This book is definitely not one of my better ones, that sit on my book shelf. I also thought that it looked like a good book because of the cover...Not!! I was fooled! I wouldn't recommend it to a soul.
You stick with it Stuart! The book you have just sold may not be good as a reference but it is still a book about Titanic and could be added to anyone’s library with the proviso that it is inaccurate and contains what may be called "purple prose". Even bad books are interesting as long as one understands their failings and at £6.50 yours is not expensive. Look at Gardiner’s book about the Titanic/Olympic switch. A travesty of the truth but with some interesting documentary facts and figures hidden amongst the dross.
I am curious to know how many of you folks opionionated Pelligrino's second work..."Ghosts of the Titanic"? Perhaps some of you balked at the thought of even reading it, owing to forming a conclusion on Pelligrino's first release.
The in-depth recounting of an RMSTI visit and artifact retrieval(s) in "Ghosts" must have only heightened the biased THS standpoint. They must have savoured in tearing that one apart,
just have we have seen in the past with Messrs. Eaton and Haas. It amazes me how critical folks can be toward one another, particulary a fellow enthusiast. Always falling short of *giving credit where credit is due*!!
Take a look back at the first edition of "Triumph and Tragedy" (**Recalling the year**)...
...then tell me not that Eaton and Haas are worthy of an high praise...even when you consider the errors.
What was it that Mr. Walter Lord wrote about *know it alls* in his work? Need I remind you?
What was your contribution way back when the first "Triumph and Tragedy" was released? Me I was ever so grateful for anything *new* in regards to the TITANIC legacy.