Santiago wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:02 am
When he wrote the piece in question he was an old man. It reads as though he was looking back at his achievements, but not in a good way. To be blunt, he's clearly being bombastic! To understand why so, we need to know much more than what has been said in this thread or in this contentious piece. For example, who was he writing to? His critics? Why the bombastic tone? Why did he feel the need to write in such a manner? Why's did he feel the need to brag in one last flurry? No more false modesty! Why was he frustrated, which he clearly indicates?
To me, he writes as someone whose over opinionated. Was this deliberate to wind up his critics to have his last word? Or was he really like this? Where's his modesty that one reads in the vast majority of his books etc.?
Nah, all these questions! He's just an old man blowing off steam for whatever reason who knows. And I like to think out of character!
I suspect that you made this statement 'tongue in cheek' Trevor, as he was clearly NOT being bombastic, just stating the truth about what he had achieved up to that time for the benefit of anyone that did not know! He was not bragging either, he had no need to, given his achievements. I am an old man myself now, given to letting off steam at times, it is natural You are entitled to your opinion, as we all are, but I think that there is much speculation in your words, which come across as harsh. Like all of us Dick Walker had faults, but he is certainly not at fault for answering his critics by reminding them of what he had given to the world of angling! I think it is an English trait to find fault with people that reach the top, whether it be in sport, politics, or business!
Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall!
Confucius
Certainly not finding fault with him! Well, to a point. But I'm not sure listing his achievements was a fine thing to do. If I were to list all my achievements in Science in a similar manner I suspect many forum members would have more than a few negative comments to make about me. And bombastic might well be one of the words used! But as I said in the end, perhaps he was just blowing off steam, as old men do sometimes! Regardless, he certainly doesn't come across as being modest in the piece quoted. Quite the opposite, so I think bombastic aptly describes his manner in that piece! We all have character flaws and that just shows that he wasn't perfect, which is a good thing, because it reveals his humanity!
As I asked earlier, why did he feel the need to list his achievements? And why did he need to let folk know of all of his achievements, who didn't already know? This is not the action of a modest person!
No worries Ted, I still hold him with high esteem, even though like us all he was flawed! That's humanity. And I prefer my heroes to show it. Flaws and all!
"....he felt the gentle touch on the line and he was happy"
Thanks Trevor, but excuse me for smiling if you 'still hold him in high esteem' after accusing him of being bombastic, bragging in one last flurry, being over opinionated and using false modesty!
Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall!
Confucius
That's just how I read and interpreted his text. He said himself 'no more false modesty', those are his words not mine!
He clearly had flaws, everyone does! Trouble with heros is that folk find it hard to acknowledge them as having inperfect characters! Naming them and being frank does not necessarily mean character assassination. Let's be honest. He was a great angler for certain! And that's why he's revered. Flaws and all.
And I'm 100% sure that if you talked to folk that knew him and asked them to be frank, they would name quite a few of his weaknesses! Moreover, I'm sure his positives would easily out number them!
"....he felt the gentle touch on the line and he was happy"
Nobby wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:08 am
I've passed them on now, but used to have a lot of angling magazines from the time Dick wrote articles for them. As a result I can't quote anything now, but there was no doubt Dick liked an argument.
Even going to far as to write a 'letter to the editor' of the magazine he was already a contributor for! And that letter was having a pop at another letter writer. And they printed it!
At a time when we generally feel people were more circumspect and 'gentlemanly', Dick was pretty brusque, bordering on the downright rude. He doesn't appear to have mellowed as he aged....
It's recorded several times how on obtaining a new material for rods he gave all his examples of the older technology away, so I think he would not be a traditionist now as he wasn't then...but who knows, we all hanker for the good old days and he must have felt something for the Mk.IV must he not?
I'm not sure he can claim to have invented freelining...early man surely did this with his first bone hook? It's this sudden ability to obtain a lot of protein that is thought by some scientists to explain man growing a larger brain and developing btw.
And I'm sure I read another account of the invention of the grinner knot? Some chap invented it for his son who was nicknamed Grinner??
Dick seems to have coped well blowing his own trumpet, I feel.
Maybe not 'foe', but I don't see him thinking of us lot too kindly....
How much of his correspondence was genuine bile or just good copy for the magazine we'll never know Nobby. He certainly liked to be proved right that's for sure.
I agree that 'freelining' is as old as the hills but, the 'Grinner knot' was named by Walker after his nickname for his son. I do though recall a debate that the knot was in use long before Walker claimed to invent it. I suppose one could claim to 'invent something if you had no previous knowledge of it's existence, couldn't you?
Just to show that nothing is new in fishing. I once caught a chub by 'dapping' a slug. It was an accidental catch but high in novelty value... well, it was. In another chapter of the book Walker describes how dapping is highly effective for chub and then states that slugs are very good baits for the method.
Ah well, back to the drawing board
Banksy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:59 am
My pleasure in using traditional tackle comes in part from sentimentality, a yearning for the lost innocence of my youth.
Nothing at all to do with the effectiveness of the tackle, and how many big fish it puts on the bank.
I my reading of Walker's work, I have not detected an ounce of sentimentality, quite the opposite.
So definitely not friend. But perhaps not foe.
"Dismissive" might be nearer the mark.
Contemporaries of Richard Walker such as Peter Stone and Colin Willock make mention of his tendancy to arrogance ,always tempered by a comment along the lines of " but a man of such skill and self confidence in his ability is entitled to a bit of arrogance " . Not an exact quote but it's the sort of thing l've seen written by his "gang" in his defence.
And what an enthusiastic , inventive and at times wild ,gang they must've been. I'm thinking of Fred Taylor shark fishing from a rubber dinghy, Peter Stone employing divers to spot big pike,Walker loudly demonstrating that different styles of opera bring fish of varying species on the feed!. Barely a jot of respect for decorum or tradition as long as they were in the fish.
Now had Walker not cleverly kept his profile high via his writing would he be so well known? His writing was interesting and inspiring as well as self promoting. Perhaps the attention it brought him was necessary to feed his ego and inspire him to greater things ,to keep him interested, as it were. It seems though that he needed no such prompting ,certainly not in his prime. His enthusiasm and quick uptake of new ideas seemed prodigious.
He deserves his place in the Hall of Fame for sure.
One story recounted by Peter Stone does illustrate something of Walker's mentality though.
Billy Lane had travelled to be Walker's guest for a day and in Stone's words desperatly wanted to catch a barbel. A quest in which he failed but he did make mincemeat of the local roach and dace population while Walker looked on. At the end of the day Walker ,having watched the matchman ply the swim with maggots all day, loaded a huge hook with a big bunch of grubs and pulled out a barbel first cast.
No doubt it caused a bit of good natured banter and laughter but it also surely added a bit more cement to Walker's mystique and reputation . It also begs the question .Why did Walker take the glory instead of helping Lane ,who was his guest , catch the fish?
In order to shoot some close-ups, wildlife photographer ,the late Len Scapstillon, lured the orca to him by dressing as a seal.......
Great anecdote Kev, he probably wanted to prove a point.... without much subtlety.
Your comment about him keeping his profile up by writing is interesting. There's no doubt about it, if you want fame, the pen is mightier than the rod. Nowadays, and probably for all time, there are many who are much better at writing than fishing, indeed, I have met some outstanding anglers who have never put a word on paper about their exploits, whilst others push their average abilities with great tales of crafty deception and memorable battles. At the time however, Walker was the biggest name in the game and his work was, for years, in high demand. Probably quite lucrative too. He also had a quest to educate others and that's possibly what drove him to write so much. I think his written work was wholly justified.
His brashness was genuine. I've said it before but a mate of mine worked for a personal friend of Dick Walker and he blagged his way onto a trip with the two of them on the Gt Ouse. They met, fished and departed without Walker uttering a single sillible to my mate. Probably deemed unworthy
Whilst being an admirer of RW since childhood I am uncomfortable with some of the hero worship, almost canonisation that does not seem to acknowledge that the man had faults. As KevD as already said; even his own friends spoke openly of this. I recall that when they were building the famous fishing hut, he sat in a deck chair and took no part in the manual labour. That wasn't his role - apparently. Also, when Redmire first came into public view with the capture of a record carp he was quick off the mark to secure access for 'The Carp Catcher's Club' basically him and a few good friends. I can only imagine the thoughts of Bob Richards when he discovered that he was going to have to share the water in future.
In his writings he also had a tendency to go beyond his experience. An example can be found where right up to the last edition of Still Water Angling he talks of centrepins over running if a carp ran with the bait, oblivious to the friction drag that is a feature on many centrepin reels including one of those he recommended in another part of the same book. To RW a centrepin was either free running or on check.
There is no doubt that RW was a good force in angling for many years inspiring new & old anglers alike and innovating tackle and methods. Given that he fished Redmire for carp for several days and nights at a time using a tent, boiled potatoes and electronic bite alarm I cannot see how he can be separated from the bivvy, boilies, bedchair and bite alarm boys of today. He started it. Along with the tactic of fishing where the last record had come from.
But would he be a traditional angler today? I doubt it. He was always innovating and driving things forward using new technology. Carbon fibre rods for example. He was at the vanguard of that apparently using his RAF contacts to source carbon fibre for Hardy Bros to play with. He dropped the half-bail Mitchell that he caught the record carp on PDQ as soon as a full bail model was available and as has been said; he gave away much of his redundant tackle. He may have caught nostalgia like we have done, but I think that he would have continued to go forward, not back.
RW was my boyhood hero and I gratefully acknowledge his massive contribution to angling. But we must acknowledge that some of it came at a price that we are paying today.
You are entitled to your opinion, as we all are, but I think that there is much speculation in your words, which come across as harsh. Like all of us Dick Walker had faults, but he is certainly not at fault for answering his critics by reminding them of what he had given to the world of angling! I think it is an English trait to find fault with people that reach the top, whether it be in sport, politics, or business! 
