1) There is nothing narcissistic about placing one's name *under* a poem's title. Placing it *over* the title, would show that the author thought his/her name was more important than the poem. Placing the poem's title first, shows that the poem comes first.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) Your claim is a baseless lie, which the archives will bear out.. Just because you're a petty little cunt, doesn't give you the right to project your cuntly behavior on others.
> > > > > > > *We thank George Dance for finding the “Digital Victorian Periodical Poetry Project” site, although we would have found it ourselves earlier than the 3 weeks it took George Dance to find it. Therefore, we thank George Dance but wonder (in the spirit of George Dance’s research comments) why it took him so long.
> > > > > > Thanks for the faint, grudging acknowledgment. But perhaps I can explain why it took me so much longer than you; because I started so far behind you. I began my search with a poem with the wrong title, attributed to the wrong author; you began yours with a correctly titled and attributed poem that I'd found for you, and a biography of the poet that I'd put together for you.
> > > > Maybe your first research should have been if you had gotten the title right? Find it in its earliest publication.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps you might care to explain why this research had not been completed *prior to the publication* of the poem on your blog?
> > > > Because it’s too much trouble and he’s busy? Because he don’t need no stinkin’ research?
> > > Michael, why doesn't George Dance want to talk about research? Does he feel insecure? Mr. O'Donnell wants to talk about his poems too.
> > >
> > Probably because he hadn't done any research.
> We did the research for him (above). We disproved some of the things that he stated. We gave him new references and new information. Does George Dance not appreciate it when someone teaches him new things?

Maybe it's a matter of gender.