Fred Manalli

Ok

A little game for you all.

Which one of the N's, No.1 or No.2., is backwards?

traveller1st wrote:

Here's something that differs in the Zodiac stuff from Manalli's. The N's don't match. The are the mirror of each other. Zodiac's have a starting point at the top whereas Manalli's have a starting point at the bottom.

You are comparing a lower case N of Zodiac's to an upper case N of Manalli. This is a lower case letter N from Manalli....it starts from the top like Zodiac...


Now, compare a capital N from Zodiac...like manalli's, it starts from the bottom:

Ah well spotted. You still have to play the game though.

traveller1st wrote:

Ah well spotted. You still have to play the game though.

No problem. This may actually merit a side by side of Zodiac's alphabet & Manalli's, and include upper & lower case to see just what is the same & what is not. I already can tell, there will be far more similarities than differences.

traveller1st wrote:

Ok

A little game for you all.

Which one of the N's, No.1 or No.2., is backwards?

I would say #2...or is this a trick question?

No 2 is the one that is backwards ... but....only in the context of this page.


Look again and tell me which one has the same starting point as zodiac's n's. Then tell me which one is the wrong way round?

traveller1st wrote:

No 2 is the one that is backwards ... but....only in the context of this page.


Look again and tell me which one has the same starting point as zodiac's n's. Then tell me which one is the wrong way round?

weird

Yup, it's visual irony where the one you think is backwards is actually the one that the right way round, in the context of the n itself and how zodiac uses it.

irregardless of anyone else's handwriting. I wonder if this was deliberately put there for that reason.

My bad on the ampersand. Manalli does do a cross type one as well.

More Finnegan's Wake matches from the full list of Zodiac's misspellings as compiled by Deoxys (link supplied by Entropy)

When Lapac walks backwords he's darkest horse in Capalisoot (3 instances in total)

saved from the drohnings they might oncounter, untill his cubid long, to hide in dry (1 instance in total)

moves in vicous cicles yet remews the same; the drain rats bless his offals while the park birds curse his floodlights; (1 instance in total)

come, my horse delayed, nom num, the substance of the tale of the evangelical bussybozzy (1 instance in total, there is another but it's not in context of the word busy)

comeho to roo. Comehome to roo, wee chickchilds doo, when the wildworewolf's abroad. (2 instances in total)

(Chorus) Woohoo, what'll she doo!

A bone, a pebble, a ramskin; chip them, chap them, cut them up allways; leave them to terracook in the muttheringpot (1 instance in total)

Wold Forrester Farley who, in deesperation of deispiration at the diasporation of his diesparation, was found of the round of the sound of the lound of
the.Lukkedoerendunandurraskewdylooshoofermoyportertooryzooysphalnabortansporthaokansakroidverjkapakkapuk. (1 instance in total)

More following a rabbit down a hole to see what I could find.

In one of his letters Manalli talks of drinking with his immediate peers and the literary names they dropped in conversation.
Thought I'd find out who Welty was.

She was Eudroa Welty and I found this quote from her quite interesting and the context of it as well.

Immediately after the murder of Medgar Evers in 1963, Welty wrote Where Is the Voice Coming From?.

As Welty later said, she wondered,

"Whoever the murderer is, I know him: not his identity, but his coming about, in this time and place. That is, I ought to have learned by now, from here, what such a man, intent on such a deed, had going on in his mind. I wrote his story—my fiction—in the first person: about that character's point of view".

Welty's story was published in The New Yorker soon after de la Beckwith's arrest.

Trav, Great list of misspellings.

Here's another from James Joyce's book, 'ULYSSES'...
"Pours a cruse of hair oil over" Zodiac wrote, "I will CRUSE around"

I am starting to wonder if ALL of Zodiac's misspellings can be found in Joyce's writings, or in the writings of other Authors & writers too. I think there is the overwhelming likelihood that the bulk of Zodiac's misspellings came from Joyce's work.

I would say that we've already found the bulk of them in Joyce. Whether that's a unique thing and therefore proof I don't know. One thing that makes me lean towards it being proof is that the words that are found aren't really strictly misspellings. They are deliberately altered words for a purpose, the remaining words, which I feel are misspellings, I haven't found in Finnegan's Wake.

From Joyce's work, 'ULYSSES', "after the stumping figure and said mildly"
From Zodiac..."I am mildly cerous'

Check this out-

Adorno's posthumous Aesthetic Theory (1969) does not, therefore, denounce art after Auschwitz, but elaborates how it works in its new life that is, as it were, an afterlife. The literary models he references for this "afterlife" are James Joyce, Samuel Beckett, and, above all, Paul Celan: those great modernist writers who set before us the disfigured body of art after its own demise. Celan's poems in particular exemplify at once poetry and the death of poetry. They represent the barbarism of artifice interwoven with the final wall of suffering beyond which there can be no further speech; as Celan phrases this condition, "we grew interlaces, there was / no longer a name for / that which drove us" ("In Prague," qtd. in McClatchy 216). Adorno's diagnosis, then, is that poetry, that activity of naming things, had been driven, after such mass murder, beyond the naming of things to the naming of silence and suffering. Far from being an outworn activity, it is an essential one because the barbarism of poetry at least is interwoven with voiceless suffering. The workaday world of modern ideology, he found in despairing contrast, had not merely silenced the cry of history's victims; it had all but erased them.

Do you think we should keep talking about Joyce here or make a new thread? I have some more ideas about him and Z connections, but they don't really have anything to do with FM.

duckking2001 wrote:

Do you think we should keep talking about Joyce here or make a new thread? I have some more ideas about him and Z connections, but they don't really have anything to do with FM.

Heres a new thread for it:
https://zodiackillersite.forummotion.com/t1255-zodiac-s-writing-inspired-by-author-writer-james-joyce#29664

Even if Manalli is not Zodiac, he pointed us possibly towards an important clue in James Joyce

I knew there was something suspicious about poetry. Even in Primary (Elementary) school I knew it. Good find, even more stuff to look into.

Big Z had asked me about the circle dots that Zodiac uses. These are most evident in the "Exorcist letter" and on the Car Door.

I had considered these as well and hadn't seen any in Manalli's writing. I had noted his rather heavy approach to punctuation which is very similar to Zodiacs. By heavy I mean oversized and emphasized as opposed to a simple dot. What I wasn't sure about was how he constructed these. As the letters are photocopies it not possible to say if a dot is a circle just because there's a hole in the middle. It could be a solid dot but photocopying degradation can create a hole where there isn't one.

I was happy enough to leave it as 'inconclusive', not least cause I got use a proper grown-up LE term lol. Then, of course, as this writing just keeps doing, something pops up.

Ignore the hole. Look at the outline. There looks to be evidence of a circular motion to create the dot.

traveller1st wrote:

I knew there was something suspicious about poetry. Even in Primary (Elementary) school I knew it. Good find, even more stuff to look into.

Big Z had asked me about the circle dots that Zodiac uses. These are most evident in the "Exorcist letter" and on the Car Door.

I had considered these as well and hadn't seen any in Manalli's writing. I had noted his rather heavy approach to punctuation which is very similar to Zodiacs. By heavy I mean oversized and emphasized as opposed to a simple dot. What I wasn't sure about was how he constructed these. As the letters are photocopies it not possible to say if a dot is a circle just because there's a hole in the middle. It could be a solid dot but photocopying degradation can create a hole where there isn't one.

I was happy enough to leave it as 'inconclusive', not least cause I got use a proper grown-up LE term lol. Then, of course, as this writing just keeps doing, something pops up.

Ignore the hole. Look at the outline. There looks to be evidence of a circular motion to create the dot.

They look almost like little x's in the circle,almost like this:

duckking2001 wrote:

Do you think we should keep talking about Joyce here or make a new thread? I have some more ideas about him and Z connections, but they don't really have anything to do with FM.

Yes good call. I was thinking the same thing.

Just while we're looking at this I thought I'd check and what a surprise. Both Manalli and Zodiac do their circles in the same direction.

More Manalli/Zodiac comparisons.

The letetr K. Zodiac did not make his K's like this most of the time. And neither did Manalli. But this is pretty close in my opinion. Zodiac's is first & Manalli's is 2nd. Then third is Zodiac's again, only this time, I stood it more upright.

Another example of Manalli's lower case i with the circle on top like Zodiac's:

And now we have the right 4 as well.

morf13 wrote:

More Manalli/Zodiac comparisons.

The letetr K. Zodiac did not make his K's like this most of the time. And neither did Manalli. But this is pretty close in my opinion. Zodiac's is first & Manalli's is 2nd. Then third is Zodiac's again, only this time, I stood it more upright.

Good stuff Morf although you should have used this k a few lines below.