ERDNASE

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
Bill Mullins
Posts: 5382
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » February 13th, 2020, 10:30 pm

PavelTheGreat wrote: The same standards of decency would have been applied . . .

I think you are projecting here, rather than making a statement that could be verified.

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 8329
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Jonathan Townsend » February 13th, 2020, 10:35 pm

A text may speak to us and we may come to imagine things about the author. Such imaginings are an "effect" whose "method" is studied elsewhere. But behind that effect, as with the Wizard in Oz, there was a person who brought those words to the print shop in Chicago.

How strange that the illustrator recalls his lettering but not the figures. Recalls soft hands and soft voice, clothes, some small talk about family, but not the tricks or the guys name.

Then there's mention of Vernon noticing the Canadian copyright filing including photographs. Any hope of finding that document?
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5382
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » February 13th, 2020, 10:55 pm

I think it has been fairly well established that the book with photographs that Vernon saw was Combined Treatise on Advantage Card Playing and Draw Poker by F. R. Ritter. David Ben located the entry for this book in the Canadian copyright records, during the period when Vernon's father worked in that office.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 7:47 am

Bill Mullins wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote: The same standards of decency would have been applied . . .

I think you are projecting here, rather than making a statement that could be verified.


You do not give full quote so even I do not know precisely what I said here, but my suggestion was that within a given community (say Philadelphia or Chicago) comprised of immigrants from England, Germany and other countries) you are likely to find same class structure. Yes, diversity (rich/poor, sophisticated/crude, etc.) but same counter-parts. Same upper-crust vanity, same elitism, same snobbery, same moral code, same manners, etc.

By the way--the use of the word "earth/erde" to describe planet was much less employed, presumably because astronomy was furthest thing from most people's mind. They thought of "earth" not as sphere in heavens, but as ground they walk on, soul they till. Thus meaning of words evolve based on relevance to Society.

User avatar
Paco Nagata
Posts: 276
Joined: July 3rd, 2019, 6:47 am
Favorite Magician: Juan Tamariz
Location: Madrid, Spain.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Paco Nagata » February 14th, 2020, 9:22 am

Jonathan Townsend wrote:How strange that the illustrator recalls his lettering but not the figures. Recalls soft hands and soft voice, clothes, some small talk about family, but not the tricks or the guys name.

That's one of the "little details" that most intrigues me, as "Columbo" used to say.
Jonathan Townsend wrote:...or the guys name.

The writter may have not been specially interested in hiding his name if we assume that it is showed just backward. So, I wonder why Smith didn't want to identify the guy even decades after.
Maybe the writter is actually Smith?
"The Passion of an Amateur Card Magician"
https://bit.ly/2lXdO2O
"La pasion de un cartómago aficionado"
https://bit.ly/2kkjpjn
Latest erratum corrections and improvements update, 16/06/2020.

User avatar
Zenner
Posts: 135
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm
Favorite Magician: Al Koran
Location: Derbyshire, England

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zenner » February 14th, 2020, 10:49 am

Whew! I have just been doing some catching up on the Forum. I am just as eager as anybody to see what Messrs Forte and Karr have to say but I am not spending that kind of money on a whim. I still feel sure that Edward Douglas Benedict was "Erdnase" and will be very surprised if he turns out to be anybody else!

1. Erdnase was a magician (the evidence is in the book.) Benedict was an ex-professional magician whose show was in three parts. One of those parts consisted of sleight of hand with coins and cards.

2. Erdnase was a customer of McKinney, the printer. Benedict was a customer of McKinney, the printer (See the Bankruptcy Files.) Find me another candidate who was a customer of McKinney!

3. Benedict and Smith both had offices in the same building.

4. Erdnase wrote in an "educational" manner. Benedict was educated at a "Normal School", i.e., a teacher training college.

5. Erdnase knew about publishing books. After retiring from the stage, Benedict became a Sales manager for a book publishing company.

6. Erdnase needed money and Benedict went bankrupt soon after the publication of the book.

Benedict's description tallies with that given by Smith but, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any reference to his height.

Bye for now,

Peter
Peter Zenner

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 2:14 pm

Zenner wrote:Whew! I have just been doing some catching up on the Forum. I am just as eager as anybody to see what Messrs Forte and Karr have to say but I am not spending that kind of money on a whim. I still feel sure that Edward Douglas Benedict was "Erdnase" and will be very surprised if he turns out to be anybody else!

1. Erdnase was a magician (the evidence is in the book.) Benedict was an ex-professional magician whose show was in three parts. One of those parts consisted of sleight of hand with coins and cards.

2. Erdnase was a customer of McKinney, the printer. Benedict was a customer of McKinney, the printer (See the Bankruptcy Files.) Find me another candidate who was a customer of McKinney!

3. Benedict and Smith both had offices in the same building.

4. Erdnase wrote in an "educational" manner. Benedict was educated at a "Normal School", i.e., a teacher training college.

5. Erdnase knew about publishing books. After retiring from the stage, Benedict became a Sales manager for a book publishing company.

6. Erdnase needed money and Benedict went bankrupt soon after the publication of the book.

Benedict's description tallies with that given by Smith but, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any reference to his height.

Bye for now,

Peter


I like your theory, but one thing is a bit problematic. If Benedict and Smith both worked in same building, how likely is it that Benedict would be total stranger to Smith?

This fact you provide is very important! I think it supports the notion of collaboration. Benedict (in my opinion) was possibly writer of at least magic section, if not whole book, but might have been partner to Gallaway.

Benedict might have recommend Smith even to Gallaway, and Gallaway meet with Smith.

For what it's worth, I think either Gallaway wanted to write book, and asked Benedict to contribute his routines (perhaps sell them outright), or Benedict was looking to publish a magic book, but McKinney wasn't interested.

Gallaway might have made Benedict an offer for his input, but retain rights as "author"

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 14th, 2020, 3:46 pm

Zenner wrote:Whew! I have just been doing some catching up on the Forum. I am just as eager as anybody to see what Messrs Forte and Karr have to say but I am not spending that kind of money on a whim. I still feel sure that Edward Douglas Benedict was "Erdnase" and will be very surprised if he turns out to be anybody else!

1. Erdnase was a magician (the evidence is in the book.) Benedict was an ex-professional magician whose show was in three parts. One of those parts consisted of sleight of hand with coins and cards.

2. Erdnase was a customer of McKinney, the printer. Benedict was a customer of McKinney, the printer (See the Bankruptcy Files.) Find me another candidate who was a customer of McKinney!

3. Benedict and Smith both had offices in the same building.

4. Erdnase wrote in an "educational" manner. Benedict was educated at a "Normal School", i.e., a teacher training college.

5. Erdnase knew about publishing books. After retiring from the stage, Benedict became a Sales manager for a book publishing company.

6. Erdnase needed money and Benedict went bankrupt soon after the publication of the book.

Benedict's description tallies with that given by Smith but, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any reference to his height.

Bye for now,

Peter

Very interesting!

Just curious: Have you also already figured out a possible explanation for "S.W. Erdnase" from the Benedict angle? I'd agree with Bill and others that every promising candidate should have a somewhat comprehensible link to that strange name or anagram.

(Which is not to say, in my view, that it needs to be a totally logical one; I remember once reading about the famous Russian illusionist KIO, who allegedly picked his stage name when seeing a German neon sign for a cinema (= KINO) with a defunct N, leaving KI_O... Name me any researcher who would either come up with this explanation or accept it as "reasonable" 100 years later!)
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 14th, 2020, 3:55 pm

Jonathan Townsend wrote:How strange that the illustrator recalls his lettering but not the figures. Recalls soft hands and soft voice, clothes, some small talk about family, but not the tricks or the guys name.

Then there's mention of Vernon noticing the Canadian copyright filing including photographs. Any hope of finding that document?

Thank you for pointing out these discrepancies! I was about to mention them, too.

As for Vernon, I believe this could either be a case of deliberately "retrofitting" his Erdnase story later (to make it more coherent or impressive) or a striking case of misremembering and/or subconsciously altering these "memories" over time while actually believing in the rewritten version.
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 14th, 2020, 4:13 pm

PavelTheGreat wrote:
Zig Zagger wrote:I got that. INK IS NOT DIRT. But Erd- does not translate as DIRT either. At least not in present times.



I do not know how "erde" was commonly used in late 19th century, but I do know (as before mentioned) that "earth" at that time was most often used in reference to soil or ground, much less than planet.

I do agree with that. And by giving both meanings and the "planet earth" thing one first, I did't mean to imply an order.

PavelTheGreat wrote:In literature, I see "earth" in the sense of loose dirt, as in "sprinkling a handful of earth upon the coffin".

But here I need to disagree again on the "dirt" aspect. It's at least a very bad example, because the German connotation of "Erde" here is rather a religious one: sprinkling loose, fertile soil from Mother Earth, where all life begins and ends, and NOT sprinkling DIRT upon the deceased. I think a - false - English equivalent here would be to claim, "Ashes to ashes, dirt to dirt." That's just not the right context.
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 4:22 pm

Zig Zagger wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:
Zig Zagger wrote:I got that. INK IS NOT DIRT. But Erd- does not translate as DIRT either. At least not in present times.



I do not know how "erde" was commonly used in late 19th century, but I do know (as before mentioned) that "earth" at that time was most often used in reference to soil or ground, much less than planet.

I do agree with that. And by giving both meanings and the "planet earth" thing one first, I did't mean to imply an order.

PavelTheGreat wrote:In literature, I see "earth" in the sense of loose dirt, as in "sprinkling a handful of earth upon the coffin".

But here I need to disagree again on the "dirt" aspect. It's at least a very bad example, because the German connotation of "Erde" here is rather a religious one: sprinkling loose, fertile soil from Mother Earth, where all life begins and ends, and NOT sprinkling DIRT upon the deceased. I think a - false - English equivalent here would be to claim, "Ashes to ashes, dirt to dirt." That's just not the right context.


What I am saying is that "earth" was almost always used for "dirt" in print in this time. "Dirt" was considered a crude word, nearly as bad as word for excrement (which appears to be closely related, as "turd").

In German-American society (not necessarily in Germany itself), relatively vulgar German words might likewise have been verboten.

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 14th, 2020, 4:52 pm

Paco Nagata wrote:The writter may have not been specially interested in hiding his name if we assume that it is showed just backward. So, I wonder why Smith didn't want to identify the guy even decades after.
Maybe the writter is actually Smith?

I agree that there's another discrepancy, Paco, and thus I have questioned the role of M.D. Smith earlier here, too. (Just as a question worth asking, not as a claim or with any proof!)

Scenario 1: (simple short story)
One E.S. Andrews writes the book and has a good reason for not publishing it under his real name (family matters, a joke among friends, whatever). So he just reverses it to S.W. Erdnase. He puts another clue into the title (and Ruse = Andrews) and also gives the real name of the illustrator, M.D. Smith. So obviously he is not very concerned about being found with a bit of effort, neither through the anagram nor through M.D. Smith. Case closed. Only that we still haven't managed to nail that real E.S. Andrews to everyone's content. And the big question is: Why not? What have we missed?

Scenario 2: (drama)
One Mr X writes the book and has strong reasons for not publishing it under his real name (creditors, the enraged gambling mob, whatever), and he never ever wants to be found. He somehow comes up with the name E.S. Andrews as a red herring or with S.W. Erdnase as a very personal joke that cannot be traced back to him. His real name is never disclosed or it is very well hidden, only for the knowing, somewhere in the text.
And this is where Smith comes in. In this scenario, it would seem quite unlikely to me for the author to take the unnecessary risk of being found via the illustrator. So, theoretically, Smith could have been a false name, too (but apparently it wasn't); or Smith could have been in on it, as a friend of the author or because he was paid an extra amount to tell a fictitious story if someone would ever come to question him about Mr X...

Scenario 3: (science fiction)
M.D. Smith is Mr X, and his clever ruse is making up Erdnase/Andrews while himself taking the unassuming backseat as "illustrator only"... (I know, not very likely; but maybe not over-investigated either?)

I'm not pushing any of these or other scenarios; but what it comes down to, in my view, is that M.D. Smith plays more than a minor role here. Depending on which scenario we lean to, his role shifts; and depending on how much we trust or mistrust him, the reasonable scenario also shifts...
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

Roger M.
Posts: 1491
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » February 14th, 2020, 5:03 pm

Zenner wrote:Whew! I have just been doing some catching up on the Forum. I am just as eager as anybody to see what Messrs Forte and Karr have to say but I am not spending that kind of money on a whim. I still feel sure that Edward Douglas Benedict was "Erdnase" and will be very surprised if he turns out to be anybody else!

Peter

With what we're hearing about Forte's 124 page long Erdnase analysis in his new book , this "new" information might serve to reinforce Benedict as a candidate?

Considering Benedict was already in the top 5 or so candidates, once we're given a chance to analyze Forte's details when his book starts showing up in peoples mail boxes we might see a move to elevate Benedict even higher in his candidacy, in that it appears that Forte may start to doubt that Erdnase was a gambler at all, and was more likely to have been a magician?

There are other magicians mentioned across the spectrum of the hunt for Erdnase, although (IMO) none of the magicians noted besides Benedict can be taken seriously.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 25557
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » February 14th, 2020, 5:41 pm

There are many reasons to buy Steve Forte's book, including what will probably be the most insightful analysis of the contents of the book ever put on paper. But Steve writes nothing about which candidate he thinks it might be, nor does he introduce a new candidate. Steve's book is about other things. I suspect Karr's book is about only one thing.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 14th, 2020, 5:44 pm

PavelTheGreat wrote:
Zig Zagger wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:

I do not know how "erde" was commonly used in late 19th century, but I do know (as before mentioned) that "earth" at that time was most often used in reference to soil or ground, much less than planet.

I do agree with that. And by giving both meanings and the "planet earth" thing one first, I did't mean to imply an order.

PavelTheGreat wrote:In literature, I see "earth" in the sense of loose dirt, as in "sprinkling a handful of earth upon the coffin".

But here I need to disagree again on the "dirt" aspect. It's at least a very bad example, because the German connotation of "Erde" here is rather a religious one: sprinkling loose, fertile soil from Mother Earth, where all life begins and ends, and NOT sprinkling DIRT upon the deceased. I think a - false - English equivalent here would be to claim, "Ashes to ashes, dirt to dirt." That's just not the right context.


What I am saying is that "earth" was almost always used for "dirt" in print in this time. "Dirt" was considered a crude word, nearly as bad as word for excrement (which appears to be closely related, as "turd").

In German-American society (not necessarily in Germany itself), relatively vulgar German words might likewise have been verboten.

Just to make sure that I don't misunderstand you: You are referring to earth/dirt in the English language and in American print, right? And you are assuming that the replacement mechanism is (or was) the same in German with Erde/Dreck, right? If so, my assessment would be no, rather not.

Of course I wouldn't know for sure, and I obviouly haven't studied such a specific question; but I have a degree in German philology and consider myself pretty well read, and I'd say that I haven't come across such a drastic word exchange strategy. I also think that such matters were probably more prevalent in Puritan American circles and in Victorian England than in Germany. And I seem to recall that most immigrants (German and others) to the U.S. in the 19th century were working class people and thus probably not overly concerned with calling someone among friends or family politely "Erdnase" instead of "Schmutzfink." But I'd be happy to stand corrected if there are some telling examples in German print from that time.

And we should not forget that the word Erdnase, as rare as it is, was and is mainly a topograpical term (just like Felsnase, which you would call "beak of rock", I believe), likely more so than figurative speech for kids or dogs. So it might actually make sense in the context of mining, and it might even imply that S.W. could be hinting at a location, south-westerly of a (prominent) Erdnase. Who knows...
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 7:35 pm

Zig Zagger wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:
Zig Zagger wrote:
I do agree with that. And by giving both meanings and the "planet earth" thing one first, I did't mean to imply an order.


But here I need to disagree again on the "dirt" aspect. It's at least a very bad example, because the German connotation of "Erde" here is rather a religious one: sprinkling loose, fertile soil from Mother Earth, where all life begins and ends, and NOT sprinkling DIRT upon the deceased. I think a - false - English equivalent here would be to claim, "Ashes to ashes, dirt to dirt." That's just not the right context.


What I am saying is that "earth" was almost always used for "dirt" in print in this time. "Dirt" was considered a crude word, nearly as bad as word for excrement (which appears to be closely related, as "turd").

In German-American society (not necessarily in Germany itself), relatively vulgar German words might likewise have been verboten.

Just to make sure that I don't misunderstand you: You are referring to earth/dirt in the English language and in American print, right? And you are assuming that the replacement mechanism is (or was) the same in German with Erde/Dreck, right? If so, my assessment would be no, rather not.

Of course I wouldn't know for sure, and I obviouly haven't studied such a specific question; but I have a degree in German philology and consider myself pretty well read, and I'd say that I haven't come across such a drastic word exchange strategy. I also think that such matters were probably more prevalent in Puritan American circles and in Victorian England than in Germany. And I seem to recall that most immigrants (German and others) to the U.S. in the 19th century were working class people and thus probably not overly concerned with calling someone among friends or family politely "Erdnase" instead of "Schmutzfink." But I'd be happy to stand corrected if there are some telling examples in German print from that time.

And we should not forget that the word Erdnase, as rare as it is, was and is mainly a topograpical term (just like Felsnase, which you would call "beak of rock", I believe), likely more so than figurative speech for kids or dogs. So it might actually make sense in the context of mining, and it might even imply that S.W. could be hinting at a location, south-westerly of a (prominent) Erdnase. Who knows...


I do not so much dispute the claim that "erdnase" was used in reference to topography, but the suggestion that no German speaking person would make the connection between "ground" and "dirt". Are you suggesting that the ground would be called "erde" but if a kid gets this "erde" on his clothes is something totally different?

Of course there are many colloquial terms for dirt/stains/discolorations/ etc.,--and each generation has its own trendy word for this--but presumably "erde" is soil as opposed to rock. It erodes, turns to mud when rain falls, turns to dust when wind blows. That somebody might say "earth" meaning particulates of topsoil in German I think would be as likely as in English. Now here is the point: Nobody in English says "earth" for dirt today. Is antiquated. So judging from modern usage is not valid. Idioms change inevitably over the course of centuries.

However--this is not the main problem with using "erdnase" to support Sanders. I would accept an argument that says Erdnase is anagram of Sanders. I would accept an argument that says Erdnase means hills and dales, so maybe a mining reference. But I reject argument that says is likely that man re-arranges letters of his name and gets German word that describes his profession. This combination of "evidence" does not make candidate more viable, but less. The chances of this happening are as remote as winning Powerball.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 609
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » February 14th, 2020, 8:50 pm

PavelTheGreat wrote:However--this is not the main problem with using "erdnase" to support Sanders. I would accept an argument that says Erdnase is anagram of Sanders. I would accept an argument that says Erdnase means hills and dales, so maybe a mining reference. But I reject argument that says is likely that man re-arranges letters of his name and gets German word that describes his profession. This combination of "evidence" does not make candidate more viable, but less. The chances of this happening are as remote as winning Powerball.

Sanders rearranged the letters in his name in different ways in his childhood diaries. And his other writings are filled with wordplay. So it seems very likely that he came across some of the various anagrams of his name, including "ES Andrews", "Wes Anders", "Ward Essen" etc. And if he was the author (given his knowledge of German), "ES Andrews" (reversed) would have led to the chosen pen name of "SW Erdnase", thus affording a clever reference to his profession as well as a throw off (with the obvious backwards spelling of ES Andrews) to misdirect from his true name, which was also embedded in the pen name. This, to me, is a much more satisfying and better explanation than the simpler reversed ES Andrews solution (though that's an adequate solution too). In either case, a candidate (such as Galaway and others) without any connection via the anagrams or reversed spellings are starting with a huge deficit.

In addition, putting the unexplained ES Andrews reversed spelling aside, the idea that Galaway as a printer would have called himself "earth nose" seems pretty far fetched, given that "nose for" is used figuratively to signify a talent for finding something. A prospector/miner is looking for metals and minerals in the ground, thus requiring a nose for it, to "sniff" them out in the ground/earth. Or you might call a farmer "earth nose" if they know when to plant or tend to crops in the ground. So, unless there was some special circumstances in Galaway's case, it seems like a very contrived argument to say that because printers deal with ink and sometimes get it on their bodies, that you'd call one "earth nose."

And even then, why in the world would Galaway pick an obscure reference (in German no less) that just happened to spell a real name ES Andrews backwards? If there's a backwards spelling, there needs to be an explanation for it. With Sanders, in contrast, everything fits beautifully together, especially given that we have documentary evidence that he played with anagrams on his name and engaged in wordplay more generally.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 9:13 pm

Bob Coyne wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:However--this is not the main problem with using "erdnase" to support Sanders. I would accept an argument that says Erdnase is anagram of Sanders. I would accept an argument that says Erdnase means hills and dales, so maybe a mining reference. But I reject argument that says is likely that man re-arranges letters of his name and gets German word that describes his profession. This combination of "evidence" does not make candidate more viable, but less. The chances of this happening are as remote as winning Powerball.

Sanders rearranged the letters in his name in different ways in his childhood diaries. And his other writings are filled with wordplay. So it seems very likely that he came across some of the various anagrams of his name, including "ES Andrews", "Wes Anders", "Ward Essen" etc. And if he was the author (given his knowledge of German), "ES Andrews" (reversed) would have led to the chosen pen name of "SW Erdnase", thus affording a clever reference to his profession as well as a throw off (with the obvious backwards spelling of ES Andrews) to misdirect from his true name, which was also embedded in the pen name. This, to me, is a much more satisfying and better explanation than the simpler reversed ES Andrews solution (though that's an adequate solution too). In either case, a candidate (such as Galaway and others) without any connection via the anagrams or reversed spellings are starting with a huge deficit.

In addition, putting the unexplained ES Andrews reversed spelling aside, the idea that Galaway as a printer would have called himself "earth nose" seems pretty far fetched, given that "nose for" is used figuratively to signify a talent for finding something. A prospector/miner is looking for metals and minerals in the ground, thus requiring a nose for it, to "sniff" them out in the ground/earth. Or you might call a farmer "earth nose" if they know when to plant or tend to crops in the ground. So, unless there was some special circumstances in Galaway's case, it seems like a very contrived argument to say that because printers deal with ink and sometimes get it on their bodies, that you'd call one "earth nose."

And even then, why in the world would Galaway pick an obscure reference (in German no less) that just happened to spell a real name ES Andrews backwards? If there's a backwards spelling, there needs to be an explanation for it. With Sanders, in contrast, everything fits beautifully together, especially given that we have documentary evidence that he played with anagrams on his name and engaged in wordplay more generally.



I think you are failing to get my point. I have not calculated the odds, but the chances of anybody re-arranging the letters of his name and getting an actual word or phrase are slight. To discover that this word is fitting to his character or his job is many times more unlikely. This is an absurd conflation.

I will grant you that is fairly possible that a man will make anagram out of his name. But to go further than this is venturing on wild speculation.

I would sooner believe that a mining engineer named Fred P. Jones was Erdnase'. Anybody BUT a man who could re-spell his name as "Erdnase" This is not reasonable argument, is most unreasonable of all arguments in this thread (including "dirt nose").

It fits TOO PERFECTLY. That is the problem.

Roger M.
Posts: 1491
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » February 14th, 2020, 9:42 pm

Richard Kaufman wrote:There are many reasons to buy Steve Forte's book, including what will probably be the most insightful analysis of the contents of the book ever put on paper. But Steve writes nothing about which candidate he thinks it might be, nor does he introduce a new candidate. Steve's book is about other things. I suspect Karr's book is about only one thing.

Indeed.
I wasn't implying SF was going to offer up a candidate, or indicate which of the current crop was his favourite ... only that he had some distinct thoughts on whether Erdnase was a gambler or a magician - based on the contents of EATCT.
In his lengthy examination of EATCT, it would seem that the information contained throughout those pages would either support or detract from his eventual conclusion, making the entire section on EATCT of potential interest to those who desire to understand Erdnase better ... even if we still don't know who he actually was.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 609
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » February 14th, 2020, 9:43 pm

PavelTheGreat wrote:I think you are failing to get my point. I have not calculated the odds, but the chances of anybody re-arranging the letters of his name and getting an actual word or phrase are slight. To discover that this word is fitting to his character or his job is many times more unlikely. This is an absurd conflation.

I will grant you that is fairly possible that a man will make anagram out of his name. But to go further than this is venturing on wild speculation.

I would sooner believe that a mining engineer named Fred P. Jones was Erdnase'. Anybody BUT a man who could re-spell his name as "Erdnase" This is not reasonable argument, is most unreasonable of all arguments in this thread (including "dirt nose").

It fits TOO PERFECTLY. That is the problem.

The reversed spelling and the anagrams and the meaning of Erdnase (as earth nose) are all there. So it's not a question of how likely that is to happen, since it happened. Instead it's a question of whether a given person who fits ALL of those criteria like a glove (Sanders) is a more likely candidate than another given person (Galaway) who matches NONE of them. Clearly the former is more likely, since that person has a reason to notice and then use that particular pen name. Sanders would surely have chosen that name (if he was the author) since it is so perfect, whereas the total mismatch with Galaway makes it much less likely he'd choose it if he was the author. Hence, on that alone, Sanders is a much more likely candidate.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 9:55 pm

Bob Coyne wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:I think you are failing to get my point. I have not calculated the odds, but the chances of anybody re-arranging the letters of his name and getting an actual word or phrase are slight. To discover that this word is fitting to his character or his job is many times more unlikely. This is an absurd conflation.

I will grant you that is fairly possible that a man will make anagram out of his name. But to go further than this is venturing on wild speculation.

I would sooner believe that a mining engineer named Fred P. Jones was Erdnase'. Anybody BUT a man who could re-spell his name as "Erdnase" This is not reasonable argument, is most unreasonable of all arguments in this thread (including "dirt nose").

It fits TOO PERFECTLY. That is the problem.

The reversed spelling and the anagrams and the meaning of Erdnase (as earth nose) are all there. So it's not a question of how likely that is to happen, since it happened. Instead it's a question of whether a given person who fits ALL of those criteria like a glove (Sanders) is a more likely candidate than another given person (Galaway) who matches NONE of them. Clearly the former is more likely, since that person has a reason to notice and then use that particular pen name. Sanders would surely have chosen that name (if he was the author) since it is so perfect, whereas the total mismatch with Galaway makes it much less likely he'd choose it if he was the author. Hence, on that alone, Sanders is a much more likely candidate.


Again you are missing the point. You say all the elements are there--the reversed spellings, anagrams, and meaning of "Erdnase" as earth-nose. These are all hypotheses, not proven facts.

We do not know that Erdnase is an anagram. It might be just German word. It might be just anagram, but not chosen for meaning. I will give you odds of 1-1,000 that Sanders was Erdnase BASED SOLELY ON ANAGRAM THEORY. But if you add the "earth nose" meaning, I give you odds of 1-1,000,000.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 609
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » February 14th, 2020, 10:48 pm

PavelTheGreat wrote:Again you are missing the point. You say all the elements are there--the reversed spellings, anagrams, and meaning of "Erdnase" as earth-nose. These are all hypotheses, not proven facts.

We do not know that Erdnase is an anagram. It might be just German word. It might be just anagram, but not chosen for meaning. I will give you odds of 1-1,000 that Sanders was Erdnase BASED SOLELY ON ANAGRAM THEORY. But if you add the "earth nose" meaning, I give you odds of 1-1,000,000.

Many pen names are reversed spellings or other forms of anagrams. Bill Mullins has compiled a list of many dozens that have been used throughout history. It's almost impossible to believe that the backwards spelling wasn't deliberate, especially when the forwards spelling is something so odd as "Erdnase." So anyone who fits in that regard, either directly or indirectly via anagram, is much more likely as a candidate.

The resulting forward spelling of Erdnase (as earth nose) might have just been chance and used almost as a nonsense word (like "Rendrag Nitram" for Martin Gardner) . If so, the earthnose meaning doesn't help any candidate, and their respective likelihoods would be based solely on whether they match the reversed spelling or anagrams. But if we assign significance to erdnase as earth nose, then a candidate such as Sanders who matches that also becomes even more likely than he would be otherwise.

Either way, Sanders has a much stronger connection to the pen name (in all respects) than Galaway.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 14th, 2020, 11:35 pm

Bob Coyne wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:Again you are missing the point. You say all the elements are there--the reversed spellings, anagrams, and meaning of "Erdnase" as earth-nose. These are all hypotheses, not proven facts.

We do not know that Erdnase is an anagram. It might be just German word. It might be just anagram, but not chosen for meaning. I will give you odds of 1-1,000 that Sanders was Erdnase BASED SOLELY ON ANAGRAM THEORY. But if you add the "earth nose" meaning, I give you odds of 1-1,000,000.

Many pen names are reversed spellings or other forms of anagrams. Bill Mullins has compiled a list of many dozens that have been used throughout history. It's almost impossible to believe that the backwards spelling wasn't deliberate, especially when the forwards spelling is something so odd as "Erdnase." So anyone who fits in that regard, either directly or indirectly via anagram, is much more likely as a candidate.

The resulting forward spelling of Erdnase (as earth nose) might have just been chance and used almost as a nonsense word (like "Rendrag Nitram" for Martin Gardner) . If so, the earthnose meaning doesn't help any candidate, and their respective likelihoods would be based solely on whether they match the reversed spelling or anagrams. But if we assign significance to erdnase as earth nose, then a candidate such as Sanders who matches that also becomes even more likely than he would be otherwise.

Either way, Sanders has a much stronger connection to the pen name (in all respects) than Galaway.


You clearly do not understand how "odds" work. The more complex the speculation, the more remote are the chances. You are piling on several layers, thinking you are increasing your odds while you are really decreasing them. To simplify is to better your chances.

Example: The odds of me being able to reverse my name or make anagram out of it is 1:1

Odds of having a name with right letters to spell ANY KIND OF WORD is, let us say, 1:1,000

Odds of that word having any relevance to my character or calling is out-of-this-world.

The trouble with your theory is that it is based fundamentally on the name of the author. You start by assuming it is anagram, then look for Sanders and Andrews, etc. to find one that might have written book.

You say Sanders (and presumably Andrews) has stronger connection with pseudonym than Gallaway. This is weak logic, as there are hundreds of Sanders and Andrews near Chicago with equally strong connection to monicker.

And you don't even know whether it is an anagram! This is house of cards kind of logic.

Solid foundation is based on writing analysis REGARDLESS OF NAME. Also, investigation of principles (such as Mr. Smith). And circumstances of book production and publication.

By starting with name you are putting cart before horse. YOU CAN BE TOTALLY WRONG.

Remember the words of Shakespeare:

"What's in a name? A rose by any other name should smell as sweet".

By focusing on only those candidates that are anagrams, you are dismissing the distinct possibility that NONE OF THEM IS ERDNASE.

In your mind, you think is a good assumption, so you close your mind to other possibilities.

Thus may be fun game, but is not good detective work.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 609
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » February 15th, 2020, 1:08 am

PavelTheGreat wrote:The trouble with your theory is that it is based fundamentally on the name of the author. You start by assuming it is anagram, then look for Sanders and Andrews, etc. to find one that might have written book.

The pen name, like many others of that ilk, is almost certainly is based on the reversed spelling of ES Andrews (either directly or as an anagram). There are a large number of pseudonyms formed in this way...it's a fairly common practice (see Bill Mullins' list). In contrast, there are no instances I've ever seen of a obscure/odd sounding pseudonym that happens to spell out a recognizable real name backwards, where that real name isn't connected to the person. So it's pretty much a requirement that the candidate matches ES Andrews in some way.

For reference, here is a list of just the pre-1902 instances of name reversals and anagrams, many of which are strange/nonsense sounding when read forward. For more, see http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~coyne/erdnase-sanders-use-of-language.html#reversed-pen-names

Hercat (real name R. D. Chater), born ca. 1843, and performed widely in the US and England in the latter part of the 19th century
Ornum magic emporium in London, owned by George Munro, and advertised in The Showman in 1900
Italian poet Trilussa (real name Carlo Albert Salustri), started writing 1887
Olphar Hamst (real name Ralph Thomas), author of The Handbook of Fictitious Names (1868)
Alcofribas Nasier (real name François Rabelais), French Renaissance writer
Barry Waller, Poet (real name Bryan Waller Procter), English early 19th century poet
Dralloc (real name John Collard), 18th cent English logician
F. Pylodet (real name F. Leypoldt), 19th cent German-American writer
James Hasolle (real name Elias Ashmole), 16th century alchemist (anagrammists of old would substitute J for I)
Walter Ramal (real name Walter de la Mare), English writer from 1890s
Arnold Lacretie (real name Jules Claretie), French 19th cent writer
H. Trusta (real name Elizabeth Stuart Phelps), 19th century American writer
Partenio Etrio (real name Pietro Aretino) Italian 16th cent writer
Telliamed (title of work by Benoit de Maillet) French 17th-18th cent scientist
Rudolfus Otreb (real name Robertus Fludd) English 16th-17th cent physician
Ryhen Pameach (real name Henry Peacham) English 16th-17th cent writer
Thorny Ailo (real name John Taylor; J for I substitution) English 16th-17th cent poet
P. H. Treleinie (real name Peter Heylin) English 17th cent author
W. J. Andre (real name W. Jerdan) Scottish writer
Johann Abricht (real name Jonathan Birch) 19th cent poet
Ekalenna (real name Anne Lake) - The Beauty of Holiness and other poems (1871)
Eidrah Trebor (real name Robert Hardie) - published Hoyle made familiar (1830)
Rednaxela Gnimelf (real name Alexander Fleming) - 1840s
Drawde Rekatihw (real name Edward Whitaker) - 1681
Nora Helen Warddel (real name Edward Heron Allen) - issued The Romance of a quiet watering-place (1888)
Job Crithannah (real name Jonathan Birch) - wrote Fifty-one fables, with morals and ethical index (1833)
Pen Cler Jocelyn (real name Pierce Connelly) - wrote The Pope in England (1853)
Catherine Childar (real name Annie Catherine Charlotte Aldrich) - wrote The double Dutchman
Dalmocand (real name George Macdonald) - issued a volume Poems and essays ... (1851)
Cycla (real name Helen Clacy) wrote Passing clouds

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5382
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » February 15th, 2020, 1:17 am

PavelTheGreat wrote:What I am saying is that "earth" was almost always used for "dirt" in print in this time. "

You keep making statements about how things were without backing them up. This one is easy enough to disprove.

Go to Chronicling America -- the Library of Congress's free newspaper archive. Search for "Earth" on 2/15/1902 (the day that EATCT was copyrighted). On the first page of results, there will be 20 newspaper pages that use "Earth" somewhere on them. Sort by date (because sorting by "relevance" may weight one meaning more than the other). Don't count compound words that use "Earth" (like earthquake), or proper nouns (like Blue Earth County [Minnesota]). A substantial majority of the results mean planet Earth or the world we live on, rather than dirt.

But I reject argument that says is likely that man re-arranges letters of his name and gets German word that describes his profession.


This isn't at all an accurate description of the chain from W. E. Sanders to Erdnase.
First, W. E. Sanders has nine letters, and Erdnase has 7. So if you want to make the change, you have the freedom to throw away extraneous letters.
Second, as you have pointed out, the actual phrase/compound word in German is Erde-Nase. So you get to delete the letter of your choice in the name of the profession.
Finally, Sanders' profession was miner or mining engineer. Obviously, this doesn't match an anagram of the name, so you get to pick any language you want to force-fit.

So, while it may be unlikely for a person to anagram their name into their profession (although nominative determinism says that names match professions quite often - the article mentions, for example, an attorney named "Sue Yoo"), the possibility grows substantially when you are allowed to take a name, subtract a few letters, translate it to any language you want, and delete letters from the foreign word.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5382
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » February 15th, 2020, 1:21 am

Bob - your link in the post previous isn't working. Late-night network maintenance?

Bob Coyne
Posts: 609
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » February 15th, 2020, 1:40 am

Bill Mullins wrote:Bob - your link in the post previous isn't working. Late-night network maintenance?

Strange...I just now tested it in three different browsers browsers, and it worked. So maybe some temporary network glitch when you tried it. Here's the link as text (vs using the URL bbcode, in case that caused it to get truncated or mangled something in your browser)...though I notice this also gets turned into a clickable link vs pure text.

http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~coyne/erdna ... -pen-names

User avatar
Paco Nagata
Posts: 276
Joined: July 3rd, 2019, 6:47 am
Favorite Magician: Juan Tamariz
Location: Madrid, Spain.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Paco Nagata » February 15th, 2020, 3:05 am

Zig Zagger wrote:
Paco Nagata wrote:The writter may have not been specially interested in hiding his name if we assume that it is showed just backward. So, I wonder why Smith didn't want to identify the guy even decades after.
Maybe the writter is actually Smith?

I agree that there's another discrepancy, Paco, and thus I have questioned the role of M.D. Smith earlier here, too. (Just as a question worth asking, not as a claim or with any proof!)

Scenario 1: (simple short story)
One E.S. Andrews writes the book and has a good reason for not publishing it under his real name (family matters, a joke among friends, whatever). So he just reverses it to S.W. Erdnase. He puts another clue into the title (and Ruse = Andrews) and also gives the real name of the illustrator, M.D. Smith. So obviously he is not very concerned about being found with a bit of effort, neither through the anagram nor through M.D. Smith. Case closed. Only that we still haven't managed to nail that real E.S. Andrews to everyone's content. And the big question is: Why not? What have we missed?

Scenario 2: (drama)
One Mr X writes the book and has strong reasons for not publishing it under his real name (creditors, the enraged gambling mob, whatever), and he never ever wants to be found. He somehow comes up with the name E.S. Andrews as a red herring or with S.W. Erdnase as a very personal joke that cannot be traced back to him. His real name is never disclosed or it is very well hidden, only for the knowing, somewhere in the text.
And this is where Smith comes in. In this scenario, it would seem quite unlikely to me for the author to take the unnecessary risk of being found via the illustrator. So, theoretically, Smith could have been a false name, too (but apparently it wasn't); or Smith could have been in on it, as a friend of the author or because he was paid an extra amount to tell a fictitious story if someone would ever come to question him about Mr X...

Scenario 3: (science fiction)
M.D. Smith is Mr X, and his clever ruse is making up Erdnase/Andrews while himself taking the unassuming backseat as "illustrator only"... (I know, not very likely; but maybe not over-investigated either?)

I'm not pushing any of these or other scenarios; but what it comes down to, in my view, is that M.D. Smith plays more than a minor role here. Depending on which scenario we lean to, his role shifts; and depending on how much we trust or mistrust him, the reasonable scenario also shifts...

Brilliant!
I have enjoyed a lot reading those thought of you, Jan!
That's what I would call "to go to the point, instead of "beating around the bush."
In the "Scenario 2" I would add the possibility that the guy that Smith met wasn't the real writter, but an impostor playing the role of "Erdnase" to hide his identity even from Smith. Who really knows?
Although in this case, this Scenario may become a kind of "science fiction" Scenario (^_^)
Seriously, any of those three perspectives could drive us to the correct path.
Well done!
"The Passion of an Amateur Card Magician"
https://bit.ly/2lXdO2O
"La pasion de un cartómago aficionado"
https://bit.ly/2kkjpjn
Latest erratum corrections and improvements update, 16/06/2020.

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 15th, 2020, 3:50 am

Paco Nagata wrote:Brilliant!
I have enjoyed a lot reading those thought of you, Jan!
That's what I would call "to go to the point, instead of "beating around the bush."

Thank you, Paco!
It's not really rocket science, and likely all of this has been stated here before one way or the other. But I strongly agree that it helps to focus on key facts and motifs first (as in every criminal investigation) and then to deduce the "main suspects" rather than to declare the suspect early and then spend years looking only for clues to prove your point. In general, it also helps to be open-minded and not to jump to conclusions prematurely, defining maybes as hard facts while ruling out other maybes or even facts as irrelevant or preposterous, as has been displayed in this thread occasionally.
In the "Scenario 2" I would add the possibility that the guy that Smith met wasn't the real writter, but an impostor playing the role of "Erdnase" to hide his identity even from Smith.

Yes, absolutely! It may be more unlikely than likely, but we definitely shouldn't rule it out. We need to understand that there is a huge difference in saying "Smith claims that he met the man who claimed to be the author" (= this is a fact) versus "We know that Smith met Erdnase because he said so" (which is but an assumption which may turn out correct or false one day). No, we don't know, because none of us were there. We have one statement to claim this, which is certainly better than none, but independent evidence were needed to turn it into a fact. (Which reminds me of my training as a journalist back in the days when we were drilled in 101 class to always find a second independent source to verify a controversial statement, claim, or rumor before publishing it.)
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

User avatar
Zig Zagger
Posts: 397
Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zig Zagger » February 15th, 2020, 5:29 am

PavelTheGreat wrote:Solid foundation is based on writing analysis REGARDLESS OF NAME. Also, investigation of principles (such as Mr. Smith). And circumstances of book production and publication.

By starting with name you are putting cart before horse. YOU CAN BE TOTALLY WRONG.

Remember the words of Shakespeare:

"What's in a name? A rose by any other name should smell as sweet".

By focusing on only those candidates that are anagrams, you are dismissing the distinct possibility that NONE OF THEM IS ERDNASE.

In your mind, you think is a good assumption, so you close your mind to other possibilities.

Thus may be fun game, but is not good detective work.

Oops, you have basically made the very same point right before I did. Sorry!

Odds of having a name with right letters to spell ANY KIND OF WORD is, let us say, 1:1,000

Odds of that word having any relevance to my character or calling is out-of-this-world.

That's not quite my experience. I've toyed a lot with anagrams years ago. There are some great (and free) anagram generators on the internet. It's amazing how many words and combinations they may come up with. Of course it depends a bit on the length of the name, the vowels used, etc., but most names can rather be turned into meaningful anagrams (often in two or three words) than not. Also, I found it fascinating how often you can actually create anagrams that may fit the right (or alleged) context of a person. For your mild amusement, here are some fun anagrams for magicians, and they weren't that hard to find:
Criss Angel = Caring Less
David Copperfield = Prop Fiddle Advice
Phil Goldstein = Shielding Plot
Pit Hartling = A Light Print
Siegfried & Roy = Fireside Orgy
Jon Racherbaumer = Am Rehab Conjurer
Richard Kaufman = Human Card Fakir

As for ERDNASE, its six different letters unfortunately rank among the ten most used ones in the English language (ETAOINSHRD) and even among the top eight in German (ENISRATD), thus allowing for many, many variations and speculations. Only the “W” from S.W. is much less common and, therefore, may be a more relevant clue--if there actually IS a connection between the pseudonym and the man behind it.

Some anagrams of S.W. Erdnase, by the way, would be Reads News / Wands Seer / Sends Ware / Draw Sense. Pure coincidence, but in the right context with the right person it could actually make sense: A printer reads news. A dealer sends ware. An illustrator might even draw sense, etc.

I do not so much dispute the claim that "erdnase" was used in reference to topography, but the suggestion that no German speaking person would make the connection between "ground" and "dirt".

I didn't mean to suggest that. Of course they are family. One man's fertile soil is another man's dirt. One man's weed is another man's flower, etc. But Erde and Dreck are neither synonyms nor easily interchangeable. Words and language are highly ambiguous. That's why the specific meaning of language is usually a combination of the written word and its application in a given context. (That's how irony comes about.)

Nobody in English says "earth" for dirt today. Is antiquated. So judging from modern usage is not valid. Idioms change inevitably over the course of centuries.

Agreed. But then there should be evidence for that in print in German, and I have yet to see it to be convinced.

But here's why I think that this particular discussion doesn't really further any case:

In my view, and from my feel for language, neither meaning of Erdnase would actually qualify as a personable nickname in the sense of a label that is permanently applied to a person (like Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson – don’t ask me why he just crossed my mind) and used to identify him or her precisely; their use is clearly context-based, not universal. I could probably imagine a mother calling out (in German), “Get out of the mud and come into the house now, you dirty little Erdnase!”, but not “Erdnase, darling, come down for dinner, please!” Thus, it seems rather unlikely to me that someone would remember a descriptive, contextual and non-personal label like Erdnase or Mudlark as their “personal childhood nickname” and put it to good use for hiding their identity decades later in a book project. That's why I'm currently not convinced of any nickname theory.
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)

User avatar
Zenner
Posts: 135
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm
Favorite Magician: Al Koran
Location: Derbyshire, England

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zenner » February 15th, 2020, 7:10 am

An omission and a couple of answers.

In my hurried posting yesterday I forgot to mention the first indication that Benedict might be a candidate worth researching. There was a Dalrymple family linked to a Benedict family in the genealogy book I downloaded. So there was a reason that Benedict might have thought that he was related to Louis Dalrymple.

Long time readers may remember that I had discovered that an E.C. Andrews worked for the same company as Harry S. Thompson. E.C.'s signature looked as if it was "E.S. Andrews" (There is a photograph of it, if you care to look back.) I have discovered a reason why Benedict would have known E.C. and his parents; his cousin shared a house with them!

The building in which Benedict and Smith both had an office was a very large building - a skyscraper. When "Erdnase" was looking for an artist, he might have remembered seeing a sign on a door, or in the lobby. They may not have actually been known to each other before the enquiry was made.

Roger accepts that Benedict is in the top five possibilities. Why not #1 Roger? I have studied the cases for all the other candidates and have had to dismiss all those who would have had a foreign accent, or were way too old, and those for which there is no evidence that they knew anything about sleight of hand. Thanks to Chris Wasshuber's finding of the McKinney Bankruptcy Files, I know that he was the only candidate to have been a customer of McKinney. Unless we can find someone else in those files who fits all the rest of the criteria, it has to be Edward Douglas Benedict!
Peter Zenner

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 15th, 2020, 7:34 am

Zenner wrote:An omission and a couple of answers.

In my hurried posting yesterday I forgot to mention the first indication that Benedict might be a candidate worth researching. There was a Dalrymple family linked to a Benedict family in the genealogy book I downloaded. So there was a reason that Benedict might have thought that he was related to Louis Dalrymple.

Long time readers may remember that I had discovered that an E.C. Andrews worked for the same company as Harry S. Thompson. E.C.'s signature looked as if it was "E.S. Andrews" (There is a photograph of it, if you care to look back.) I have discovered a reason why Benedict would have known E.C. and his parents; his cousin shared a house with them!

The building in which Benedict and Smith both had an office was a very large building - a skyscraper. When "Erdnase" was looking for an artist, he might have remembered seeing a sign on a door, or in the lobby. They may not have actually been known to each other before the enquiry was made.

Roger accepts that Benedict is in the top five possibilities. Why not #1 Roger? I have studied the cases for all the other candidates and have had to dismiss all those who would have had a foreign accent, or were way too old, and those for which there is no evidence that they knew anything about sleight of hand. Thanks to Chris Wasshuber's finding of the McKinney Bankruptcy Files, I know that he was the only candidate to have been a customer of McKinney. Unless we can find someone else in those files who fits all the rest of the criteria, it has to be Edward Douglas Benedict!


I still like your theory, but another question I would ask.

What motive would Benedict have to write pseudonymously? In most reasonable scenario, he wishes to write magic book. Why not use real name? He is already public figure (performing magician) and contemporary audience may even recognise his act.

To me, it makes more sense that "Erdnase" was made up name for purpose of false attribution or appropriation of Benedict's work.

While Gallaway could have claimed to be the author of EATCT, having simply purchased the rights from Benedict, it would have seemed rather unethical. Perhaps "Erdnase" wanted the copyright, but did not feel justified in applying his proper name to the book.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 15th, 2020, 8:42 am

Bill Mullins wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote:What I am saying is that "earth" was almost always used for "dirt" in print in this time. "

You keep making statements about how things were without backing them up. This one is easy enough to disprove.

Go to Chronicling America -- the Library of Congress's free newspaper archive. Search for "Earth" on 2/15/1902 (the day that EATCT was copyrighted). On the first page of results, there will be 20 newspaper pages that use "Earth" somewhere on them. Sort by date (because sorting by "relevance" may weight one meaning more than the other). Don't count compound words that use "Earth" (like earthquake), or proper nouns (like Blue Earth County [Minnesota]). A substantial majority of the results mean planet Earth or the world we live on, rather than dirt.

But I reject argument that says is likely that man re-arranges letters of his name and gets German word that describes his profession.


This isn't at all an accurate description of the chain from W. E. Sanders to Erdnase.
First, W. E. Sanders has nine letters, and Erdnase has 7. So if you want to make the change, you have the freedom to throw away extraneous letters.
Second, as you have pointed out, the actual phrase/compound word in German is Erde-Nase. So you get to delete the letter of your choice in the name of the profession.
Finally, Sanders' profession was miner or mining engineer. Obviously, this doesn't match an anagram of the name, so you get to pick any language you want to force-fit.

So, while it may be unlikely for a person to anagram their name into their profession (although nominative determinism says that names match professions quite often - the article mentions, for example, an attorney named "Sue Yoo"), the possibility grows substantially when you are allowed to take a name, subtract a few letters, translate it to any language you want, and delete letters from the foreign word.



If you want to persuade anyone that "earth" was used less often than "dirt" in 1902, you need to show super-abundance of examples of "dirt" in print. Happy hunting, Bill.

User avatar
Zenner
Posts: 135
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm
Favorite Magician: Al Koran
Location: Derbyshire, England

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Zenner » February 15th, 2020, 9:05 am

PavelTheGreat wrote: What motive would Benedict have to write pseudonymously? In most reasonable scenario, he wishes to write magic book. Why not use real name? He is already public figure (performing magician) and contemporary audience may even recognise his act.


Perhaps he didn't want other magicians to know that he was exposing?

PavelTheGreat wrote: To me, it makes more sense that "Erdnase" was made up name for purpose of false attribution or appropriation of Benedict's work.


Loads of people have written under pseudonyms without telling their readers why.

PavelTheGreat wrote: While Gallaway could have claimed to be the author of EATCT, having simply purchased the rights from Benedict, it would have seemed rather unethical. Perhaps "Erdnase" wanted the copyright, but did not feel justified in applying his proper name to the book.


Why bring Gallaway into it at all? Nobody has ever claimed to be the author of the book. There is no evidence that Gallaway even read the book that he filched from work, let alone could do any of the material therein.

I'm going back into hibernation now.

Bye-bye
Peter Zenner

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 15th, 2020, 12:07 pm

Zenner wrote:
PavelTheGreat wrote: What motive would Benedict have to write pseudonymously? In most reasonable scenario, he wishes to write magic book. Why not use real name? He is already public figure (performing magician) and contemporary audience may even recognise his act.


Perhaps he didn't want other magicians to know that he was exposing?

PavelTheGreat wrote: To me, it makes more sense that "Erdnase" was made up name for purpose of false attribution or appropriation of Benedict's work.


Loads of people have written under pseudonyms without telling their readers why.

PavelTheGreat wrote: While Gallaway could have claimed to be the author of EATCT, having simply purchased the rights from Benedict, it would have seemed rather unethical. Perhaps "Erdnase" wanted the copyright, but did not feel justified in applying his proper name to the book.


Why bring Gallaway into it at all? Nobody has ever claimed to be the author of the book. There is no evidence that Gallaway even read the book that he filched from work, let alone could do any of the material therein.

I'm going back into hibernation now.

Bye-bye


I have never believed (or suggested) that Gallaway is the most likely to have WRITTEN THE BOOK. I think is possible that he wrote some part of it, but perhaps not a word.

What I think is that "Erdnase'" is not strictly a pseudonyms of the author, but of the publisher.

Now it is generally assumed that EATCT was self-published, but it could have been published by somebody that bought the material. We can be fairly sure that McKinney only printed it. We may guess that the author wished McKinney to publish it, but he refused.

When Erdnase says he "need the money", he might mean money from sale of book to public, or advance money from publisher.

We know that Gallaway worked for McKinney. He might very well have designed it and set the type.

Why bring Gallaway in? He is already in. He is one of two people we know who were close enough to be in involved with the production of book. Himself and artist Smith.

Though is true, Benedict had dealings with McKinney, his connection to EATCT is less direct.

It is not Implausible that Gallaway became acquainted with Benedict through McKinney, nor that he might have known of Benedict's desire to publish book, nor that McKinney rejected idea.

Gallaway might have taken advantage of the situation and offered to publish it himself. As Benedict was probably desperate for money, he might have let Gallaway have the rights for a small sum.

Roger M.
Posts: 1491
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » February 15th, 2020, 1:18 pm

Benedict is a legitimate candidate.

Gallaway is a ridiculous distraction best left alone back on Chris’s blog.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 15th, 2020, 1:26 pm

Roger M. wrote:Benedict is a legitimate candidate.

Gallaway is a ridiculous distraction best left alone back on Chris’s blog.


Sorry, it is not ridiculous to posit that Gallaway might have bought rights to Benedict's book and put his own pseudonyms, "Erdnase" on the cover.

You are being stubborn and this is not helpful to objective inquiry.

Roger M.
Posts: 1491
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » February 15th, 2020, 1:36 pm

Gallaway is irrelevant.

PavelTheGreat

Re: ERDNASE

Postby PavelTheGreat » February 15th, 2020, 1:46 pm

Roger M. wrote:Gallaway is irrelevant.


You are irrelevant.

Roger M.
Posts: 1491
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » February 15th, 2020, 2:30 pm

Oh Pavel ... stick with the subject matter and avoid getting personal.

Gallaway is irrelevant - now rather than resort to personal insults, make a cohesive case demonstrating that he’s not irrelevant.
That’s how forums work.


Return to “General”