New Book

[Steph]

Yep. And I'd like to see it.

No offense, Migbar, but with all that type of info (from the infamous safe) being held so secretly for so long, I can't just take it on faith that you (or Galen) are not -- well -- trying to sell me some snake oil.

You can say whatever you like. Show me the documents, and I'll accept what they say gracefully.

I've seen the documents too. They're quite comprehensive. Not that Mike needs anyone to vouch for his word about documents he is holding in hand. It's really an amazing treasure. It will be nice when they can be made available for all. Until then, I feel very fortunate to have been able to see them.

[catfish]

Geez Lloyd, I hate snakes. I would shoot that one.

[migbar]

Oooh....one of them self-shooters !

Thanks up there, Steph'nie.

[Steph]

I don't know why anyone wouldn't want to buy your snake oil, Mike.

[Steph]

Oh, you know me. Only for 1927? Or are there others? If so when, what years? Are there enough so that you can tell if they are regular (weekly, bi-weekly) paychecks or the occasional "consulting fee"?

There's a two-year contract saying Fiedler was to start work on or about Oct. 24, 1924 in the capacity of Glass Maker and foreman. One of his particular duties was to teach the men "the art of glass gathering". [Edit: yes, what Galen posted while I was editing this.] That contract was apparently extended since he was there another year with the same pay scale. There are IRS documents from 1926 and 1927 showing Fiedler's Ottawa address and his considerable pay. There are other detailed documents from 1925 through 1927 showing his pay as it related to production costs and as it compared to the pay of others in Peltier's employ. And of course there is the aforementioned check which was cancelled in March of 1928.

[lstmmrbls]

Ann, you don't have the proper security clearance. Heck he tries to kill me whenever I get to look at them. Here is one paragraph from Fiedlers contract.

[akronmarbles]

Schwing! Awesome information....lol

[ann]

Ann, you don't have the proper security clearance . . .

That's exactly the kind of hoohah I'm talking about. To quote others from other threads, this ain't exactly USA nuclear secrets. And I got fed up a few years ago by the "I'm writing the book" line. I wouldn't give odds on that happening. However, a book doesn't HAVE to be written right now. The greatest (and most valuable) contribution anyone could make towards Peltier knowledge would be (1) the organization of this "safe" material into categories, and (2) the publication of a fascimile of every single page of it -- like was recently done with Helmers' batch book -- and let the discussion, and the book-writing, begin.

As for the exerpt above -- what relevance does it have to anything we've been discussing? I don't see a name, a date, or anything that would indicate it had anything to do with any particular marble company, much less a particular employee and when he worked there.

As far as Migbar not needing anyone to vouch for his word, I don't doubt many of you who know him personally feel the same way. The few exchanges I've had with him over time, on the boards and through a few pms, lead me to say that I like Migbar too, although we've never actually met. For one thing he has a great sense of humor, which is rare as hen's teeth these days. And I like his marbles. He's graciously sent me some in the past, along with a few now-treasured Pelts.

But I don't take anybody's word when it comes to primary research material. I've spent many years of my life chasing it down, and finding out, in some cases, how badly it's been used/interpreted. I'm a cranky art historian, remember?

Sorry. Gotta see it myself. Publish the damn stuff.

Love the snake oil box.

[Steph]

This thread is about the "new book". The new book is in error. How much error is open for debate. It is your right and perhaps your cranky art historian responsibility to not believe Mike, Galen and myself about the nature of the Peltier documents. Do you believe the information presented in this new Fiedler book? Do you believe that Fiedler started the Cambridge Glass Company (1901) and named the Christensen Agate Company (circa January 1925)?

You reported on the content of the book without having seen it. Now that you have seen it do you recommend it? What is your current evaluation of it now that you have read it?

[lstmmrbls]

And did you read any factual evidence backed by any bibliogaphy or actual evidence about Arnold Fiedler in the book. (other than his citizenship document)

[ann]

Certainly there are errors and unsupported assumptions in the book -- at least one of them directly related to the fact that key Peltier information about Arnold Fiedler and god-knows-what-else is available only to a select few who have been sworn to secrecy. To attack someone's work when that attack is based on so-called but unsupported, unpublished "documentation" that is being deliberately withheld from all but members of a certain group -- is -- well, it's a lot of things, but cheap is one of them. To quote Steph . . . "When there is secrecy warning flags go up." You betcha. Cuts both ways, folks.

And "belief" has nothing to do with anything. I believe very little. I have seen no proof of some things presented in the new Fiedler book, just as I have seen no proof of many things stated in this thread. I am pursing those lines of inquiry privately.

The Helmers batch book was a revelation.

Yes, I would recommend the book, for all of the reasons Steph gave in post #41 above. There's been lots of talk in the past about people "doing research on Arnold Fiedler," but nothing has been produced. I applaud the author for, as Alan Basinet has said (in an Amazon review) "having the intestinal fortitude to tackle a controversial subject," when no one else has.

It's a start. Which is more than anyone else has done.

And it has lovely pictures of some hand-gathered marbles.

Publish the damn material.

[hdesousa]

Hey Ann,

Re-read the first few posts on this topic. You've seemingly forgotten that you refused to disclose where you heard "(this book) has some timeline info, and maybe some glass formulae info too."

You refused to answer a simple question to your unqualified statement that started this topic.

Remember the golden rule? All marble collectors should have one to play by.

I can't imagine you publishing *any* Peltier material, if it was yours to publish.

BTW, Galen, as stated in post #4, had offered Ralph information, (which turnes out to be this Peltier/Fiedler information), and did not get any response.

[lstmmrbls]

Actually I gave him the opportunity to get more information and it appears he did not follow up. Here you go Ann, this is the last snippet I can show you before Mike removes my Super secret squirrel snake oil salesmen rating. Bottom of the Contract

[migbar]

I don't own the documents, and I am not permitted to post any of them on the internet, but I don't withhold the information, I answer all of the Peltier questions I can, using the documents, and whenever possible have sent scans of pertinent documents to nearly anyone with a question and an interest, not just a select few. I usually ask them to not post the documents, because I don't have permission.

I thought Ann had an interest in seeing the documents related to Fiedler, so I offered to send them to her this morning, in one of them PM thingies, but I guess she just wanted to make a statement, and I must say, I agree with her, she is cranky.

I'm afraid I may have to modify my Peltier document sharing policies slightly.......

[lstmmrbls]

And should we really reward someone just attempting something even if they strikeout?

[ann]

Hey Ann,

. . . You've seemingly forgotten that you refused to disclose where you heard "(this book) has some timeline info, and maybe some glass formulae info too."

You refused to answer a simple question to your unqualified statement that started this topic.

Hey Hansel -- I'm sorry the irony of what I was doing was lost on you. And, undoubtedly, others..

[ann]

Actually I gave him the opportunity to get more information and it appears he did not follow up. Here you go Ann, this is the last snippet I can show you before Mike removes my Super secret squirrel snake oil salesmen rating. Bottom of the Contract

THANK YOU, Galen. Wish it had a date.

[ann]

I thought Ann had an interest in seeing the documents related to Fiedler, so I offered to send them to her this morning, but I guess she just wanted to make a statement, and I must say, I agree with her, she is cranky.

If you offered them to me Migbar, I would delightedly accept. But I don't know how you made such an offer, since I haven't received one -- maybe my PM thingy isn't working? Or I have to do something new, to get to it, with the new format on the board?

I'm old, I'm cranky most of the time.

[ann]

I can't imagine you publishing *any* Peltier material, if it was yours to publish.

There are a lot of things that I would do, and have done, that you can't imagine, Hansel.

And at least I HAVE had things published. Things I've actually written -- you know, not just pictures of stuff I own.

[Steph]

If you offered them to me Migbar, I would delightedly accept. But I don't know how you made such an offer, since I haven't received one -- maybe my PM thingy isn't working? Or I have to do something new, to get to it, with the new format on the board?

I'm old, I'm cranky most of the time.

You might have to set your preferences in order to get back to the notices you're used to. The pop up window and email notifications and the like.

[hdesousa]

There are a lot of things that I would do, and have done, that you can't imagine, Hansel.

And at least I HAVE had things published. Things I've actually written -- you know, not just pictures of stuff I own.

Ann, cranky or not, there's no need to blow your own horn while trying to put me down and twist what I said..

Obviously, if you've done some research, especially in your field of expertise, you want to get it published.

I'm saying that by refusing to disclose where you heard that this book had some useful attributes (time line and glass formulae), it indicates that you would not likely freely disclose any previously unknown information you may come across, such as the Peltier trove.

Maybe it's just part of your old age crankiness, but you sound hypocritical when you keep clamoring for information to be published, when you're so stingy with your own.

[ann]

Ann, cranky or not, there's no need to blow your own horn while trying to put me down and twist what I said..

Not blowing my own horn. Hardly ever do. Just poking back with a stick approximately the same length, girth, and pointyness as the one you use. You stop it, I'll stop it.

Sigh. I didn't say where I heard info about the book because I had been asked not to. For the hundredth time.

And I do believe I've already said, myself, in a previous thread, that because of the reaction I got to "hey I heard there's a new book out with timeline info and maybe glass formulae" -- that I certainly will NOT post on this board any new information I get about anything. Although I will share it on an individual basis with civilized people.

I don't think that's hypocritical. I think that's rational.

[ann]

Thanks, Steph --