What's more amazing is the numbers of people who believe that any information seen in print, no matter how incredulous, just has to be factual. I'm sure Mr. Gardiner really appreciates this quirk of human nature during his frequent jaunts to the bank.
What is FUNNY is that we all are passing judgement on a book that WE ALL likely bought!
Not necessarily funny, Larry. Many of us (but by no means all - some, like Kyrila, were warned off in time!) purchased Gardiner's first Titanic book without knowing the contents. I wish someone had warned me, but at the time I wasn't online and was isolated from the general Titanic 'community'. I purchased it years ago, at a time when the only two books readily available on general Sydney bookstore shelves were Ballard's book on the discovery of the wreck and Gardiner's. This was before the on-line book purchasing boom, and when I wanted to purchase other titles I had to provide an ISBN for a bookstore to do so (I even had to order ANTR this way). It was accessible. At least we can say we're responding from firsthand knowledge of the text!
I hold that it's a case of 'Once fooled, shame on you. Twice fooled, shame on me.' Which is why I'm happy to say I did not waste money on Gardiner's second, even more execrable work.
Once fooled, twice fooled... Oh dear, where does that leave me, up to book #4?
Admittedly book #4 was from a well meaning friend rather than a deliberate purchase. The friend was so thrilled to have found a Titanic book I didn't own that I didn't have the heart to break it to them. What's that thing about the road to hell and good intentions again?
Noel, I agree with your categorisation up to a point. You've left out those with a book collecting mania approaching an obsessive-compulsive disorder (albeit a minor disorder). Mike T and a few others here know of what I write.
As for racy publicity material emphasising the sensational over the factual, I also agree up to a point. Publicity material certainly can be misleading: just look at some of the sillier hype around David Brown's 'Last Log.' Completely trivialised his intent, as I discovered when I finally found a copy at my local maritime specialist.
I also like to flip through a book and make up my mind that way, which is a bit hard if it's somewhat obscure and just not available locally. Another reason why forums such as this are quite valuable in sharing opinions of works around the globe.
On the subject of Robin Gardiner, I have just finished reading his "History of the White Star Line". Given the author's reputation, I don't know what to believe and what to ignore.
What makes it worse is that in this book, too, he perpetuates his theory that what the Titanic struck was something other than an iceberg. Extra, unnaccountable lifeboats and all that jazz ... but at least he makes no reference to the possibility that the ship in question was actually the Olympic.
For small mercies be grateful.
Now I cringingly slink into the nearest dark corner as the dreadful secret is a secret no more ... I have bought three of Gardiner's books. What does that make me??
Dave- poor where? In my pocket, or between the ears? Oh well, at least I didn't fall for buying the identical book twice under two different titles. Which is a miracle, because I've forgotten which of Gardiner's books that applies to!
this is probably a good place to spring upon the world my new book, which is written, sort of, and will be printed sooner, or maybe later. it is gonna knock Titanicdom on its ear as I have uncovered the real real story.
the title is The Riddle of the Iceberg Conspiracy, the Berg that Never Sank the Titanic.
I have uncovered a massive and sinister conspiracy in which those in the highest levels of power conspired to frame the Baffin Bay iceberg as the most infamous berg in history.
it was an deceptively easy ploy as the real culprit in the disaster also happened to be named iceberg. but it was not iceberg, but rather iceberg that really did the doing.