Book reviews: The Sunday Times

 

 

Back to Book reviews main page

 

 

THE SUNDAY TIMES

 

 

ASH, Edward C.: Puppies, Their Choice, Care and Training (Miles, 1933)

CAREY, Lewis: My Gun and I (Philip Allan, 1933)

CHALMERS, Patrick R.: Dogs of Every Day (Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1933)

CLARK, Alan: The Donkeys (Hutchinson, 1961)

DAVENPORT, W. Bromley: Sport (MacLehose, 1933)

HICKLING, Grace: Grey Seals and the Farne Islands (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1962)

JAMES, Nora C.: Jake the Dog (Dent, 1933)

JOBSON, Allan: An Hour-Glass on the Run (Michael Joseph, 1959)

MOYNIHAN, Michael (editor): People at War, 1914-1918 (David & Charles, 1973)

PARKER, Ernest: Into Battle: 1914-18 (Longmans, 1964)

PERCY, Cyril Heber: Hym (Faber, 1959)

STARKIE, Walter: Scholars and Gypsies: An Autobiography (John Murray, 1963)

THOREAU, H. D.: A Writer’s Journal (Heinemann, 1961)

 

 


 

1933, day and month unknown

 

reviews sunday1

 


 

1 October 1933

 

reviews sunday2

 


 

12 April 1959

 

reviews sunday3a

 

*************************

 

reviews sunday3b

 

reviews sunday3c

 

*************************

 

The letter from The Sunday Times gave HW a strict word limit:

 

reviews sunday3d

 

HW has quite extensively marked the text of the review copy with 'corrections' (poor expressions etc.), and inscribed it thus:

 

reviews sunday3e

 

and on the envelope pasted in at the end of the book he has written:

 

reviews sunday3f

 

This is the heavily amended/corrected TSS, which illustrates, once again, the painstaking care which HW took over his writing, even of a short review:

 

reviews sunday3g

 

reviews sunday3h

 

reviews sunday3i

 

The last sentence on the envelope note leads one to believe the The Sunday Times made some major cuts to the review before publication, but a quick comparison of the galley proof below, sent to HW for his approval prior to publication, and the published review shows that all that was cut was a short phrase and the reference to Robert Graves, which the editor probably felt wasn't really relevant. Nevertheless, HW evidently felt somewhat aggrieved by this presumption.

 

reviews sunday3j

 


 

7 June 1959

 

Anne Williamson, who worked with Suffolk Libraries at the time of this book's publication, remembers it well as being in great demand, being a book of local interest.

 

reviews sunday4

 

A reader was prompted to write in on reading this (the date his letter was published is unknown, but presumably the following week):

 

HICKORY DICKORY

 

Sir,

 

Henry Williamson seemed surprised to find hickory in "An Hour-Glass on the Run." Forty years ago when I was a small boy living in South Suffolk the gypsies still used hickory for making clothes pegs. My bow was hickory but from a hazel coppice.

 

Gerald W. Clarke

Northampton.

 

*************************

 

reviews sunday4a

 

reviews sunday4b        reviews sunday4c

 


 

4 June 1961

 

reviews sunday5

 

*************************

 

reviews sunday5a

 

reviews sunday5b

 


 

16 September 1961

 

There is no cutting of this review in the archive, but there do exist two completely different versions in galley proofs sent to HW by The Sunday Times. From an independently-typed copy of the published review, it has been determined that the galley proof below, a more considered assessment of the book, is that used for publication. This was HW's second attempt at the review which, as he noted on the manuscript, was written on 10 July 1961, while he was staying with his friend Sir John Heygate at Bellarena in Northern Ireland.

 

reviews sunday6a          reviews sunday6b

 

*************************

 

 reviews sunday6c

 

The red strip on the back cover is a mark left by sellotape:

 

reviews sunday6d

 

reviews sunday6e           reviews sunday6f

 

*************************

 

The galley proof of the earlier review, the MSS of the published review and scans of the notes that HW made inside his review copy over several pages (with a transcript) are available on a separate page.

 


 

4 March 1962

 

(Taken from a photocopy)

 

reviews sunday7

 


 

15 December 1963

 

(Taken from a photocopy)

 

reviews sunday8

 


 

September 1964 (day of publication unknown)

 

HW was invited to review Ernest Parker's Into Battle: 1914-18 by the Literary Editor of The Sunday Times:

 

reviews sunday9a

 

*************************

 

Unfortunately, neither the press cutting nor the galley proof of HW's review survive in the archive. However, tucked into the review copy are the letter above and a two-page carbon-copy typescript  on thin paper. The typescript seems incomplete, but there are roughly 750 words here – more than twice the length asked for.

 

reviews sunday9b

 

reviews sunday9c

 

*************************

 

reviews sunday9d

 

reviews sunday9e         reviews sunday9f

 


 

October 1973 (day of publication unknown)

 

Unfortunately, neither the press cutting nor the galley proof of HW's review of this book survive in the archive, though there are both several drafts and a 'final' review that exist as carbon copies of the typescripts. First came this letter from the Literary Editor of The Sunday Times:

 

reviews sunday10a

 

 *************************

 

Labelled 'Final copy', it must be presumed that this is the review as sent to and published in The Sunday Times:

 

reviews sunday10b

 

reviews sunday10c

 

*************************

 

reviews sunday10m

 

reviews sunday10n

 

HW inscribed the front endpaper thus:

 

reviews sunday10o

 

*************************

 

Draft reviews:

 

HW's first version of the review is labelled 'rejected', and 'bad':

 

reviews sunday10d

 

reviews sunday10e

 

*************************

 

Three further drafts follow, although in the first, the text on the second page doesn't follow on from the first, and seems to belong to a different draft:

 

reviews sunday10f

 

reviews sunday10g

 

**********

 

reviews sunday10h

 

reviews sunday10i

 

**********

 

reviews sunday10j

 

reviews sunday10k

 

**********

 

And finally, what seems to have been a false start, quickly abandoned:

 

reviews sunday10l

 

 

 

 

**************************

 

 

 

Back to Book reviews main page