39 replies to this topic

[WGD706]

I've just read a 'review' of this book on another web-site and it portrays a disturbing picture of Chapman...A new biography, by the motor racing historian Mike Lawrence, presents a rather poor portrait of Lotus founder Colin Chapman. Chapman, he suggests, had the business ethics of a 1950s spiv, used dangerous drugs to maintain a crushing schedule and ruthlessly stole other men's ideas.
I haven't read this book nor any others by Mike Lawrence so I am wondering if his credentials are any good?

[Doug Nye]

HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBTS ABOUT MIKE LAWRENCE'S WORK - in contrast, his publisher's production standards are rubbish, and are unworthy of Mike and his work...but that's why the book is inexpensive. It is thought provoking material, well researched and extremely well written by a former English teacher who is very proud of his more recently-earned PhD and likes to be addressed - therefore - as "Dr Lawrence". Some 'opes with us, his rough mates....

DCN

[Gary C]

thanks for backing up my thoughts of Mike, Doug. The book is on my Christmas present list!!

[Ruairidh]

It is on my xmas list too.

Doug, any plans to do a third edition of Theme Lotus? I'm having problems tracking down a second hand copy of the second edition.

[Doug Nye]

The possibility has been mooted - but not by the right people...if I do it I'd want to do it to a new standard (like, for a start, filtering out my balls-ups ) and it looks instead as if other people will in effect do it first. Good luck to them...as long as they do it justice. 'Chunky' might in some ways have been a bandit - but my goodness he was an impressive one. There was more about the bloke (and his team's creations) that was entirely admirable than there ever was to condemn. I feel that Mike has done him justice.

DCN

[Eric McLoughlin]

I bought Mr Lawrence's book as one of my Christmas presents to myself. Unfortunately, I couldn't wait 'til Christmas so I've just finished reading it. I can only second Doug's comments on the content - an excellent read with quite a few revelations. However, from what I've learned about Colin Chapman over the past few years, I can't say that any of the new revelations are all that surprising. But they are illuminating.

[Ruairidh]

Originally posted by Doug Nye
The possibility has been mooted - but not by the right people...if I do it I'd want to do it to a new standard (like, for a start, filtering out my balls-ups ) and it looks instead as if other people will in effect do it first. Good luck to them...as long as they do it justice.

DCN

Well I, for one, hope it happens. Someone cool once described the Formula One press as a " roving, clubby, cliquey set, a bunch of old gossips in some ways ever anxious to know just a smidgen more -- to have just that wee bit greater insight -- than the next man" and I know who among those old gossips I've enjoyed and valued reading the most over the years
Until then I'll just have to track down a copy of that second edition - and read Doc Lawrence (whose book I've just ordered)!

'Chunky' might in some ways have been a bandit - but my goodness he was an impressive one. There was more about the bloke (and his team's creations) that was entirely admirable than there ever was to condemn.

Couldn't agree more. People - especially successful people - are way too complex to ever be 100% this or that. Whatever Colin's failings, you have to look at the achievements too. My life would have been poorer without him and Team Lotus.

[Don Capps]

This is one of those books I plan to obtain in the near future. Doc Lawrence is one of those whose work I have found to be solid and well-researched over the years. There is little doubt that Chapman was a highly complex individual and one of those who actually could be labeled a "genius" since he had a knack of seeing what others couldn't and how to make something work. However, those are generally not the sort of blokes who teach Sunday School.....

[masterhit]

(Mental note - must buy it, must buy it!)

[Vicuna]

I loved it.

Well written, well researched, balanced.

[Barry Boor]

Oh dear! Is there becoming a need for a 'do you LIKE Colin Chapman' thread to go along with the 'do you like Enzo' one?

[Doug Nye]

Barrie - I think ACBC was immeasurably more likeable on many levels than OMF...if perhaps somewhat less respectable (i.e. I can't remember OMF actually being identified with a palpably serious scandal, other than his philandering which in Italian society was taken as read, and simply not talked about).

ACBC's men - almost to a man - will recall "Cor what a terrible bloke, when I think what he did to me, and then there was the time when...unbelievable! BUT I WOULD GIVE MY RIGHT ARM FOR HIM...".

OMF's men - almost to a man - will recall "Cor what a terrible bloke, when I think what he did to me, and then was the time when...unbelievable! BUT THAT'S HOW IT WAS IN ITALY...".

And this seems to me to be a crucial difference...closer to equality, a team, all in this together, with Chapman, but absolutely servant and master with the entirely autocratic Ferrari. Not that he was incapable of being a generous and sympathetic master upon occasion...

DCN

[masterhit]

Originally posted by Doug Nye
Barrie - I think ACBC was immeasurably more likeable on many levels than OMF...if perhaps somewhat less respectable (i.e. I can't remember OMF actually being identified with a palpably serious scandal, other than his philandering which in Italian society was taken as read, and simply not talked about).

ACBC's men - almost to a man - will recall "Cor what a terrible bloke, when I think what he did to me, and then there was the time when...unbelievable! BUT I WOULD GIVE MY RIGHT ARM FOR HIM...".

OMF's men - almost to a man - will recall "Cor what a terrible bloke, when I think what he did to me, and then was the time when...unbelievable! BUT THAT'S HOW IT WAS IN ITALY...".

And this seems to me to be a crucial difference...closer to equality, a team, all in this together, with Chapman, but absolutely servant and master with the entirely autocratic Ferrari. Not that he was incapable of being a generous and sympathetic master upon occasion...

DCN

[Eric McLoughlin]

The interesting thing is that not many Lotus drivers ever stormed out of the team. Yes, they were sometimes sacked or left because of safety issues but they seemed to retain a reasonable relationship with Chapman (with the possible exception of Innes Ireland ). However, many Ferrari drivers fell out big time with EF - some, like Moss, before they'd even sat in a Ferrari.

[masterhit]

There was an instance in the "Secret Lives" documentary that noted with awe his ability to have a flock of people he did not know gladly offering to help him with a problem, he just had that aura about him.

[Mac Lark]

I have already spoken to some Lotus devotees who have said they won't be reading anything that might smudge the name of ACBC.

I suspect there were Ferrari followers who took the same view with Brock Yates's book.

The thing about Lawrence's book that annoyed me was that it came to an end. I could have kept reading and reading...

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by WGD706
I've just read a 'review' of this book on another web-site and it portrays a disturbing picture of Chapman...A new biography, by the motor racing historian Mike Lawrence, presents a rather poor portrait of Lotus founder Colin Chapman. Chapman, he suggests, had the business ethics of a 1950s spiv, used dangerous drugs to maintain a crushing schedule and ruthlessly stole other men's ideas.
I haven't read this book nor any others by Mike Lawrence so I am wondering if his credentials are any good?

I think all three of your points have been confirmed in other books on
Chapman and Lotus anyway.;)

Mike's book is a balanced portrait of a deeply-flawed character and the
legacy he left behind.

As for Mike's credentials - at a rough guess he's written a couple of
dozen racing and motoring books, all of them impeccably researched; he
was editor of Motor Sport for a while; he's a respected academic and he
knows more about the "folk history" of the British racing industry than
almost anyone else; he's also a respected Shakespearean scholar. If Mike
Lawrence writes something, it's almost invariably true, entertaining
and thought provoking.

It's interesting to note that Mike's book very rarely contradicts
Crombac's authorised hagiography/biography - Jabby generally just omits
the controversy!

pete

[Gary C]

got the book yesterday as one of my Christmas presents. A stunningly interesting read so far (I'm over halfway thru and it's still only Boxing Day lunchtime) - heartily recommended!!

[Ruairidh]

Well, I've just finished it.

Was it worth the $29.99? - yes, but......

It is more balanced than Jabby's hagiography and Prof Lawrence's conclusions are, likely, correct. "Wayward Genius" is as good as a two word summation of Colin as we may get.

It is strong on the early years; turns into a bit of a (very brief) year by year highlight of Lotus' activities for most of the 70's before coming back and focusing on Colin and DeLorean. Honestly, it read to me like Mike ran out of time or spent too much time on the research on the early years and then had to cram down the later years. It is not like the point of the book is that Colin, once his character was formed, ceased to change.

I'd have relished more on Colin's relationships with key Lotus folks - Jimmy Clark (in particular); Mario; and other key Lotus folks - Peter Warr is mentioned only twice. More insight and example into what made these folks come to Colin and then stick with him would have been great. Why did Jimmy not follow Jackie Stewart's line of reasoning that Lotus cars were always going to be unsafe? Why did Mario get back into the 77 in 1976? Did Mario approach Colin after Gunnar passed him or was it the other way round? These seem critical to me to Team Lotus' history. I know Doug was gracious enough to answer a question I posed about why Colin and Jimmy got along as being, essentially, a case of opposites attracting and filling each others gaps- but shoot, a Borders farmer and a former Warren Steet spiv are not obvious room mates and often opposites repel before the attraction becomes obvious or explode when the differences irritate. Again maybe we'll never get to the bottom of this but anecdotes help.

Mike does do a good job of balancing the good and the bad sides of Colin - often showing how this good aspect of Colin paradoxically begets one of Colin's bad features but this is often by authors statement rather than supported by anecdote or example. In other words I was left acknowledging the likely veracity of a conclusion but would have liked to see the authors workings and supporting evidence.

I also think that some support from a lawyer or accountant or business investgative journalist could have helped Mike unravel more of the DeLorean story. Both the Arthur Andersen papers and the Morganroth litigation provide a deal more insight into what happened and the true story for me lies in the details - whose idea was it? How did it unfold? What was Colin's motivation?
Why did Colin take the chance of being caught? Why did Fred?

Ah shoot. I've always subscribed to the Salinger view that one should "read and run" and am falling into the trap of negatively criticizing someone for work that I have neither the talent or time to conduct. There are some really good insights and intelligent statements which make this worth both the money to buy and the time to read but I guess what I'm trying to say is that this, to me, is not the definitive work and I crave more.

[schildkröte]

Greeting all.

I have a query.
I was on my way to ordering "Colin Chapman" by Jabby Crombac online when I read this thread on Dr. Lawrence.
For someone of (my) limited means and many miles (of material yet ) to read -could you suggest which one of the two books on Chapman I should go for for first?

[Barry Lake]

Originally posted by Ruairidh

Ah shoot. I've always subscribed to the Salinger view that one should "read and run" and am falling into the trap of negatively criticizing someone for work that I have neither the talent or time to conduct. There are some really good insights and intelligent statements which make this worth both the money to buy and the time to read but I guess what I'm trying to say is that this, to me, is not the definitive work and I crave more.

For my money, yours is an excellent review of this book. I had suspected this book wouldn't answer all my questions (similar to those you pose) especially the "whys" of Chapman becoming so involved with DeLorean. The latter was (is?) a superb con-man, by all accounts, and Chapman was, it seems, not averse to bending rules...

But this is at least a step forward from Jabby Crombac's "three wise monkeys" approach. Nothing against Jabby, I know him quite well and like him, but he doesn't want to see any wrong in Chapman - or at least doesn't want to write it.

Perhaps you, Ruairidh, could take the baton and carry on the good work. If you research and write it as well as you have written your review, I will buy a copy.

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by schildkröte
Greeting all.

I have a query.
I was on my way to ordering "Colin Chapman" by Jabby Crombac online when I read this thread on Dr. Lawrence.
For someone of (my) limited means and many miles (of material yet ) to read -could you suggest which one of the two books on Chapman I should go for for first?

Jabby's book is excellent as far as it goes (it also has much better photos than Mike's). I'd say the best thing to do is read that, then read Mike's. There are surprisingly few contradictions between the two - Jabby merely maintains a dignified silence over a number of issues, although does generally play up Colin's design involvement at times! Bear in mind that he'd been a close friend of Colin's for thirty years and it's an authorised biography approved by the Chapman family - it was never going to be a book that portrayed Chapman warts and all.

Given that neither of them are expensive books I think anyone interested in Chapman should have both!

pete

[DOHC]

Originally posted by Ruairidh
Well, I've just finished it.

Was it worth the $29.99? - yes, but......

Very interesting comments. I've read Jabby Crombac's, and the comments in this thread made me order this book. I can't wait to get it.

[Wolf]

Originally posted by Eric McLoughlin
However, many Ferrari drivers fell out big time with EF - some, like Moss, before they'd even sat in a Ferrari.

Correct, but how many others would succeed in seriously tempting him to consider driving for him (albeit, on Fangio's advice IIRC, Moss was considering driving his cars).

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Barry Lake


For my money, yours is an excellent review of this book. I had suspected this book wouldn't answer all my questions (similar to those you pose) especially the "whys" of Chapman becoming so involved with DeLorean. The latter was (is?) a superb con-man, by all accounts, and Chapman was, it seems, not averse to bending rules...

Apparently De Lorean has just come out with a new project - he's recorded an audiobook version of Smokey Yunick's autobiography. I'm sort of torn over whether to buy this or not - Smokey's epic is hilarious and unique, but I'm not sure I want to put dollars in de Lorean's pocket!

pete

[Gary C]

Pete, I have the de Lorean read set of CDs of Smokey's book. It's a great listen!! Perfect for those long drives to and from the circuit, or just to fall asleep to! I got it thru the Smokey website earlier this year.

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Gary C
Pete, I have the de Lorean read set of CDs of Smokey's book. It's a great listen!! Perfect for those long drives to and from the circuit, or just to fall asleep to! I got it thru the Smokey website earlier this year.

If it's a fraction as good as the book it's worth the money - especially if he keeps some of the WW2 stories in there. It'd be worth it for the Carrera Panamericana story alone actually! It's just..... John de Lorean!

pete

[DOHC]

Just got the book By Mike Lawrence delivered. Looks good.

[masterhit]

Originally posted by petefenelon


Apparently De Lorean has just come out with a new project - he's recorded an audiobook version of Smokey Yunick's autobiography. I'm sort of torn over whether to buy this or not - Smokey's epic is hilarious and unique, but I'm not sure I want to put dollars in de Lorean's pocket!

pete

I wonder if he needs the money!!!

[Alan Baker]

Originally posted by WGD706
I've just read a 'review' of this book on another web-site and it portrays a disturbing picture of Chapman...A new biography, by the motor racing historian Mike Lawrence, presents a rather poor portrait of Lotus founder Colin Chapman. Chapman, he suggests, had the business ethics of a 1950s spiv, used dangerous drugs to maintain a crushing schedule and ruthlessly stole other men's ideas.
I haven't read this book nor any others by Mike Lawrence so I am wondering if his credentials are any good?

This book is essential reading for any student of 60's/70's F1. However it is marred by Lawrence's usual and by now rather tiresome antipathy toward Ferrari. This is manifested in his oft repeated assertion that "Ferrari never had an original idea" and in other ways. For example; although just about every F1 designer of the era is referred to in the book, Ferrari's long serving Mauro Forghieri does not rate a single mention. Indeed, Lawrence asserts (p.119 & 130) that Ferrari's 1963/4 renaissance was due to the arrival of Surtees and Parkes. Well, John Surtees was a great race driver and a competent development driver who also fancied himself as an engineer but never claimed to be a designer, while Parkes was a road car engineer who had absolutely no input into F1 design and development. Later (page 208) Lawrence implies that the FIA framed aero rules in the mid seventies to favour Ferrari's flat-12 engine layout and tries to justify this by claiming that "Alfa Romeo converted it's V-12 to a flat-12" to take advantage of these rules. As anyone who knows anything about F1 of that era knows, the Alfa engine always had been a flat-12, having been derived from the sports car engine. In fact, of course, the reverse to Lawrence's assertion happened, with the Alfa being redesigned as a V-12 to enable Brabham to build a "wing" car. The development of ground effects actually killed of the Ferrari flat-12 as it was not possible to build such a chassis around it.

Apart from the Ferrari phobia, there are a lot of rather silly mistakes. On page 100 we are informed that Lotus took delivery of a Climax V-8 for the Italian Grand Prix in 1961 and that Ireland handed a car so powered to Moss for the race. In fact, only Cooper and Rob Walker took delivery of Climax V-8s in 1961 and when Moss' Walker entered 18/21 V-8 lash up failed in practice at Monza, Ireland did offer him his works 21, but this was powered by the normal 4 cylinder Climax. On page 103 we are informed that the Lotus 25 had sub frames to carry the engine and front suspension. Well, not on any 25 that I've ever seen! I was amused by the comment on page 134 to the effect that Ford did not supply their new 4 cam Indy V-8 to anybody building front engined cars. As this unit had in vee exhausts, installation in a front engined car would have posed a few problems!

On page 141 we are given the remarkable and hitherto completely unknown news that Ford was behind Dan Gurney's Eagle Weslake V-12 F1 project, an assertion repeated on page 158. In fact, of course, Ford had nothing whatever to do with the Eagle F1 effort other than the fact that Dan's salary as a works Ford sports car driver probably paid a few bills at AAR. A few years later, Weslake did build a very similar V-12 for Ford which never raced.

Describing the 1967 Lotus 49, Lawrence refers to it's Hewland gearbox. However, the 49 was fitted with ZF 'boxes throughout '67 and early '68. It was not until the 49B in the spring of '68 that the Hewland 'box was adopted.

There's many other innacuracies which do detract somewhat from what is neverthless a fascinating story. Unlike Doug Nye I don't think that twenty quid for 250 indifferently produced pages is particularly cheap! For a pound less, Maurice Hamilton gave us a hundred pages more on Ken Tyrrell (admittedly in a bigger type face)!

[ensign14]

Bernie's mag this month gives it a 'mediocre' rating (2 out of 5) - however 4/5 for Karl's book on Emmo. The review on ACBC may be somewhat biased as it was done by someone who seems to have idolized him (Peter Collins, I think).

[Doug Nye]

Good review points Alan - you have read the book properly - I scanned it and perhaps my faith in Mike is a little bit dented by your observations...with almost all of which I certainly concur.
Maurice's work on Ken is certainly a new favourite of mine, and I have read more of it ... Rupert-book typography, you see...
DCN

[Eric McLoughlin]

Maybe I read it too fast.

I think it's still a good book, although you probably would need to have read some of the other writings on Chapman that are out there to get a more complete picture of the man. It is probably the first book that seriously questions important aspects of Chapman's personality. However, I still felt it was restrained compared to the Channel 4 TV documentary of a few years back.

[fines]

Originally posted by Alan Baker
I was amused by the comment on page 134 to the effect that Ford did not supply their new 4 cam Indy V-8 to anybody building front engined cars. As this unit had in vee exhausts, installation in a front engined car would have posed a few problems!

Interestingly, the DOHC was used by several front-engined dirt cars in the late sixties/early seventies! I never really came around to see how it was done, maybe they reversed the head portings?

[2F-001]

Originally posted by Eric McLoughlin
Maybe I read it too fast.

..quite a tricky book to read fast, I think Eric! The typography and typesetting are shockingly bad.
In fact, it's quite the most nastily produced book I have come across in recent times; and I didn't think it especially cheap (although I shouldn't grumble - it was a gift!).

[Bernd]

I'm not sure if I already knew most of it's claims or merely suspected them but nothing seemed particularly new to me.
I also picked up a couple of the errors that Alan has mentioned the 25 one was particularly galling as was the simple matter of the 49's original gearbox.

Then the Ford AAR one had me

However on the whole it's a good read. Perhaps Dr Lawrence should cross reference a bit more though in future.

[mark f1]

Some of you may be interested to know that it is on sale at Mill House books for half price.

Edit - The Mike Lawrence book, that is.

Mark

[Milan Fistonic]

Another couple of errors I've noticed in the book.

On 8 January 1968 at the New Zealand Grand Prix at Pukekohe, Jim Clark put his works Lotus 49 on pole, except that it wasn't a Team Lotus car, it was a Gold Leaf Team Lotus car.

The New Zealand Grand Prix was on 6 January 1968 and in fact it was another two weeks before the the Gold Leaf livery first appeared at Wigram.

Jim Clark began the 1969 season by winning the Tasman Championship.

OK, this could just be a typo but with Clark being killed in April 1968 it is one that should have been picked up.

At half price from Mill House Books it's still an very good read.

[JtP]

Whatever the errors in Mike Lawrence's book.

Surely nothing matches Graham Gauld putting a photo on the front cover of one book of Clark in a Lotus 49 with GLTL colours and listing it as Clark's last GP win in South Africa.

[WGD706]

Roebuck in Autosport online (maybe another re-posting of a previous column) talks about Chapman...........
suppose, when it comes to designers of racing car, the name which will always come first to my mind is that of Colin Chapman.

In his leaner moments, Chapman, silver hair, pencil moustache and all, bore more than a passing resemblance to David Niven, for so long perhaps the world's favourite Englishman. And when Colin was in the right mood, his manner, too, could remind you of the movie star. As a raconteur he was without equal in the business, and his humour – invariably barbed to some degree – could have you falling about.

Chapman's mood, though, was not always like that. He was as complex an individual I have known in motor racing, capable of child-like rages, dignified stoicism, and all points between.

If the breadth of his ego was astonishing, Chapman was the best, the most free-thinking, originator of race cars that the world has so far seen. It was his mind which swung a lamp over unknown territory – the irony being that quite often others, having been shown the way, exploited the new ground more effectively. Once the initial superiority had been established, Colin was inclined, particularly in his later years, to lose interest, go on to the next thing.

He was never a man to suffer fools, nor one to allow sentiment to impede the Lotus path. People who worked for him always knew their employment would end the day he spied someone who could do the job better. But still they wanted to be there, for they knew that when Colin was on song being part of Lotus – ahead of the game – was uniquely satisfying.

He adored challenges, loved, for instance, beating Ferrari at Monza, rubbing it in a little. In so many ways he was the English equivalent of Ferrari, and it was no surprise that the Commendatore acknowledged his genius freely, holding him in great esteem.

It was this same part of his personality, this desire to beat The Establishment, that led Chapman to Indianapolis. "And the money," he would smile. "Don't forget the money...

"We faced a hell of a lot of hostility at Indy," he once told me. "They were still running their front-engined roadsters, and they didn't like to see them threatened. I could understand that, even if I couldn't go along with it. We decided we were going to try our hand there – but I
obviously wasn't going to build a Lotus roadster!

"Obviously, the logical thing was to build something on the lines of our F1 car. The car was quick from the start, and I think the regulars could see the writing on the wall. They started off by laughing at this tiny car, and that just made me more determined than ever. There was no way I'd have dropped racing at Indy without winning there. No way..."

Forty years ago, America was where the money was in motor racing. Just as the US Grand Prix, at Watkins Glen, paid way more than any other F1 race, so the Indianapolis 500 brought financial rewards to make a Grand Prix team's eyes water, to the point that, when the 1965 race clashed with the Monaco Grand Prix, Jim Clark skipped the annual visit to the Principality.

It was worth it, too. By August, he had clinched his second World Championship, anyway, and, in winning the 500, earned Team Lotus a total of $166,621. Two years later, Jimmy retired early at Indy, and was classified 31st – yet still collected $39,572. By contrast, his last Grand Prix victory, at Kyalami in 1968, was worth just $7,323...

When you speak of Chapman, of course, in the same beat you must speak of Clark. The designer/driver relationship between them was perhaps the most potent racing has known, and never, in his eight seasons of F1, did Jimmy race other than a Lotus.

A decade after Clark's death, in an F2 race at Hockenheim in 1968, it was still difficult for Colin to accept his loss. "For me," he said, "he will always be the best. In time someone else will come along, and everyone'll hail him as the greatest. But not me.

"Once or twice Jimmy came close to retiring, and I had mixed feelings: the idea of going racing without him was almost unthinkable, but at the same time I desperately didn't want him to hurt himself."

This was a side of Chapman I had never seen before, nor ever would again. We were in his office at Ketteringham Hall, and at one point he almost broke down. When his secretary brought in tea he turned away, pretending to look for something while composing himself. "Jimmy had more effect on me than anyone else I've known," he said. "Apart from his genius as a racing driver, he was genuinely a good man. Racing changed for me after 1968."

That may have been so, but still the restless desire for success remained. That same year, Graham Hill won the World Championship in a Lotus, and more titles followed, for Jochen Rindt, Emerson Fittipaldi and Mario Andretti. "Working with Colin was no trip to Paris," Andretti would smile, "but you're always going to have problems with a genius, right?"

The last Lotus Grand Prix victory witnessed by Chapman was scored by Elio de Angelis at the Osterreichring in 1982. At the end of that year, he died, of a heart attack, at the age of only 54.

None remembers Colin more fondly than Bernie Ecclestone: "'Chunky' was my man. I really liked him. He was good company, one of the boys. He was a good businessman, he was the best designer, and he was as quick as half the guys who ever drove for him. OK, Mr Ferrari was Mr Ferrari, and the name's a legend, but Colin was a little bit different from all the others. As I say, he could get in the car, and drive as quick as half the guys who were doing it for a living – and he'd designed the bloody thing, as well! So he was a special guy, and you've got to miss him..."