Fear and Loathing in America
Page 76
As for that “running for the Senate” trip, that’s just another case of trapping myself in my own rhetoric—and the idea that I should “ambush” Dominick in the GOP primary was Pat Caddell’s wishful thinking: He’d already signed on to do the polls for Gary Hart in the Democratic primary (for the Senate), so he tried to pass me (his other client) off as a dingbat Republican.
Politicians are pigs—but the people who make their living off of politicians are beyond description.
And so much for all that. What was that madness about getting me into a lawsuit in Memphis about some estate I never even heard of? I assume it was some spin-off from Uncle Garney—but, Jesus, what a nasty shock to suddenly find myself named as a plaintiff in some goddamn lawsuit in Shelby County, Tennessee, or some such place. I have enough real lawsuits on my head, without having to grapple with people I never even heard of. (At the moment, Oscar Acosta—the Chicano attorney whose behavior was the genesis of “my attorney” in the Vegas book—has an apparently valid claim against me for $25,000, which would worry me considerably if there was any way he could get it, but even in a money vacuum he’s managed to kill any chance of a film-sale by his constant threats of a libel suit.)
So in essence nothing has really changed much—except that I’m now making mortgage payments, instead of rent, and that’s a big difference psychologically, if nothing else. Juan is fine, Sandy’s teaching reading at the Community School, and I’m doing nothing at all. NOTHING. And that’s the way I like it—for now, anyway.
Love,
Hunter
TO JEROME GROSSMAN:
In February 1972 Thompson had gone to Worcester to cover the “Rad/Lib Caucus” organized to unify Massachusetts liberals before the state’s April 25 Democratic presidential primary. George McGovern beat Eugene McCarthy nearly three to one in the informal ballot: “To make things worse,” Thompson wrote in Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail ’72, “one of the main organizers of the Rad/Lib Caucus was Jerry Grossman, a wealthy envelope manufacturer … and a key McCarthy fundraiser in the ’68 campaign,” who after the event “went far out of his way … to make sure McCarthy was done for” by immediately endorsing McGovern.
October 20, 1973
Woody Creek, CO
Dear Jerome:
I am going through your long letter of Sept 11 for the third time, tonight, and I’m damned if I know how to answer you. Some of your points are so hard & true that they snap me up short with a sense of humility—the backed-off “journalist” vs. the totally committed “activist”—and some are such pure, petty gibberish that I wonder if getting into politics on a national level is worth the horror of putting up with this kind of bullshit, or even existing in the same arena with it.
But what the hell? Let me read the goddamn thing again, and maybe after that I’ll be able to deal with it on that level—undetermined, as yet—where it was conceived or at least written.
In the meantime, however—and despite any ugly outbursts that might come your way in the future—I should probably say here, while there’s still time, that every milligram of energy that you’ve put into politics since I first heard your name up at the Wayfarer in ’68 is a milligram I envy & have to admire. And whatever description of you in my book that seems to have offended you was, after all, just a quote from one of your local politics wizards. If I zapped you personally, I don’t recall it—and if I was ever that careless I should probably apologize. One of my continuing fears is that a combination of rampant ego and fun with the language might result in the flaying of innocent people … but I try to be careful, and a backwards glance at the evidence leaves me feeling pretty clean.
Which is not to say that I might or might not have maligned you, accidentally, in my account of the ’72 campaign Mass. Rad/Lib Caucus, or perhaps in some other area. Contrary to the assumptions of many book reviewers, I began & continued my coverage of the ’72 campaign with the idea that a totally ignorant person might learn a lot more than somebody with a bag of old ideas.
Your claim, however (referring, as you do, to pg. 65 of my book) that the Mass Rad/Lib Caucus was not conceived as a launching pad for McCarthy in ’72 reminds me that I would never even have known about the goddamn thing if somebody working for McCarthy hadn’t called me at my house in Washington to tell me about it—which is why I went there, for starters—and I also attended the McCarthy rally at Holy Cross the night before the caucus, where Gene made some very strong statements that were not supported by his showing when the deal went down some 15 hours later. I listened to [Democratic political strategist Richard N.] Goodwin speak that day, I listened to Gruening speak, and I was out on the floor when Reuther30 was counting his votes … and it was brutally clear to me, even before the vote was announced, that Gruening & Reuther had you & Goodwin beaten stupid.
I was a bit shaken by the outcome, as I said in the book, but after a time I managed to overcome my shock—and also that memory of McGovern arm-in-arm with Hubert at the Stockyards in ’68—and by the time of the California primary I was able to feel a sense of at least journalistic unity with the troops in the McGovern campaign.
It was not until a month or so later that I realized that this was not quite the same as feeling a sense of unity with McGovern’s top command …but at least I admit my mistake on that score, and the deadly weakness I see among You People is that you never understood what was happening (or failing to happen) in ’72. All anybody has to do, to understand why Nixon is Our President today, is lock himself in a motel room, overnight, with Marty Peretz,31 Adam Walinsky and Al Barkan. After eight hours of that, anybody would vote for Nixon—or even Agnew now.
This is the horror that I see in politics today—a pack of self-righteous hyenas feeding on an unexpected carcass, and getting bloated too fast on all that sudden meat.
I can rail & shout against this, but it won’t mean shit in the vacuum of energy & ideas we’re all flailing around in right now. As painful as it might be for you, we have to admit that McCarthy was a fraud and Sam Ervin is worse, and that McGovern, for all his faults, was a potentially viable presidential candidate in ’72 if he hadn’t splintered his constituency (or if people like you & Peretz hadn’t splintered it for him) and that at least a part of his root problem lay in the turned-off “if you’re not a virgin you’re a whore” syndrome that emerged from the Worcester caucus. This attitude was either an excuse or a reason for much of McGovern’s staff-thinking throughout the campaign—and I doubt if he understands, even now, why Mass. was the only state he won.
Jesus … I only meant to send a note saying I’d answer your long letter at some later date, when I had time to cope with it. But I see I’ve gotten into some of the meat; not all, certainly … and now that I think on it for a moment I don’t see much point in haggling with you over the details of what went wrong in ’72 … because the Main Drift is painfully apparent.
Anyway … I’m sure you’ve noted by now that my stationery stash contains no second sheets. (Herr Wenner feels very strongly about titles and letterheads….)
And I’m sure you’ve also picked up on the fact that I haven’t responded to the main thrust of your letter … which struck me, frankly, as a classic of Lint-head Thinking, but which was so artfully and aggressively presented as to demand an answer in the same vein….
And in all truth, Jerome, I’m just not up to that right now. It’s almost dawn and I have a lot of things to deal with—everything from digging holes to planting two 16-ft. blue spruce trees in my front yard to organizing a local land-use referendum and re-writing the 13th draft of my statement explaining why I can’t muster enough adrenaline to run for the U.S. Senate in Colorado this year.
Colorado is a long way from Massachusetts, and at the moment I’m about 8000 feet higher than you—which may or may not affect the tenor of our talk, but in any case it gives me a sense of wasted energy with regard to this letter. It is more than what I intended, and much less than what I’d planned … but, considering the po
ssibilities, maybe it’s just about right.
In closing—from one politics-junkie to another—I feel pretty safe in assuming that you’ll keep hammering the swine from your own stylish mountain-top. You might not believe this, Jerome, but the truth is that I’m really on your side…. What worries me now & then is that you might not be on mine.
Cazart …
Hunter S. Thompson
FROM U.S. SENATOR GEORGE McGOVERN:
October 22, 1973
Washington, D.C.
Dear Hunter:
The books arrived with the inimitable Hunter Thompson inscriptions, wrappings and trappings. They are warmly appreciated by Eleanor and me. Thanks so much, too, for the two delightful posters which were mailed earlier. We will treasure them.
Enclosed is a copy of my letter to Joe Robbie, recommending that he agree to your suggestion. I think it would be a good mutual arrangement. With regard to the New Politics matter, I will await your call on that sometime in the near future. I think you are probably a better judge of the Colorado situation than I am, but if I get any brainstorms, I will give you a call.
Love to you and Sandy.
As ever,
George McGovern
Eleanor was pleased that you remembered her with the Las Vegas book inscription. I will read it too.
FROM KATHARINE GRAHAM, THE WASHINGTON POST:
Graham sent her personal thanks for Thompson’s subscription and payment.
October 25, 1973
Dear Mr. Thompson:
Thank you for your enthusiastic appraisal of the Post and for backing it up with lovely $. I only hope we fulfill the promise, which the paper shortage is making us look at rather hard.
I am an admirer of yours and don’t want to put you out of work. But I would like to have that drink. Since Aspen looks pretty remote, please let me know if you can come East.
Tell your doctor that Newsweek’s editors edit standing or even running.
Sincerely,
Kay Graham
TO JANN WENNER, ROLLING STONE:
Thompson was forging ahead with his plans for a Rolling Stone–sponsored summit of the nation’s best political thinkers.
November 27, 1973
Woody Creek, CO
Jann …
Both my typewriters are fucked now, so this will have to be “handwritten,” as it were—the required memo inre: plans, budget, etc. for A-76.
I talked for about an hour with Dick Goodwin tonight & also with Adam Walinsky this afternoon—& at this point I feel I’ve gone as far as I can without some kind of formal, written commitment from you. Without it, I fear the vicious embarrassment that would come to be called “Thompson’s Folly” or “The Rolling Stone Political Nightmare” if I get the thing half-organized & then let it drop for lack of funds, interest, understanding, etc. on your part.
So far, we have Adam, Goodwin, Wagner, & Dave Burke32 tentatively agreed on a small meeting (& the necessity for it) sometime in January. Dick & I agreed on a target number of nine (9) participants—which probably means eleven (11) in the end. But right now we’re aiming for nine, as a very manageable number.
This memo, in addition to the copies you already have of Wagner’s outline & my letter of 11/10 to Adam, should give you enough information for a DECS/COMM (decision commitment) ASAP. I absolutely need this before I can go any further on my own. Given the obvious fact of my own inability to finance the thing—& also my somewhat nebulous connection with the RS empire—I feel the need for some firm footing before I get locked into this gig any further than I am now.
So … here’s the way I think we should do it.
1) Organize the whole thing, on paper, in the form of a book contract with S/A [Straight Arrow]—along the same lines as my C-72 book. The contract would essentially be between me & S/A—or, rather, between S/A & HST plus 10, 11 or 12 “John Doe’s” (names to be filled in later, for royalty purposes). By this means, all expenses for putting the conference (& the book) together would be covered by an advance, with all profits beyond the advance (15%) going in equal amounts to the “authors.”
2) Under this arrangement, I would be personally responsible to S/A for delivery of the book—which would not only focus the responsibility, but spare us both the apparently interminable & energy-sapping money squabbling that seems to be part of any working arrangement with RS. It would also require a credit card & a separate phone credit card (like the C-72 book contract) that would allow for separate accounting and budgeting.
3) It would also require a lump sum payment to me—for organizing the whole thing & writing the introduction—along the lines of the C-72 contract …probably a $10K payment on delivery to me, with another $20K as an advance against expenses … for all “author/participants.”
(Cazart! It’s 5:57 A.M. now & the Aspen FM station is howling “White Rabbit”—a good omen, eh?) “… Feed your head …”
…& starve a habit; that’s what I’ve always said….
Anyway, the A-76 project would also require the services of a more or less full-time ex-secy to keep the lines untangled. You may have somebody in mind; if not, & with considerable luck, I might be able to arrange for somebody out of my own vast experience. I figure the whole project—from DECS/COMM to publication—will take about a year … but if it works out right, we’ll have a landmark book for ’76 & a steady seller until 1999.
The main problem lies in the selection of the people—Goodwin is going to call in a few hours with his list: Adam & Carl have theirs—& then, of course, there’s mine. All of which now amounts to 25 or 30 names so far (we’ve already vetoed JK Galbraith, and any use of the word “Democratic” in the title, for instance—just to give you an idea how the thing is beginning to mesh…).
So … we should have a long (& perhaps taped) phone talk very soon, then we’ll need a D/C & a Contract, which Lynn can arrange, I think, after proper instruction. Personally, I like the C-72 contract as a working model—it allows for maximum freedom, minimum hassle, total reimbursement of all expenses, & potentially unlimited returns.
Any pre-pub. excerpts in RS should be treated as a separate matter, I think … once again, like my C-72 arrangement.
Overall, I see no real problems unless we create them ourselves. Goodwin & I can handle the personnel problems & a good ExSecy can do the tangible organizing—travel, location, communications, etc. (Dick’s function, as I see it, will be to keep me from stacking the thing with wild-eyed radical freaks—& mine will be to keep Goodwin from turning it into a Kennedy for President & organizing seminar….)
As for you … well, when your nerves get so bad that you have to be doused with a fire-smothering agent, for your own good. …I hate to say this, but institutionalization is not always a bad thing.
In any case, I’ll probably see you over there in a few days. I’m planning to make the Houston trip with the [Oakland] Raiders this weekend … so give this thing some thought ASAP so we can get it settled quick.
Thanx
H
FROM OSCAR ACOSTA:
Acosta was also a bit of a “politics junkie.”
November 29, 1973
Los Angeles, CA
Hunter—
For the past six months I’ve tried to find a job as a writer, lawyer, clerk, laborer, etc. … I am blackballed everywhere—in Frisco & L.A.
I’ve lived on food stamps and petty theft. As you know, counter-culture “legends” don’t pay off in cash. Ass & dope are always plentiful, but no one seems to care about my room & board.
Despite all messages & nightmares to the contrary, I still am looking to you as my only serious white connection for the big contract … the way it looks from here, I’d even settle for a small one.
Send immediate seed money to discuss the possibilities of forming a political alliance between your freaks and my cucarachas…. If I had the bread, I could—without doubt—be elected to the offices (one) of City Council, Assembly, Judge and probably Congress. A new “chicano�
�� district has just been ordered by the Calif. Supreme Court.
If you’re still serious about running for Senate, you are going to need Corky.33 I am back with the boys in East L.A. The “commies” who drove me out 2 years ago are now stone nazis (pl.). I ran into César34 at the press club and he gave me his blessings in front of the politicos who would be my only opponents.
I am very aware that all this sounds like a repeat of my early letters of ’68—but the truth is that things have gotten more deadly serious—much more than in those days when it all sounded like pipe dreams.
e.g.: 1) “chicano”—i.e., power is now officially accepted—2) The deputy Mayor (Aragon, former CIA in Brazil) told me to give him a call if I needed anything—3) The press all came at my command—all I said was I’d written an exposé of the CLF, etc. & they came but were too embarrassed to ask if it was fiction or journalism—etc.—4) And East L.A. (part of unincorporated county) will soon be incorporated, which would automatically give me at least city attorney, if not chief of police….
My only “drawback” is the status of my taxes (9 years no file) but it will actually raise all those good American issues once again, “No taxation w/o rep., etc.”
Why don’t you set up a meeting with May? After all, I can probably even make trouble for [L.A. Mayor Tom] Bradley, his boy. In a close race, I am the best spoiler candidate in town.
At the very least, send my share (you did say 20%) of the film rights to F/L—Clancy said you got $7500.00 … deduct my loans from you to me and wish me well, as I do you.
The bill for the car, assuming you had to pay for it, should be sent to [associate editor] David Harris at R/S since he used it for that week. (I didn’t get to fuck Joan)—or—you can consider that my fee for holding your hand all the way into the fucking airplane.