I donned my wtich hat & purple socks and handed out candy on Halloween, while Vincent Price read ghost stories behind me (not pictured).
Another October and Halloween have passed us by. We had a little over 100 trick-or-treaters at our house this year. I like to make a list of how many kids come and what they're wearing. The most popular costume this year was princess, followed by
Ghostface. After that, there was a wide variety of costumes, including witch, Snow White, Spider-Man, pharaoh, angel, inflatable dinosaur, Michael Myers,
Stitch, vampire, ghost, cheerleader, hamburger, pirate, Black Panther, Supergirl, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle, wizard, pickle, Oscar the Grouch, Jawa, pumpkin, cat and, of course, clown.
Today's a good day for the latest roundup of new reader comments, most of which are from October. Special thanks to Tom from
Garage Sale Finds/Stranger Finds for so many dandy contributions!
Spooktober kickoff: "Spooks and Spirits and Shadowy Shapes": Tom writes: "As a kid, I never cared for those 'ghost story' books that had a plausible explanation. I preferred the 'true tales of ghosts' type books whether they were true or not. Those are great illustrations, though. I'd never heard of the Xerox books until later years when I found them at garage and estate sales. I guess they were vying for competition to Scholastic Books?"
Agreed on the book types! From what I can surmise, Xerox, flush with cash in the 1960s and 1970s, tried to leverage its resources to grab more of the education market by cheaply reprinting old books and selling them in bulk, at bottom-barrel prices, to schools. The aim was to expand in a sector where they were already active with educational services and paper products. But since they mostly dealt in reprints, not new material that could create buzz, they never managed to nudge Scholastic aside. But if others have more or better insight on this topic, I'd love to hear from you.
Spooky Sunday: Tom writes: "Great images. I would love to have seen one of those 'spook shows' in person."
Book cover: "Strangely Enough!": Tom and I went off on some tangents based on posts from years past. He writes: "Nice. I haven't seen some of those covers. I know it's been 5 years, but in case you still don't know,
Koogle peanut butter spread was a mixture of either Peanut Butter and Cinnamon Sugar or Peanut Butter and Grape Jelly (there may have been a chocolate one too). I begged my dad for the cinnamon sugar until he finally broke down and bought some. It was awful. It sat in our pantry for years. Funny thing is, I love peanut butter and cinnamon sugar and still eat it on toast."
And Tom adds: "Winchester House is on my bucket list as well. I'm not sure when I first heard/read about it. It could have been in a book like you mentioned,
Weird Worlds magazine, or the
"Ripley's Believe It or Not" TV show. It's kind of disappointing that the ghost-driven/paranoia building theory was debunked, it made for a good story."
The spookiness of "Candy and Andy" (but mostly Candy): Brian Busby of
The Dusty Bookcase writes: "'Yikes' was my first reaction, as well. Then I wondered what the little 'boy' was doing smoking in bed. On closer inspection, I see that what I took for smoke was just part of the wallpaper design. Growing up in Sixties and Seventies Montreal, British magazines were all about thanks to the great many W.H. Smith stores in the city and suburbs. That said, I'm certain
Candy and Andy wasn't carried. There's no way I would've forgotten their faces."
Danny's sweater in "The Shining" was a real thing: Brian Busby writes: "I too was interested in the
Colville connections. I'm a fan of the artist. My wife -- who is also an artist -- has always found Colville's work disturbing. When we first met, I had a framed poster from a Colville exhibition at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts hanging in my bedroom. Fortunately, it didn't put her off. For the record, it was 'Church and Horse,', not the more disturbing 'Horse and Train.'"
The ghost photo that haunted Gen X: Tom writes: "You mentioned all of the ghost photos that haunted my childhood. I loved books like this along with
In Search Of... ghost episodes. I was really into the paranormal movement of the early 2000s and watched all those shows religiously, however, I've cooled to them since and frankly they bore me now. However, I'm fortunate enough to have had my own personal experiences with the supernatural to keep me a believer."
Yeah, I watched
"Ghost Hunters" for about a year with Joan at the very beginning until I realized it was going to be the same schtick and camera tricks over and over. I'm really glad you have had personal paranormal experiences and am envious, too. I sometimes wonder if being disillusioned, extremely skeptical and not receptive enough to them anymore is part of the problem.
From the readers: Treasured copy of "Andersen's Fairy Tales": Anonymous writes: "I found a copy of this book here at my house. I’m not sure who purchased it or how it got here. There’s no written or printed date anywhere. The tiny number on the front cover is 0742. Inside the front cover is: Joeseph Jonas and 35-. The book appears very old, but is in great shape."
What a find. I love it when old books appear out of nowhere. You have a magical house.
McCall Chair Co. ink blotter: Anonymous writes: "My grandfather, Grover McCall, created McCall Chair Co., where most of my family worked over the years. My brother and I accompanied my father, S.K. McCall, after work hours to the 'factory' to play among the wood, upholstery fabrics and sawdust while he worked. Many fond memories!"
Thank you so much for sharing this information!
Take a ride with Edwards Motor Transit Co.: Commenting on a post from way back in 2010, Bill Gray shares this great information: "My grandfather, Albert 'Swede' Carlson, drove (originally from Clearfield then later DuBois to Buffalo and Pittsburgh) and his brother John was station manager in Williamsport."
Upon closer examination, the photo is a little weird. At first I thought maybe it was taken from outside, through a bedroom window that caused some reflections. But upon closer examination I realized it's a double exposure. If you look closely, you can see the faint image of another woman to the right of the woman in the bed. No, it's not a ghost. Definitely a double exposure. Possibly of the same woman. I miss the days when I might have excitedly claimed it to be a ghost photo, though.
.jpg)