Doug's review was even-handed in spite of the necessity to point out errors. Bloom really had no clue- fools rush in. We treated him like he knew something. And his ego was too big to admit he knew nothing.
As I said before, SB claimed he talked to me after the Strack lecture, but I didn't meet him until dinner that night- Tootsie glasses and all.
Doug met him at the dinner too. Now I think that Doug could have been a Wayshower, a cosmic step in his pearl journey, but SB didn't recognize that he will never find a bigger intellect on Pearls than Doug, if he even bothered to notice Doug.
His style of journalism is to be a part of the story. His POV, his food, his small airplane seats. The style reminded me of that genre of thousands of travelogues by young men in the 1900-1940 era. They go to exotic countries in the far east and hang out with the British elite in their compounds, playing cricket and dress up for dinner. They speak of their contacts with the wealthy in awe. The natives are always regarded as servants. My grandmother in law collected about 100 of the darn things.
I did like "Postvale", where his participatory journalism style sort of worked. There was a lot of tension between groups and he went back and forth, trying to befriend both sides. He eventually chose the side of the local Iowans over the Lubavichers- a savvy political move for an Iowa University professor. I'll never forget the scene in which he entered a Mikvah and noticed the film of grease on the water with a few pubic hairs floating in it. The Lubavichers were funky. They also left dead cars w/o tires in their yards to rust. Totally shocking to Iowa townspeople who wanted some taxes from the Lubavichers' kosher meat factory.
He manages to make the pearl story a lot more boring. He teaches journalism. I don't see how he can let his students read this book. If this book sets his standards? Ouch!
And he believed The Rana of Fresno and claimed that her so-called tissue nucleated Miki akoyas were better than Paspaleys' best. Not in a direct comparison, but in his claims about the beauty of the strand, which he said was the best he ever saw. My best guess? They are tissue-nucleated freshwaters- in fact, they are the first CFWP freshadamas Jeremy brought back, stunning pearls with amazing luster and iridescence. I doubt Leonard Rosenthal used any particular strand of cultured pearls to make his case and sold them to her grandfather with no provenance. This episode in pearl history needs its own journalism to uncover Rosenthal's monumental story of how he fought in French courts to protect the name "natural pearls" for naturals alone.
Leonard Rosenthal- The Pearl Hunter. Steve would have had a unique story to research there, one that hasn't really been done in English, which is why The Rana of Fresno could make such ridiculous claims and get away with it. Even after all his travels, I think he still portrays a too shallow knowledge of pearls.
He got his kicks from listening to the clicks of pearls and mentioned the clicks they make, time and time again. I have a strong sense that his ears are more engaged in pearls than his eyes. However, others have noticed the sounds pearls make against each other, too. In fact we developed a terminology for the sounds of pearls at P-G:
Small pearls 5-6-7mm make "Klink", sounds
Medium pearls 8-9-10, make "Klank" sounds and
11mm over "Klonk" as they bump each other.
This has fallen out of usage lately on the forum, but big Pearls will always be Klonks to me. ...
One more thing. That title, "Tears of Mermaids" is the most imaginative thing about the book. I fully expected to read some soaring prose and literary references to pearls if not references to mermaids. Read passionate words of pearls as metaphor. Verbal expressions of Stephen's passion. He is a writer after all. The prose itself was rather pedestrian.
Unfortunately, this book is too boring for laymen and will never be taken seriously by the pros. It does not teach us anything about pearls. It does not engage our imaginations.
One caveat> St Martin's Press. BAD boys! They threw him under the bus. They had some kind of production schedule to make money, not to make the book great. They are smacking Stephen's reputation with this approach. He had no editor to save him from these embarrassments, to force him to think big, put things in context and at least tell us ONE secret.
