Beyond the Pale: Molly Ivins' Eulogy for Habeas Corpus...

As most of you know, I do by best to keep my lawyerly background deeply buried, but every now and then, it haunts me. I want to be appathetic. I want to drink the koolaid. I want to blithly go on with my life an ingore what this administration is doing to this country, the world and our standing in said world. But I can't. I can not pretend I do not understand what Habeas Corpus is. I can not listen to the talking heads as they either flat out LIE or so twist the truth that it not longer resembles anything close...well...the truth. I am embarassed that one of my congress women voted for this gross affront to the law. I am slightly embarrassed that the other, while not voting for it, did not vote against it...she knows it is wrong, but couldn't bring herself to stand against the lemmings of her party. I can not put it any better than Molly Ivins just did: Habeas Corpus - RIP (1215 - 2006).

...
The bill simply removes a suspect's right to challenge his detention in court. This is a rule of law that goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215. That pretty much leaves the barn door open.

As Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident, wrote, an intelligence service free to torture soon "degenerates into a playground for sadists." But not unbridled sadism -- you will be relieved that the compromise took out the words permitting interrogation involving "severe pain" and substituted "serious pain," which is defined as "bodily injury that involves extreme physical pain."

In July 2003, George Bush said in a speech: "The United States is committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit."

Fellow citizens, this bill throws out legal and moral restraints as the president deems it necessary -- these are fundamental principles of basic decency, as well as law.

I'd like those supporting this evil bill to spare me one affliction: Do not, please, pretend to be shocked by the consequences of this legislation. And do not pretend to be shocked when the world begins comparing us to the Nazis.

Biblio.com down for over 24 hours and running...the revenge of unintended consequences...

My favorite online aggregator, biblio.com, had their host blow up (figuratively). Apparently, they had a power outage and the large UPS that was intended to keep the servers up and happy did not work (I'm certain there will be joyful discussions about this). The problem with large, dynamically served database driven webservers is that they do not like having the proverbial plug pulled...it makes them cranky and, on occasion, uncooperative as to being revived. The host, as I understand it, has power again and one or two other book sites hosted there have returned...unfortunately Biblio.com remains down. Presumably this is due to having to rebuild the data base, but it raises at least two important issues related to running large...er...important servers:

Backups: Realtime remote backups that can be turned to when the unexpected happen are good things. Sort of like insurance with less annoyance.

Peering: Having multiple backbones coordinated so that when one line gets too slow the server is automatically switched to the fastest line (load balancing). This is tricky as many hosts claim to have "multiple connections" to the Internet while *very few* provide true "peering". Speed is good, stability through a node loss is better.

Mirroring: Having duplicative servers at different locations (backups for grown-ups). The mirrors serve as a back-up, AND support stability and connection speed.

On the other hand, you can run everything off one server in and roll the dice. While Biblio.com is down, I suggest reading Edward Tenner's book, "Why Things Bite Back: Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences."

12 days per stolen map...there must be a moral somewhere...

Well, Smiley was sentenced yesterday to 3.5 years and restitution of $1.9MM. Reports on this can be found here (with pictures); here; here; and my personal favorite. I think I agree with Clive Field, director of collections at the British Library, who "grumbled", "That amounts to 12 days in prison for every map stolen. That's not much of a deterrent to other would-be thieves."

He is, most likely annoyed as he is convinced (as am I) that Smiley, while admitting stealing 98 maps, has not admitted to all the thefts he actually committed...just enough to gain himself a light sentence. In the BL's case, Field believes Smiley stole an additional three maps: Smiley visited the library twice and was the only visitor since 1997 who looked through the four albums missing maps. For better or worse, I remain convinced that his "cooperation" was *solely* driven by the fact that he wanted to negotiate the shortest sentence possible...not that he in any way, shape or form regretted his actions (though, I am certain, he regretted dropping an x-acto blade on the floor at Yale.

While still doing law, I had the unfortunate experience of working with a 19 year-old man who, with his brother, grew 104 pot plants in his basement. They were trash plants and for personal use, but because he had over 100 plants, the judge, under a then new law, sentenced him to 5 years, actual time (that is, no good time...five actual years) in a Federal prison. That he was 19 was irrelevant, that he had a merit scholarship to a major university was irrelevant, that neither the judge nor the prosecutor wanted the sentence was irrelevant. Five years and a wasted life over a bunch of skunk week. Smiley stole major pieces from an untold number of institutions, betrayed their trust, betrayed his clients' trust and put into question the intent of all special collection visitors...and got 42 months.

For more general comparison (relatively recent stats): the average prison sentence for drug-trafficking crimes is 83 months; the average for immigration crimes is 27 months; the average for firearms offenses is 58 months; and for theft and fraud, the average is 21 months. I guess one could say, the sentence is higher than the average for theft/fraud...then again, the crime blows the bell curve.

He will spend the next year or so in a nice minimum security facility where he can work on the manuscript for the book that will inevitably emerge...and perhaps his tennis game before being eligible for early release. He will be out, I am certain, long before the full scope of this thefts is known.

Is Bush the Devil...should the Devil be offended...Milton might say, "yes"

I do not know if you read the SF Gate's brilliantly witty columnist, Mark Morford, but if you do not I strongly encourage you to do so. He is a bit fringy at times, so if you are easily offended, beware...but he has a brilliant knack of cutting to the quick of things and putting issues in terms that I find very pleasing...ok, I like him because if I had the time (and ability) to write, I would write what Mark writes. Which brings us to a recent column.

He recently penned, "Is Bush Really The Devil? Satan has better taste in shoes. Is far sexier. Can actually spell 'Venezuela.' I mean, come on". Admittedly, he has a taste for long, overly descriptive titles (e.g. Sticky Hedgehogs, Stolen Puppies British heroines, toxic ice cream and the case of too many cute, dead mammals; and, Lick My Silent Sports Car How much has Big Auto lied? Take a drive in this four-wheel electric orgasm, and find out, etc.). But that is part of his charm.

In examining Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's recent rant in front of the UN, Morford asks the hard question: "Was he [Bush] really sent to us by an angry and sighing God(dess) to test our ability to suffer toxic GOP fools with greater humor and more sex and good scotch?" He chooses, as a point of reference, "Milton's epic poem "Paradise Lost," perhaps the most heavily canonized and lovingly detailed examination of the underworld..." [see, it really is about books, after all]. He proceeds, at length, to compare our falling leader with the fallen angel. I will not recite the details...read and enjoy. I am going to have go and reread Paradise Lost (and Purgatory...as I have both, in editions with the great Dore illustrations) sometime soon.

This reminds me of another of my favorite "fictional Satan entering the real world" story. As you know, I am a recovering attorney. Finding bizarre legal cases is something a lot (of the more interesting) law student spend time doing when they should be Shepardizing cases. On of my favorites is: US vs. Satan and His Staff. It was a forma pauperis hearing (where an indigent plaintiff petitions to have the US government step in on their behalf in civil rights cases) and, by nearly any other judge, would have been "denied without opinion" (that is, without any written explanation of the reason). In this case, an elderly emeritus judge, apparently with time on his hands and a great sense of humor, laid out the foundation as to why the write was denied. In addition to all the tedious legal bits, there is a nice biblio reference:

While the official records disclose no case where this defendant has appeared as defendant there is an unofficial account of a trial in New Hampshire where this defendant filed an action of mortgage foreclosure as plaintiff. The defendant in that action was represented by the preeminent advocate of that day, and raised the defense that the plaintiff was a foreign prince with no standing to sue in an American Court. This defense was overcome by overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Whether this would raise an estoppel in the present case we are unable to determine at this time.

The first time I read this I was compelled to reread the Devil and Daniel Webster (a treat, do so if you have not since college).

On a slightly more serious note, I am a bit disappointed with Chavez's rant. I think he is genuinely doing what he thinks is best for Venezuela and has, in fact, done some very good things for the country...but he suffers serious foot in mouth disease. Maybe this is my issue, I have become so used to politicians only saying things in the blandest, least-inclined-to-piss-anybody-off-way, that hearing someone speak from the heart (admittedly, a pissed-off heart) is overly jarring. Then again, sometimes it pays to think about the audience (admittedly, this may well have played well in every other country on earth...). Here in Maine, our Governor had pissed off the feds by cutting a fuel oil deal with Venezuela for the state's "home heating assistance program". This deal was going to save the Maine a great deal of money on heating oil for those eligible for the subsidy (8 million gallons at a 40% discount). In the wake of the UN fiasco, he has stated he will not renew the program...in theory hurting Venezuela, but really hurting the poor in Maine and...well...the taxpayers who will now have to buy it at a higher rate. Personally, I'll keep my fingers crossed that when it comes time to renew, fiscal responsibility will win out over rhetorical backlash.

Oh, and the devil (and rock&roll) is, according to Rand, responsible for teen sex as well.

I am not the only one...follow-up to minor rant...

According to Wonkette: this evening Helen Thomas will be signing copies of her book, "The Watchdogs of Democracy? The Waning Washington Press Corps and How It Has Failed the Public," at the American News Women’s Club (6:30pm). The $25 entrance includes a dinner buffet. I would go in a minute if I lived in or around DC. If anyone attend, please let me know *g*.

Truth...you can't handle the truth: the abdication of any semblance of journalism...

This is not a political rant...it is a rant against banality and/or mediocrity in the press. The trigger is this week's Newsweek cover around the world (via Rising Hegemon). You will note that in pretty much every other section of the globe (Asia, Europe and Latin America) the "news journal" Newsweek has a cover story title, "Losing Afghanistan" with a photo of a Mujahadeen soldier on the cover.

In the US, this week's cover story is "My Life in Pictures" with a photo of Annie Leibovitz and kids. Now don't get me wrong, I like AL's photos a great deal. She is talented and worthy of recognition...but the cover of NEWSWEEK!!!

Has the media so abdicated their roll in this country as a purveyor of "news"? Has the media guzzling general public become so thin skinned and rose-tinted in thier ability/willingness to absorb "real news" that they must be sheltered from the darker bits? Has mainstream news become so cowed by the current administration's aversion to...well...the truth? Has truthiness really won the proverbial war?

I would expect such things from People, Esquire, or the Enquirer. Newsweek, however, really SUPPOSED to be about, well, NEWS. I am more annoyed because they *know* what the real news is...and have given it a front page placement everywhere else on Earth. Sadly, the US market can't, apparently, accept the news...as it were.

Print media used to be where the public could turn to get depth and meaning to the stories and issues in play. Broadcast media long ago abdicated the roll...exchanging it for the growing "infotainment" version of the news where propaganda and corporation created sound-bites are presented in 30 second bursts...no challenge at all for the average American to absorb between swigs of beer and bites of twinkies. As has been said elsewhere, "there are lies, damned lies and Fox News" (Expressen: Räven går i Rosengård Behrang Kianzad). But have we really come to the point where a Newsweek cover-story on Afghanistan is too "political" to run in the US...it must be replaced with a puff peice on a photographer...

I started, years ago, to read most of my day to day "news" from foreign sources (primarily the BBC and the Economist because I liked to compare it to what was being fed the US market. Several years ago, I pretty much stopped following US news feeds completely...save the occasional snip via googlenews. Most, I know, are not bitter and cynical enough to have followed this path, for better or worse. I feel sorry, however, for a nation seeking news who think the best Newsweek has to offer is "My Life in Pictures." Maybe Newsweek and the population deserve each-other...I like to think that people would want to know the truth...the "news"...if it were actually offered to them. Screw it. I'm going to go buy a People and stop thinking.

Library sales...great show and chance of a nice find...

Library sales can be so much fun. Get there early and keep your people watching skills honed. The first half-hour of a library sale usually a pretty great bit of performance art. Best of all, in addition to the show, you have the chance to find some nice bits of this and that. Suz and I attended a local sale the other day. We bought a half dozen items and all were solid purchases. Two, however, were quite good (both in the $450 range)...these two for a total outlay of $19. I am going to have to make a donation to the library when they sell, as I always do when we purchase something reasonably/very valuable at one of these sales.

Most of those attending where great fun and enjoyed themselves. There were only a handful of the way too intense, this is war, damn the torpedoes types attending...its amazing how, in a community that is really quite small, some people don't seem to care at all how poorly they behave. Then again, no one threw any books (I've seen that at at least one sale) and no one came in, stood in front of a table and shouted, "I'm taking this whole table"...and then proceeded to go through the table, vetting the things she really wanted and leaving the dreck (a personal favorite, I've seen the same person at more than one sale do the same thing). This was pretty mellow compared to the really fun ones *laughing*.

Overall, however, we made some great purchases and saw a pretty good performance of the ongoing piece, "Poor Behavior on Parade." Fun was had by all.

noted map thief "entitled" to maps...

As most of us know, Edward Forbes Smiley III stole approximately 98 from some of the world's great libraries over a seven year period. There has been much debate about what was going on behind the thefts...what would lead one of the best known dealers to a path so base. The leading theories tended to revolve around "scarce good material" and debt excuses. According to an article published today, debt appears to be validated, but according to prosecutors his initial thefts were more out of pettiness, entitlement and resentment:

"He explained that his initial thefts were acting out of resentment towards persons at certain institutions that he believed had wronged him, individuals who he believed had slighted him or used certain of his research without accreditation," prosecutors wrote.
...
"Other thefts he explained resulted from some misguided sense of entitlement to the maps because he had, through collectors, provided better versions of the same map to the institution. He also acknowledged that stealing and selling the maps was profitable and he had mounting debts."

It's the "entitlement" argument that has me the most...er...baffled. The idea that, because he provided a "better" copy to an institution, he was somehow entitled to alternative copies (for free) shows absolutely stunning arrogance and, I think, desperate rationalization.

The article goes on to mention that the prosecution is not seeking a specific term, but noted that he should get credit for his assistance in recovering his stolen maps, stating: "From any perspective, the defendant has taken tremendous steps towards addressing the wrongs he committed," [emphasis mine]. I beg to differ. He stole maps, over a SEVEN year period, from some of the most significant public libraries in the world...libraries that remain "open" to preserve and provide access to great works. What he did was a profound betrayal of trust...of the institutions, of his clients and of the profession as a whole. I suggest that it also shows a profound *lack* of respect for the institutions, his clients and for the works themselves...of their significance and *why* the institutions sought to archive and protect them.

His "assistance", I believe, has absolutely *nothing* to do with "addressing the wrongs he committed." Rather, having been caught, he knew that rolling over would get him at least some degree of preferential treatment at sentencing. He knows that there is no downside to him in giving the prosecutors the information about what he stole and who he sold it to...in fact, a great upside for him. His clients, of years, are now compelled, ethically and legally, to return the stolen property without any likely recourse. True, the institutions will get most of their now damaged/impaired property back, which is a good thing. However, the one who benefits the most is Smiley himself...again. I think there is every indication that had he not been caught at Princeton, he would still be stealing maps today and onward.

He stole the maps (effectively from his clients) to serve his interests, he now "assists" in their return...again to serve his interests. Had he had an actual epiphany, turned himself in and, in doing so, layout a history of his thefts and where the maps ended up, *then* I would support lieniancy. I know I am a cynical old recovering attorney, but his efforts to undo the damage he has done should not garner him preferential treatment at sentencing. It is the *very* least to be expected from him. He is/was the worst kind of opportunistic, usurious predator. I am sorry for his clients, on both sides of the transactions and for the profession as a whole. I hope the judge sees through self-serving turn of heart. Sentencing is on September 27th. We shall see.

What a great weekend...a triple threat draws a trip to NY

ILAB has a book fair...very neat, but not really enough to justify a trip to NY alone.

Fine Books hosts the first annual Collegiate Book Collecting competition awards presentation a the Grolier Club...really wonderful, in more than one way, but not quite enough to justify a trip to NY alone.

I have a moderate amount of books (including the elephant folio set of the Monograph of McKim Mead) that need to be delivered to a client in NY...great fun, but not something to drive justify a trip to NY alone.

All three...in one day...totally justify a drive to NY. So I did.

I arrived shortly after the ILAB event started on Saturday. It was a relatively small fair (60ish dealers)...but by and large, what great dealers. Very international (possibly more foreign than domestic...which was strangely pleasing) and simply exceptional material from nearly all genres. Jonkers was there with, among many wonderful things, some truly exceptional illustrated juvenalia; Between the Covers had their usual (exceptional) collection of modern lit (I had a nice chat with them about their absolutely exception website...it is almost too much fun). Donald Heald brought an absolutely amazing collection of folio to double folio sized books...simply a stunning collection of books. Nicholas Basbanes was there, chatting and signing and was, as always, charming. Sadly, I ended up only able to spend about 2 hours there...for two reasons. First, I had to meet with my client in the afternoon and wanted that to be leisurely. Second, 2 hours is the parking garage was $30, over 2 hours was $50. I love NY.

I then proceeded to the Park. Or, rather, very near it...to visit a client and deliver his books. I, as he, love good books and good architecture. We had a nice visit and good chat. All one's clients should be a nice.

I then moved on to the final event of the day, arriving somewhat early for the Grolier Club event. This turned out to be a very good thing. I had a nice bite to eat nearby and visited the Apple Cube...Apple, it seems, is as good at designing their retail space as they are their hardware. The elevator alone is worth the trip. Best of all, however, is that I had about two hours to wander through the Grolier Club. They have two exhibits on display the moment. One is a collection of miniature designer bindings and the other is the Guild of Book Workers Centenary Exhibition...simply exceptional art bindings. In retrospect, these exhibits alone justified the trip to NY and I recommend any and all to make the trip. It was wonderful. To top it off, there was a very nice awards presentation. I had the pleasure of meeting the winner, a charming, (reasonably) young man with an exceptional collection on Japanese prints/printing. The event was well attended and was key-noted by Nicholas Basbanes...the start and finish to an all together lovely day.

The trip itself was rather fun. I listened to an unabridged version of an utterly entertaining bit of escapism and had the surreal experience of stopping in at a rest stop where TWELVE bus loads of Boston Red Sox fans had just unloaded (hidden, behind the building) on their way to play the Yankees...or some such thing. I have never seen a 40 person line to use a Men's Room. I have now. I did not return the same day...though I came close. My sister, however, lives in Guilford and is encumbered, at the moment, with a parasite that will in a month or so, be my nephew...so I spend the night there which was great fun, too. Business, play and family...what a great weekend.

New "book" from(ish) the treasury department, cash vs accrual accounting and passing yet another crisis to the next administration...

Rep. Jim Cooper has just published the Financial Report of the United States: The Official Annual White House Report, effectively a repackaging with an explanatory preface of the US' financial status. In synopsis (from Buzzflash):

The following figures appear in the official U.S. Financial Report, released by the Treasury Department:

~ The true national debt is $49 trillion, not the $8.3 trillion Bush reported
~ That's $156,000 for every citizen, or $375,000 for every working American
~ This figure has more than doubled in the past five years
~ We paid $327 billion last year on interest alone
~ The true 2005 deficit was $760 billion, not the $318.5 billion Bush reported
~ This is 6.2% of the GDP, not 2.6%
It's all getting worse

What accounts for the huge discrepancy? Unlike businesses, the government uses "cash" instead of "accrual" accounting. This means that the government does not report future spending promises like Medicare and Social Security, or even future spending guarantees like veterans' benefits and federal employee pensions.

"Cash accounting tells you what's in your bank account. Accrual accounting tells you what's in your bank account and what's on your credit card statement," Cooper told BuzzFlash in an interview. "Whether you're promising to buy a road or something at Target, you need to know what you promised to buy. That should be a binding obligation of the government. We've made a world of promises to folks that we need to keep." [emphasis and "~" mine]

Jim Cooper (D-TN) is a conservative Dem (often accused of Rep. leanings), but he is a Rhodes Scholar and Harvard Law graduate...so one hopes his numbers are good. I am pretty much convinced that the GOP is planning to effectively throw the next election and, in doing so, dump the profound economic mismanagement of this administration onto a Dem president's desk. He/she will, with the help of a likely Dem leaning congress, be forced (to prevent functional bankruptcy) to raise taxes and/or engage in *deep* spending cuts. The GOP will then ride the backlash of these necessary steps *back* into the whitehouse....then roll back the tax increases for the very wealthy while leaving in place the "necessary" increases on the rest of us. I hope I am unduly cynical.

If you prefer the original form of the data, it can be found here. They are really breathtaking numbers...it is a shame no one in this country seems to be able/willing to be honest about such things...smoke and mirrors is ever so much more comforting. This is *not* a political rant...it is a financial rant. No politician, from any party, wants to talk about the real implications of what our debt levels mean for this country. It is far better (and easier) to spew pablum that appeals to either the conservative or liberal masses (and, one hopes, those trapped between), than to try to discuss/explain/promote complex concepts to the voting public. Then again, the voting public, according to recent studies, votes on name recognition alone...not parties, not issues...name recognition. I am this close >< to supporting a return to the idea that only landed gentry should be able to vote...better yet, Plato's benevolant dictatorship. Bollocks, I'm going to go to bed...and put my happy, rose tinted glasses on again in the morn.

James Frey, Million Little Pieces and the publishing industries' coming Million Little Lawsuits

I am, I must admit, somewhat stunned that Random House has caved to demands for refunds in the face of litigation. [N.B. I am a recovering attorney, I tend to support creative/experimental uses of the lay...but not abjectly bogus ones...] I am the first to admit that I do not read things like Frey's, "A Million Little Pieces." I'm disinclined to do a great deal of navel examination as to my own life...reading other's tales of self discovery/redemption makes me a bit...er...glazed. That said, that aspects of his "memoir" were fabricated is tacky...but functionally irrelevant.

I learned, around 10 or so, that just because something is in print does not mean it is "true." So he added tales to deepen/broaden the tale of his life...does it actually change the substance/impact of his story? Maybe...maybe not, but have I been "harmed?"

Legally, the substantive issue would seem to me to be one of "damages." What is the harm? So I bought a book that was supposed to be a memoir but it included fictional/fictionalized passages. How am I harmed?

How many books have you picked up finding quotation after quotation stating that the book is "one of the great books of the 20th century", "thrilling", "brilliantly written", etc., etc. Yet, when read it turns out to be abject crap. Has RH opened the door for a slew of "you said is was X...but it was Y" suits under the guise of "fraud." [I read with bemusement of another who is currently seeking an attorney to file a class action against the Catholic Church and others over the Bible.]

It is one thing when a piece of non-fiction is found to be plagiarized and/or based on spurious data, etc. Even then, it is just written off as being dreck of one flavor or another...it is just a "bad book"...to be read with a careful eye or not read at all, as one sees fit. In no other case can I find people suing for "fraud." [Mind you, there are countless suits for invasion of privacy, defamation and the like.]

There are times when, as a defendant, you simply pay to avoid the annoyance/cost of litigation. There are times, however, when you must fight a stupid fight because the collateral damage of a settlement carries too high a cost. I'm a bit concerned that RH's desire to put this Frey matter to rest has made them shortsighted as to the implications of caving. Time will tell.

Joyce, Martello Tower and Ulysses...

A minor Joyce note is warranted today as it was on this day in 1904 that Joyce (then 22) moved in with his friend, Oliver St. John Gogarty into Martello Tower. The Tower was in Shadycove, just outside Dublin. He stayed only a week...before running off to Europe with Nora. He did not return to Ireland...but the Tower was immortalized in the open chapter of Ulysses and the world is better for it *laughing*.

Rude and wrong (a minor rant)...

This is a minor addendum to my show posts, but applies beyond this one show so I thought I'd splice it off on its own. We all signed a contract stating that we would not begin breaking down our booths until 6pm Sunday...that is, after the show "closed." This would appear to be a very simple and bright line rule...and clearly one that we had all agreed to as we all signed individual contracts to this effect.

So why did one dealer pack and leave shortly after 5pm? Worse, why did another half dozen to a dozen begin packing at 530pm? Personally, I think the later began packing because the first had packed and left. That is, if everyone else "obeyed the rule", they would have...but once one dealer blatantly violated the rule, others felt it was somehow ok to do so as well.

I know I am probably a bit snippy about this, but I really think that packing up a booth before a show is closed is unbelievably rude...to the promoter, other dealers and, most importantly, to the customers/public. As two dealers near him were busily filling their booths with packing boxes and putting their books away (and 540pm), my friends at First Folio were conducting a final nice sale. While others near me were packing up, I was negotiating with a new client to take a rather exceptional item on consignment. Would either of these things have come to pass if we had been packing up our booths...clearly no.

The contract we all signed clearly stated that anyone who packed up early would not be asked back next year. I doubt, very much (and for several reasons), that the promoter will actually oust people for packing early...but it is almost too bad. I really do not think that the half hour to forty-five minute "lead" in packing made that much of a difference to anyone in getting out...and, most importantly, it is just really rude to customers. It is worse as at least two dealers who I really like a great deal where among those I saw packing early. I still love them...but really hope to never see them bailing early.

I really do not mean to upset anyone and am in no way saying that I have not/do not do inexplicable things now and again...but this is just one of those things that I don't understand. You sign the contract, you man your booth, you try to give customers the best experience you can. I just really think that packing early is rude and wrong.

Day four and the aftermath...

Sunday was,surprisingly, really quite busy and fun. It was a long day (11 to 6), but traffic was really quite steady right to the end. Seeing a good number of people still actively milling about and looking at 6pm on a Sunday is really nice and speaks well for the show.

Overall, we really enjoyed doing this show and have already signed up to do it again next year. The antique dealers were fun and the crowds they drew were a nice addition to the usually bookish crowd. With the exception of a bit of logistics, I think the show was very well run and that the pr/marketing before and after is among the best I've seen by any promoter.

On a related marketing note, I was interviewed by two different publications and it will be interesting to see what sort of feedback we get from them.

We managed, as we do far too often, to purchase more than we sold *laughing*. It was all for clients, but we really did do a fair amount of buying...most notably, a lovely set of the 1915 elephant folio of the monograph on McKim Mead in four volumes. Thus, as we left, our already filled car was *more* full than when we left Portland.

Then we went to Annapolis, MD, where my wife's parents own a home and picked up several largish things they asked us to bring up to Maine for them. The car, at this point, was basically completely full save the front seat.

Then we went to the Eastern Shore and met with a new client and picked up a rather nice W. Somerset Maugham collection. I managed, frankly to my surprise, to find room to tuck another FOUR shelves worth of WSM material. The car, at this point, is really stunningly full...and so tightly packed that I think I could roll it down an embankment and not have anything shift (though I hope not to test this theory). Back in Maine tomorrow for the big unpacking and a great show finished.

muttering and the like at bookfairs...

One of the major social aspects at most bookfairs is chatting with other dealers about the fair, other dealers, and various aspects of the success or failures of any given day. This is especially true when A) it is slow; B) any change has been made to the show from one year to the next; C) folks are looking but not buying. That is, booksellers tend to bitch/comfort one and other in an arbitrary and caprecious fashion.

I tend not to bitch much about shows. We really don't "expect" to sell much at any given show...if we break even we are happy, anything above that is just great...but shows fall under "marketing" on our P&L statements so it is really more about getting the brand out there and making new contacts and follow-up opportunities (e.g. I was interviewed today for a national antique journal....a *big* plus for this show). So the issue that makes the most number of dealers the most...er...talkative is not something that tends to get me very riled up (and I tend to not like to talk about such things anyway).

I do, I'll admit, sometimes tell stories about other dealers...though to be fair, they are almost always funny/flattering and if they are not, *I* am typically the dork character. I have certainly heard (or overheard) *many* stories about others that range from the snarky to to downright mean-spirited. Again, personally, I tend to try to extricate myself from such situations as...well...no good comes from such things.

The reason I am thinking about this is that I had a new client chat with me at length about this very issue. He had just come from another booth where 3 dealers were apparently discussing/critiquing the current show and he was really rather put off by it. He has been collecting for many years and has shopped shows throughout. It was interesting to chat with someone "from the other side of the fence" about this issue. He told me that several years ago, he had walked into a booth and browsed while two dealers discussed a mutual client is not remotely positive terms (he stated that he has never bought from either of them again).

The moral, I guess, is that we should all be more conscious and cautious about what we chat about and when. Bookselling, at least for some, is a profession...I guess it is not unreasonable to expect professionalism in our collective conduct. Then again, bitching when it is slow is really...er...kinda fun.

Day three...soldiering on...

My feet are sore. Standing on concrete for 8 hours a day (or more) is really...really...really...dumb. I switched shoes today...now my feet hurt in two generally distinct, yet overlapping, ways. Have I mentioned my feet hurt.

There was great traffic today. The weather was overall favorable. We had very positive feedback from visitors and genuine interest in several significant items. I have found that many of our shows are actually "made" in the week or two after...this one appears to be heading that way. Sales have been solid but not spectacular...feedback and interest, however, has been outstanding.

It has also been a great show for finding things for clients...and that is always a good thing.

Everyone is dreading the moveout. Apparently, because there is another event in adjoining space, all vehicles will have to come into the building ONE AT A TIME. Even if they are able to get one truck in every minute (which is stunningly unlikely), the fact that there are OVER 400 trucks means that it will take AT LEAST 6 hours to get everyone's truck in the building. The show ends at 6pm. It appears likely that some/many of us will not be leaving until after midnight. We are tentatively planning to use our handtruck to move 4 boxes at a time from the floor to our hotel garage half a block away...urgh.

Have I mentioned that my feet hurt?

How to check one's moral compass:

So, when a nice young man approaches you and offers you an ex libris book (from the "right" high school library) on the history of gastronomy with the name of an infamous cannibal serial killer signed (twice) on the check-out card, do you:

a) Say, "Oh my...that is the most disturbing thing I have ever seen. Begone dark stain."

b) Say, "Oh my...that is the most disturbing thing I have ever seen. You should really take that to TBD, who would love to handle such things."

c) Say, "Oh my...that is the most disturbing thing I have ever seen. I would love to handle it...the crass factor is cool."

d) Say, "Oh my...that is the most disturbing thing I have ever seen. I would love to handle it and I know someone who will buy it tomorrow."

I find it interesting how something can be "exceptional" in very different ways. You can have something that is exceptionally beautiful (e.g. Paul Bonnet's spectacularly bound Faust). You can have something that is exceptionally significant (e.g. Metcalf's first sketches of Ethernet). You can have something exceptionally funny (e.g. a pristine copy of Crumb's, Zap 1). Or you can have something that is just exceptionally disturbing.

Day two of four...I need new feet.

I have stood for over 21 hours over the last two days...on a concrete floor. It is interesting how painful this can be. One would not, necessarily, think that it would be....and one would be wrong. It is painful. I have two days to go. I wish I could stand on my hands.

It was an ok day. Steady/heavy rain. Rather slow traffic...but very good/interesting visitors and several very promising new contacts. As I have mentioned before, we really do look at shows as marketing/branding exercises (the cost of shows goes under "advertising" on our P/L statement). It is always nice (very nice) to have a show pay for itself immediately...but it is not necessary for a "successful" show. One of our "best shows" did not become a best show until a month or two later. We are doing ok thus far...but hopes are high for tomorrow.

On the plus side, we discovered a wonderful market not too far from the hotel that should be the model for such markets in other cities. Dozens of stalls, fresh fruit, fresh bakeries, delis, great ethnic spaces, etc., etc., etc. Most importantly, no effort to make it trendy and expensive. Fresh made donuts for 40 cents or 4 for a dollar. Great breakfast sandwiches (two eggs, sausage, cheese on toast for $1.50). Really nice, fresh fruit salads for $1.00. The result: the place it teaming and people appear to be making good money (most stalls have been in place for years/decades). I wish the Portland Public Market would have looked here. The PPM was great if you wanted overpriced veggies, dry goods or meat...interestingly, this does not draw a great number of people (motto: "Portland Public Market: Why Pay Less").

More from Baltimore later.