It was last week that I finally went over to the National Library of Scotland and donated copies of my two books on the Loch Ness Monster. The donation form was filled in, the books dropped off and the emails arrived yesterday confirming they were now part of the library's panoply of Loch Ness Monster authors. The books are now accessible to the general public for years to come and further information on the books can be had here and here.
Which brings me to my upcoming third book on the creature. The first book was on the folklore of the beast, the second was on land sightings of the beast and now the subject is photographs of the beast. Not surprisingly, it is entitled "Photographs of the Loch Ness Monster" with the subtitle of "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly". That subtitle basically tells you that some of these pictures are genuine, some are misidentifications and some are fake. Of course, the debunkers will say they are all bad and ugly, that is their opinion and the aim of the 400 pages is to take a thorough look at the arguments for and against.
You can guess from the cover what some of the subject matter will be, I hope there will be something for everyone as over forty alleged pictures of the monster are covered. So, I hope to tie up the loose ends and get this book out some time in February. After that, it will be another visit to the National Library with another book.
The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com
Great looking book! Full of knowledge and deep insight I'm sure. 400 pages full of information. Congratulations on becoming part of the established knowledge resource, people will benefit from your expertise. The day when a young boy or girl with a thirst for the Loch Ness Monster topic can pull your book off the library shelf is here.
ReplyDeleteI love the idea of donating your books to the library. Is their card cat Number 001wat of something like that? As for the new tome - how recent does it get? Up to 2018? Is it mostly new writing, stuff you've posted here, a combination? Sounds like the one I've been waiting for...
ReplyDeleteRight up to our friend Ricky Phillips. It is a combination of blog stuff which is re-edited and condensed with some additions but also new stuff. Chapters on the James Gray and Roy Johnston pictures which I have not really talked about, Shiels and Searle will get chapters and the post-Dinsdale, pre-Internet void of the 1990s is filled with photos I didn't know about myself until I wrote this book.
DeleteHaving said all that, despite 40+ photos, there will still be plenty missing! It was a disappointment that I could not track down the very first published Nessie picture, which was taken not by Hugh Gray but by the Rev. N. Dundas around the same time.
DeleteYes hopkarma, the Dewey Decimal cataloging system 001-099. That's where I find all the LNM and paranormal stuff.
DeleteSounds great GB. I don't know about Rev Dundas; is this account in your book depsite not having the photo?
DeleteBriefly, not much is said about it in the literature.
DeleteDid a search at my local library for your books GB. * keyword "loch ness" roland watson" found no matches in any library * Ummm... could you please donate copies to my library? You see, I'm too cheap to buy books. Just send them in care of me, I'll make sure they get them. You don't have to make a personal appearance. Here's my address XXXXXX Any Town, USA. Oh, and please sign them. Much obliged. :)
ReplyDeleteAs John said below, maybe they'll order it?
DeleteI look forward to it.
ReplyDeleteA photo before Hugh Gray's ? Please tell me more Roland.
ReplyDeleteGould mentions it in his book, apparently it was no great, just a splash of some sort.
DeleteYeah apparantly it happpened quick and nothing came out on rev dundas photo...intrestingly there were two othere reported sightings that week...ive noticed in my mystery studies quite often when there is a sighting there have bin other sightings around the same time..sometimes the same day..hmmmmm ..cheers Roy
ReplyDeleteCongrats!
ReplyDeleteHere's my appraisal on a few photographs. The Good: Hugh Gray - bona fide in my opinion. The Bad: Frank Searle - Bad cut and paste job. And the Ugly: Robert Rines - Gargoyle head and Flipper, not fake, but not the LNM either and a great disappointment for me.
ReplyDeleteOh, did I mention the Ridiculous? Anthony Shiels - Muppet photo. Faker than fake can be. Summons the creature for a photo op, yeah right. His magic is no match for Ol' Nessie
ReplyDeletehttps://www.irishpost.com/life-style/loch-ness-monster-eight-fascinating-facts-about-the-salford-irish-man-behind-the-hoax-86294