The truth can hurt...

Read the interview with Peter Johnson that was written in DGJ years ago about his writing of the book and the extent of his research.

This is eye opening to say the least

Associate Nick de Guerre's rabid post piqued my curiosity.

So... I went to Amazon and searched for any book he's ever written. Gun book or not.

I came up with nothing.

Just sayin'...

What issue was that interview in?

The Peter Johnson book was the first book on the Parker gun. It gathered together what was known and what was understood at the time about the manufacture and it’s history. As such it was a noble effort created by a fine and well intentioned writer. Others have followed; Baer, Muderlak and Mullins et al as book writers and many others as magazine article writers. Much credit goes to Peter Johnson as the first in the line.

Each author built upon his predecessors, correcting errors and adding facts as they became known. Isn’t this how scholarship usually works ?

I think it is a real disservice and a limited view to denigrate Peter Johnson and his efforts. I think it says more about the critic than the criticized .

"Audacious..." "A disservice"... "Says more about the critic than the criticized."

My comments were honest, and offered as my own opinion...not a some generally accepted truth. Perhaps it's a sign of our current times that contrary opinion is met with rebuke, rather than simple disagreement?

I don't say a whole lot here, and I gave up on the Doublegun Forum long ago because I have no desire to engage in internet jousting, so I'm just going to disengage on this.

Suffice that my thoughts were genuine, if unfiltered. And they are informed of having read both that book, as well as all the others.

I will refrain from future comments which may strike some as frightfully independent-minded and nonconforming. I don't want anyone to be uncomfortable. *wink*

NDG

I’m not uncomfortable in the slightest. It is clear that you have your views.

If you want to meet other people who enjoy the Parker gun and other significant American double guns, come to the next Southern SxS or to the Pheasant Fest in MSP in Feb. We’ll be there.




Colt
Lefever
Parker

One thing Peter Johnson does deserve to be denigrated for is his fashion sense.:rotf:

Hey... it was the sixties!






.

First off, he wrote a book on a subject we hold dear when nobody else was inclined to do. I have all the books (and two copies of Mr. Johnson's). Have read them all and appreciate the effort it takes to write on a subject before the internet made every one a Dewey Decimal Card Catalog Ranger extraordinaire. So he waxed poetically on the Parker, BFD.

The gun stands the test of time on its own merits and is respected by the collecting community. The Works did something right because creating a
"Brand" in the late 19th century required having the goods to support the claims made in the advertising.

As an example of the "cachet" that Parker has, I was at Audley House a few years ago looking at the small bore doubles. I was with my boss and the Salesman was a little snooty until he asked what I used back in the colonies. When I told him Parkers his demeanor changed completely and we ahd a nice discussion on SLE's, BLE's, thoughts on why Parker never made a sidelock, the future of "Best" guns and other sundry topics. Interesting afternoon all because I used Parkers. So Peter J, spoke highly of the guns and took the time to write a book that started many of the members of this organization to learn about their own guns.

Parker sidelock, this one an external hammer sidelock but we have previously posted photos of a Parker internal hammer sidelock.

The other Parker hammer sidelock is my light open choked 12 from 1881 that I use for a lot of hunting. This was made five years after Custer should have gone fishing since a stream was so close but didn’t. Where are all the other guns made in that time period? Still functional and in use?