WeenieCampbell.com
Country Blues => Weenie Campbell Main Forum => Topic started by: kaizen on October 05, 2014, 05:21:40 AM
-
Having been a lurker here for a while, I probably could have picked a better first post than a Robert Johnson related topic, but here goes. :)
It was only yesterday that I stumbled upon this report from a Houston new station. The link is after this paragraph. While it deals mostly with the purported Johnson/Shines photo that we've all heard about, it was the end of the report that caught my attention. Lois Gibson apparently claimed to have found a previously undiscovered photo of Robert Johnson drinking with friends. Considering that this report is from back in February, I expected to come on here and find a well-informed thread weighing the possibilities. I searched, but didn't find one. Here's the report.
http://www.click2houston.com/news/the-mystery-of-robert-johnson/24745992 (http://www.click2houston.com/news/the-mystery-of-robert-johnson/24745992)
I've done some poking around the internet but haven't been able to find info anywhere else either. I'd have thought it would have resulted in more Google hits, but maybe it was immediately debunked and nothing further said about it. Does anyone have more information about the photo they'd be willing to share (e.g. where it was found and so on)? I've attached a screen capture from the interview to make it a little easier to study the photo in question.
Apologies if this has been debated extensively and I failed to find it in my search.
-
There was some discussion over at the old IGS forum when the third photo surfaced. Lois Gibson's opinion is just that--her opinion, and not proof.
-
Thanks for your reply. I'll see if I can find the discussion you mentioned.
Also, I absolutely agree that Lois Gibson's opinion does not constitute proof. Particularly after her assertions regarding the Johnson/Shines photo, I tend to be skeptical of anything she says is Robert Johnson. Of course, I am no expert on facial recognition methodologies, either.
-
Seems there isn't a way to access the IGS thread. I found an old link to it, but it is dead and the Wayback Machine doesn't have an archive of it either. Ah well. I'll keep looking. I'd be interested to know if any of the people in the photo were ever positively identified, where it came from, how it was found, and so on.
-
I think that the IGS site and its threads became history once Woody decided to shut it down. The problem is the objective verification of the accuracy of her conclusions with respect to the identity of the people in the photos.
-
IMHO she must have benefitted by the publicity from her work or liked the attention and initially I remember something about her saying she was needing some reference for dates to clinch it but the people determined to capitalize on this had enough by surpressing that portion to move forward.
I met Zeke who worked at Matt Umanoffs in NYC as I was looking into a national, and there was some discussion about it, and I expressed an interest in seeing the photo, but I don't recall what his response was at the time. I know for sure that everyday of his life Johnny Shines had big beautiful front teeth and an overbite except in that picture where he has little teeth and an underbite so I have no clue what was going on in Zeke's mind - I can't believe he came out with that suggestion. Although I had a good time at Umanoff's- Zeke is a cool guy and good slide player, when I researched the picture in Vanity Fair ( there's a clue!) it colored my opinion of him and I kind of backed off from on the idea of a national.
Don't know whether anyone has examined the original.They never offered a front and back view - I regret not having developed an opportunity to see the original.
I'm happy to have this post taken down if its offensive!
UPDATE: I corrected Zeke's name and the mag's. Doh.
-
Harriet, that makes sense. It hadn't occurred to me that someone might have purposely stifled attempts to dig further. As for the 3rd photo, I have run across very few people who support the idea that it is actually of Johnson and Shines. Not to say that nobody does, but they seem to be the minority (I realize this is not news to anyone here).
To my untrained eye, the supposed 4th photo doesn't look like Robert Johnson either. Wishful thinking makes me wonder if there is more to it than someone believing it looks like him. Maybe the provenance of the photo makes it a strong candidate, or possibly there is someone in the photo who has been clearly identified and is known to have associated with Johnson. My suspicion is that it is more a case of, "He's thin, has long fingers, and he's drinking. Must be Robert Johnson," though.
Stuart, thanks for the heads up. I did manage to find a passing reference to the 4th photo on another photo, but nothing in depth and it generated very little discussion.
-
I wonder if they'll have the nerve to try and foist a coffee swirl or a pattern in a pancake as his spirit reaching out to us! Lawd have mercy on my wicked soul....
-
I suppose you will not think much of the apparition of Robert Johnson that appeared on my lunchtime tamale, then...
-
If we could cut it up into 1/4 inch squares and sell it along with a certificate of authenticity I would :)
-
I took your advice and cut it up. Now one of them looks like Johnny Shines.
Certificate of authenticity! :P :P
-
The "4th" photo (earlier aka the "3rd") can also refer to the one that Mack McCormick supposedly has in some post-Vanity Fair article discussions. No sane person would pretend to clearly understand and follow what's going here. ---But YMMV! :P BTW, Who's on first?
-
It does get a little confusing to refer to the photos by arbitrary numbers. I've read that McCormick has a few photos of Johnson, all still unpublished. The only one I have seen specifically described is one with Johnson and his nephew who was leaving for the Navy. To clarify, then, I am assuming photos 1 and 2 are the photo booth shot and the studio photo. 3 would be the "Johnson/Shines" photo. 4 is the one I included an image of in my first post that Lois Gibson claimed might be Johnson having a drink with friends. The only logic to my numbering is that is the order in which I saw them, and giving them numbers allows me to be a bit lazy in referencing them :D
Fifth is the image of Johnson on Harriet's pancakes.
-
Is johnson basically a swear word on here then?
-
Hi jonocymru -
Not at all. If people want to actually discuss his music, great. The photo discussions generate less enthusiasm I'd say, not because another photo wouldn't be interesting, but because the ones that are offered up are dubious, and seem more about people cashing in on the legend.
-
Hi jonocymru -
Not at all. If people want to actually discuss his music, great. The photo discussions generate less enthusiasm I'd say, not because another photo wouldn't be interesting, but because the ones that are offered up are dubious, and seem more about people cashing in on the legend.
Great, Well, my interest lies in his music. Thats cool. It is sad how people cash in on him.
-
Hi jonocymru -
Not at all. If people want to actually discuss his music, great. The photo discussions generate less enthusiasm I'd say, not because another photo wouldn't be interesting, but because the ones that are offered up are dubious, and seem more about people cashing in on the legend.
Great, Well, my interest lies in his music. Thats cool. It is sad how people cash in on him.
This was mostly the reason for the self-mockery at the beginning of my initial post. For a while, it seemed like all anyone had to do was appear in an old photo with a guitar (or maybe some liquor) and they became a solid candidate for Robert Johnsonhood. I think that probably gets tiresome to those who have been involved in countless discussions on the subject.
Like you, I am interested in any new info on RJ, just as I would be if there was some new insight on, say, Skip James, Barbecue Bob, or (improbably) Henry Sloan.
-
I don't know whether there's much point in trying to discuss the original photo farther but if there's one thing I'll point out, my 2 cents says that those interviews with childhood friends + Honeyboy Edwards and Willie Mae Powell mentioning his smaller eye, the man in the last photo appears to have two evenly sized eyes. But if someone wants to call a forensic investigation into it go right ahead.
-
"Is Johnson basically a swear word on here then?"
No, as long as you play by pre-established rules from forums done years ago that you don't know about. Just make sure that you have several works sited, a videotaped blood oath, and confirmation from an established member of the blues mafia. Then you can say what you want.
-
" seem more about people cashing in on the legend"
No one has cashed in on the legend more than those who have already cashed in on the legend and continue to cash in on the legend. RJ is an industry with in an industry. No one can harmlessly come up with new info anymore without people jumping to conclusions. Notice that Randy Meadows and some of the other "new" enthusiast researchers have stopped posting. Its not cause new info isn't being unearthed. Believe me there is blues research happening but the response from a very vocal few can be deafening. Talk about RJ and other possible new info of other artists at your own risk.
-
These Robert Johnson photo discussions could be totally futile. In the recent NY Times article Mack McMormick points out that he isn't even sure that the pictures we have of Robert Johnson are of "the guy who made the records". Even the photo locked away in a safe house in Mexico. The photo he showed to Peter Guralnick wich probably never will be published.
-
Mack McMormick points out that he isn't even sure that the pictures we have of Robert Johnson are of "the guy who made the records
Not putting any stock into that without proof. Mack is really bitter these days in regards to RJ. He is bitter about lots of things lately. Hell his crazy ass might have said that just hoping to devalue the Steve LeVere/Johnson empire just a little bit.
-
https://www.academia.edu/13591934/A_NEW_ANALYSIS_OF_THE_TWO_ACCEPTED_PHOTOS_OF_ROBERT_JOHNSON_AND_THE_ALLEGED_3RD_PHOTO?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest (https://www.academia.edu/13591934/A_NEW_ANALYSIS_OF_THE_TWO_ACCEPTED_PHOTOS_OF_ROBERT_JOHNSON_AND_THE_ALLEGED_3RD_PHOTO?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest)
-
I'll wait for the peer review...
-
There has to be a joke about reincarnating a dead horse in there somewhere.
-
I'll wait for the peer review...
If you look at the end of that document, you'll see that it already has had a pretty extensive one...
-
Is johnson basically a swear word on here then?
Yes and no, it depends on how seriously we are taking ourselves. The name Weenie Campbell is also a reminder that, no matter how much of an enthusiast one might be, it is difficult to adopt an overly serious attitude if you call yourself a Weenie.
This is usually the rule but for some reason RJ can get peoples granny panties in a bunch so tread lightly lad.
-
If you look at the end of that document, you'll see that it already has had a pretty extensive one...
I took those to be co-authors, the way they were listed. I was speaking about it being a published paper in a peer journal, and then reviewed....
I do believe the paper, mind you, the way it was presented, but I'm not a forensic photo guy. My science back ground is mostly clinical chemistry/toxicology....but I am a firm believer in peer review.
-
In this particular case, just as a matter of interest, it was written and then circulated via the Facebook group The Real Blues Forum for review. Some people offered suggestions and then offered their names as "endorsement," so to speak.
It would be interesting for a forensic photo expert, a disinterested one, to take a look at the issue.
-
It would be interesting for a forensic photo expert, a disinterested one, to take a look at the issue.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here, motivation can do a lot, I would suggest a step of disconnection would be of benefit.
-
Lois Gibson is a popular forensic artist who has received publicity for her work in the media, and she has a knack for resemblances in the area of forensic sketching, I don't believe she had biased interest when contacted.
IMHO she was mispresented in Vanity Fair by the slant of the article in favor of selling magazines with that article.
She was pretty clear in the Vanity Fair that she would need more to actually put her name to this being the same person as the other photo.
You can look her up on the internet, and there does not seem to be any mention of this there, which is telling.
-
By "disinterested" I simply meant someone who wasn't hired by someone who had a financial interest in the photo being proved as Johnson. It's been a long time since I read the article.
Frankly, though, I would be skeptical of anyone who didn't look at or study that picture and say definitively that it's not the same person as in the other pictures.