View Single Post
Old 11-16-2015, 08:38 AM   #71
pdurrant
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
pdurrant's Avatar
 
Posts: 74,082
Karma: 315558332
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Oasis
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
The issue in this specific case is that the claim is being made that Mr Frank had creative input in the original published edition, so there is no earlier edition to compare it to. Whether or not that claim is valid would be something that a court would have to decide.
But for many years they have claimed that Anne was the sole author, and that the published diary really was Anne's words.

And since the original manuscripts have been compared to published versions, it seems clear that that is what they are. I don't see that this claim has any merit whatsoever.
pdurrant is offline   Reply With Quote