Categories
Hatfield-McCoy Feud Hokum

Why Do We Have the Supersized Feud Story?

My books, this blog, my Facebook “Hatfield-McCoy Truth” page and Ryan Hardesty’s “Real Hatfield, Real McCoy, Real Matewan” Facebook page have proven—by the historical records—that the Hatfield and McCoy feud yarn is a libelous screed against our ancestors. It follows that, by extension, we are also libeled by it. Yet the tale persists, presented to the world as “History.” Why?

The answer is simple: People with power and money were behind it from the beginning, and they still are. The same financiers who owned the newspapers that published the original yarn in 1888 also controlled the land and coal companies who were scooping up the land of the “Feudists.”

The first expansion of the original 1888 tale was by a man named Charles Mutzenberg. If you buy Mutzenberg’s book today, it will show a copyright date of 1917. What few people know is that the book originally appeared in 1897, and it was published by a coal company that owned tens of thousands of acres of Eastern Kentucky.

Scroll forward to the 21st century, and you see the same forces at work. In 2013 Dean King wrote the most voluminous and the most outrageous compendium of libels against our ancestors and us. That book presents our ancestors as bloodthirsty and stupid. But it goes further, claiming that we are still the same.

King claims that he and his teenaged daughter were fired upon TWICE, first in 2009 and again in 2010, as our cousins attempted to “warn him off” as he did his ‘research’ in Tug Valley. Of course these attempts to murder the intrepid writer were not reported to law enforcement.

Most importantly, King tells us that he was accompanied on his sojourn in our valley by the man in charge of the biggest absentee land owner in West Virginia. King says that Mr. Craig Kadevarek, Senior Director of Forest Operations for the Appalachian Region for the Forestland group, accompanied him as he came under fire from the descendants of the feudists.

A man who is overseeing three quarters of a million acres does not take a few days out of his schedule to travel around with a writer unless he knows that the end product will be a book that benefits his company. He was not disappointed. After nearly 400 pages about our barbarous ancestors, King wrote: “I can attest to the continuing ferocity of the neighborhood.” (p. 377)

We are the only demographic group that can be safely denigrated on network TV. The foundation stone of the stereotype with which we are still saddled to this day is the feud story. People who will fight a decades-long war and kill dozens of each other over a pig will do anything.

Ten to twelve thousand children in Flint Michigan were exposed to lead poisoning in their water, and there was a justifiable national uproar over it. Three hundred thousand people in West Virginia were exposed to poisoned water in 2014, and it was a mere footnote.

As long as the hillbilly stereotype exists, nothing will change significantly. That stereotype is founded on the tale of people who went to war over a pig, and the stereotype will not die until the feud yarn dies.
That’s why we fight the feud liars on every front, using the historical record as our weapon.

Victory will not come easy, but it will come.  The power of big money remains sufficient to cause people who are paid by the taxpayers to preserve and present our history to write and say things that they know—from the records—are not true.  That will end. Maybe not in my lifetime, but it WILL end!

 

Categories
Hatfield-McCoy Feud Hokum

LISA ALTHER: A VERMONT NOVELIST WRITES TUG VALLEY HISTORY

Lisa Alther is a Vermont novelist who has made a lot of money writing books that rely heavily upon lesbian sex. In 2012, she “caught the wave” in the wake of the Kevin Costner TV show by writing a book on the Hatfields and McCoys. In its review, the Wall Street Journal called Alther “An expert on the feud.”

There is not a single sentence in that book that is both new and true. She tells us that she parsed the prior books and chose the tales she liked for her book. It is obvious that she never laid eyes on a single original document in a courthouse or archive.  Ms. Alther entitles the introduction to her book, “Murderland.”  That title is a good indication of the validity of the tale that follows.

Lisa Alther said of Truda McCoy: “she wrote an account that reads like a novel — and is probably about as reliable as one.”  After stating early on that Truda McCoy’s book is “probably about as reliable as a novel,” what does the novelist, Alther do? Why, she cites that “unreliable” source one hundred and two times in her footnotes!

With one hundred and two citations of Truda McCoy in one hundred forty-seven pages of feud-related text, it is clear that this author can’t write two pages without falling back upon a book she says is no more trustworthy on historical fact than a novel.  And she touts her book as non-fiction!

The part of Truda McCoy’s book that reads most like a novel is the first chapter, which describes the death of Asa Harmon McCoy. A comparison of Truda’s original manuscript, which is in the Leonard Roberts papers at Berea College,  it is obvious thatthis chapter in Truda’s book is largely the work of Leonard Roberts.
Alther’s first chapter is also on Asa Harmon.

Truda McCoy, who did not claim to be writing a history, used her imagination to tell the story of Harmon McCoy’s death the way she envisioned it.  Since no one knows the details, McCoy does no great violence to historical fact by telling the story the way she imagines it might have happened.  Knowing what it represents, this chapter is actually the best part of McCoy’s book.  Although one can get a real feel for the situation in January, 1965 by reading McCoy’s chapter, no serious scholar would mistake it for real history.

It is a far different thing for a later writer to use it as if it was real history, but that is what Lisa Alther did, in a near-verbatim regurgitation of McCoy’s first chapter.  Alther said Truda McCoy’s book read like a novel, and that is true of most books by descendants.  Alther’s 2012 book, Blood Feud, reads even more like a novel than does the one by Truda McCoy.  In fact, in her fictional chapter on Asa Harmon, she follows Truda McCoy so closely that one has to look at the title to know which book one is reading.

Here are two examples among many sentences that are so similar that it is hard to distinguish Alther from McCoy:

TM: “Pete and Patty started toward the cave. They had not gone far after they reached the woods, until other tracks joined the tracks that Pete had made on his previous journey to the cave.

LA: “they reached a junction at which new boot prints emerged from the woods to join Pete’s tracks up the hill toward the cave.

TM: Then, “Halfway to the cave, they found Harmon lying across a snow covered log. The snow around him was red with his blood.”

LA: “Alongside the trail, just below the cave, they spotted a fallen oak treeAcross its trunk sprawled Harmon McCoy.  The snow on the ground around him was stained scarlet.”

Alther takes McCoy’s harmless fiction and transforms it into “history,” without even giving McCoy credit for her words.  This narrative exists nowhere else in feud literature, except with Truda McCoy and Lisa Alther. Knowing what it represents, this chapter is actually the worst part of Alther’s book.

Alther had a few new ‘facts’ in her book, but they are all egregiously false.

One of her “New” discoveries is where she wrote, (p. 35) of Ran’l McCoy: “he charged Devil Anse Hatfield with stealing a horse from his farm in 1864.” On the next page, she writes: “Ranel McCoy and Devil Anse Hatfield filed several similar suits against each other in the years following.

This is not a minor human error that any writer might make. It is a whole cloth fabrication of something that is of central importance to her tale. And it is absolutely false in its entirety.

As you can see in this Index, Randolph McCoy filed several lawsuits, NONE of which had any Hatifeld–much less Devil Anse–as a defendant.

McCoy 1

Randolph Mccoy cases continue on the next page. He was actually quite litigious. Ran’l was involved in many suits contesting the value of hundreds of pigs, but no one knows about them.

There are NO lawsuits in the record where Randolph McCoy sued ANY Hatfield, much less Devil Anse Hatfield. The index also shows that Devil Anse never sued ANY McCoy, much less Ran’l McCoy.

McCoy 3

Lisa Alther, whose previous novels dealt a lot with sex, has much more sex in her fictional “history” than any other feud writer.  Everyone knows sex sells in 21st century America– and the kinkier the better.  Alther mentions at least three times that Ran’l McCoy’s cousin, Pleasant, was accused of copulating with a cow.

When describing the widely publicized photo of Ellison Hatfield in his Civil War uniform with his revolver in front of him, she says he is “fondling his pistol.”

In her chapter entitled The Corsica of America, Alther says: “If only the feudists had spent as much money and effort on acquiring contraception (which was, in fact, available in other regions of the United States at this time) as they did on acquiring guns, ammunition and moonshine, a different scenario might have evolved.”

I must admit that the scenario would have been quite different if someone had sold condoms to the feudists.  When Devil Anse went to federal court in 1889 on a moonshining charge, he faced the standard year-and-a-day if convicted.  Had he been peddling condoms, however, he would have faced up to five years in the pokey and a two thousand dollar fine plus court costs.

The Comstock Act became law in 1870.  That law read, in part:  “…whoever shall sell…or shall offer to sell, or to lend, or to give away… any drug or medicine, or any article whatever, for the prevention of conception, or for causing unlawful abortion, or shall advertise the same for sale… shall be imprisoned at hard labor in the penitentiary for not less than six months nor more than five years for each offense, or fined not less than one hundred dollars nor more than two thousand dollars, with costs of court.”

Whether this declared expert is ignorant of history or simply chose to condemn several generations of Appalachians while knowing her statement was untrue, I know not.  The Comstock Law remained in full force against contraceptives until 1936.   The 1936 decision applied only to married couples.  The right to contraception for unmarried persons was not recognized until 1972.

We learn more about the mind of the novelist who penned this screed when she says she was driving through the Cumberlands and saw a billboard advertising an indoor firing range.  Alther says: “At the top stood a large cutout of a pistol, pointed upward at an angle.  The barrel resembled an erect phallus, the trigger guard outlining a testicle.”   Now we know why she thinks Ellison Hatfield was ‘fondling’ his pistol in his Civil War photo.  To some people everything is about sex, and those folks write a lot of books — and buy a lot of books.

The Wall Street Journal calls Alther “An  expert on the feud.” I place her in the top tier of the folks I lovingly refer to as “The feud liars.

Categories
Dean King Hokum Hatfield & McCoy Hokum in Books

We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us!

We Southern Appalachians are the only demographic group that can be publicly insulted with impunity in this politically correct twenty-first century. This will continue to be the case so long as Southern Appalachians continue to aid in the promulgation of lies about themselves and their ancestors.

The most damaging lie about our people is the Hatfield and McCoy feud story. I am not referring to the actual history of the two families, which is not really remarkable for violence in the context of late nineteenth century frontier America.  The problem is the story, which is largely false.

The Hatfield and McCoy feud story, whether in the slimmed down forty-page versions of John Spears and Shirley Donnelly, or in the super-sized four hundred page version of Dean King, is not true. In fact it is false in so many of its material claims—as my own books clearly prove–that it must be considered a lie on the whole.

I despise the feud tales, and I have a very good reason to do so: Every lie in every feud tale makes my ancestors look evil and barbaric. There is not a single lie in any feud book that makes them look more sane and civilized.

I use the term “lie” deliberately, to refer to material misrepresentations of fact which the writer either knew or should have known was false when he wrote it. I am not talking about simple errors like a wrong date or the confusion of similar names—the kind of mistakes every writer makes.

The feud lie, which presents ALL of our ancestors—and, by extension, all of us– as stupid and bloodthirsty cowards, is spread by three types of Appalachians:

First, there are those who believe that the super-sized feud yarn will attract tourists to an area that is virtually in its economic death throes. I try to be as kind as possible to these misguided kinsmen who honestly believe that it is profitable to be dishonest.

They can and must be approached with the power of the truth. Our real history, properly presented, would attract just as many tourists as does the feud lie.

The second group is comprised of folks who just don’t know any better. They need a history lesson or two.

The third group of home-grown aiders and abettors of the feud liars is not approachable on the same basis. Comprised of people who are enamored with the idea of being descended from pathological killers, this group is beyond reason. Rational arguments based on historical facts have no effect on these people. They will help sell a feud book that they frankly admit is false in many material particulars, so long as it presents their ancestors as bloody savages.

pogoClick on graphic to enlarge.

I am sure that most people reading this have seen Dean King’s Facebook page, which features many members of the third group.

The most egregious of the many lies in King’s book says that Ellison Hatfield started the Election Day fight by drawing a knife on Tolbert McCoy. That means that Ellison, called “a splendid man and soldier” in the definitive McCoy story by Truda McCoy, was a would-be murderer, who got only what was coming to him when the McCoys butchered him. By extension, Devil Anse was nothing but a cold-blooded murderer when he executed the three innocent McCoys.

Yet, we see direct descendants of Ellison and Devil Anse pictured with King, helping him sell his lies about their ancestors.

Of course the same lie makes Preacher Anse Hatfield a willing accessory to the triple murder of the three McCoys, but that does not keep descendants of Preacher Anse from giving the book rave reviews.

The best thing about Jim McCoy in the book is the ridiculous claim that he worked for Devil Anse at Anse’s moonshine still, at a time when a vicious blood feud between the two families was underway.  Yet, some descendants of Jim McCoy laud the book.

Asa Harmon McCoy, a warrior to the bone—by the record—is a coward who deserts his home and hides out in a cave. Yet direct descendants of Asa Harmon are shown on King’s Facebook page, grinning from ear to ear as they help him pitch his lies.

The best depiction of any Hatfield or McCoy in King’s screed is of Ran’l McCoy. He is simply a victim. There is not a single laudatory word about Ran’l or any other McCoy in the four hundred plus pages of the book. Yet King has no shortage of McCoys plugging his book.

This third group of Hatfields and McCoy descendants is beyond the reach of rational argument. Any time spent trying to enlighten them is utterly wasted.

 

Categories
Dean King okum Hatfield & McCoy Hokum in Books

A Church house, a Smokehouse and a Cat house—and a Bounty Hunter, Too!

Once one has read my 2013 book, “The Hatfield & McCoy Feud after Kevin Costner: Rescuing History,” one can get some real laughs from reading the feud books.

Dean King’s “True Story.” has almost all of the most comical yarns from earlier feud tales, and he gives the prior author credit occasionally.

Unfortunately, some of the best guffaws in King’s book are not apparent to someone who was not raised in the hills before about 1970, or who hasn’t read the Foxfire books.

King starts out with one of those Foxfire howlers.

This story can be read in my book, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Feud Tales.”  https://tinyurl.com/ycqlg3oy

Categories
Dean King Hokum Uncategorized

We Got Guns! The Little Newspaper that Wasn’t

A recent post on a popular Facebook page devoted to “The Hatfield and McCoy Feud” caught my eye. The poster wrote:  “The story in its basic form will never really change despite efforts to uncover new evidence in documents.”

That is an absolutely true statement. The basic story will never change for one simple reason–it is a STORY! It has not changed materially since John Spears first wrote it in 1888.

This story can be read in my book, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Feud Tales.”  https://tinyurl.com/ycqlg3oy

Categories
Dean King Hokum Hatfield & McCoy Hokum in Books

The Stockholm Syndrome in Southern Appalachia?

The Stockholm Syndrome in Southern Appalachia?

When a hostage bonds with his/her captor, it is called “The Stockholm Syndrome.” Wikipedia says that it: “can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes “strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other.” Wiki further states that the FBI has found that roughly 8% of victims succumb to the syndrome.

What are we to make of a situation where a much larger percentage—possibly even a majority—of a population of a million or more exhibits evidence of having succumbed to the syndrome? I submit that this is precisely what we now see in the coal mining areas of Southern Appalachia.

West Virginia native Jeff Young wrote: “The key to understanding West Virginia is to recognize that it is less a fully functioning state government than a resource-extraction colony.”  http://grist.org/climate-energy/is-there-hope-for-west-virginia-as-it-moves-away-from-coal/

I have argued that the colonization was possible in the beginning and is maintained today only because the people of Southern Appalachia are perceived as deserving of colonial oppression.

North Carolina native, Betty Cloer Wallace wrote: “Appalachian mountain natives are the only group in America that many people still have the audacity to publicly ridicule as being ignorant—and worse.”  https://mountainx.com/opinion/050609fighting_back/

Historians trace the stereotype from Will Wallace Harney’s article “A Strange Land and a Peculiar People,” published by Lippincott’s Magazine in October 1873, through John Fox, Jr to Al Capp and television’s “Beverly Hillbillies.  I contend that, at least since 1888, the hillbilly stereotype rests mainly upon the story of the Hatfield and McCoy feud. In its “Hillbilly” entry, Wikipedia says: “Fueled by news stories of mountain feuds such as that in the 1880s between the Hatfields and McCoys, the hillbilly stereotype developed in the late 19th to early 20th century.” I agree.

Within a few days of entering graduate school at Cornell more than half a century ago, I was faced with this question from a fellow student from New York City: “What kind of people kill over a hundred of each other over a pig?”  When I objected to the characterization, he produced a copy of the New York Times article reporting the death of Cap Hatfield in 1930, which gave him all the documentation he needed. After all, it was in the nation’s “Newspaper of record.”

In my more than eighty years, I have never had anyone refer to Harney, Fox or Capp as support for their opinion of my people. It is always “the Feud!” I wrote in my 2013 book, “The Hatfield & McCoy Feud after Kevin Costner: Rescuing History: “The feud story was a creation of the big city newspapers.  The immediate purpose for its creation was to devalue the people and thereby facilitate the transfer of ownership of the wealth of the Valley to the same big city financiers who controlled those newspapers.  The ultimate purpose was to transform the independent mountaineers into docile and willing wage workers. This transformation was abetted by the state governments and the elites on both the state and local levels, who hoped to profit by the transformation.”

I show in my book that the story of the Hatfield & McCoy feud is, indeed, a story and not history, and that it was created and is maintained for the purpose of facilitating the continuing colonial oppression of the region.

Ms. Wallace ended her essay with: “We do have a choice. We can hasten our own cultural demise by doing nothing, by drawing a circle around ourselves and trying to shut out the rest of the world. Or… we can pick up our pine knots and go to war—to save ourselves.”

Unfortunately, a large percentage of my people have done the opposite of what Ms. Wallace urges us to do. The worst screed ever penned about my people—for reasons amply stated in my book—is the book by Dean King, which came out in the wake of the hit Kevin Costner TV mini-series.

Mr. King wrote in his book that the man responsible for overseeing 650,000 acres of West Virginia land for the largest absentee “colonizer” of West Virginia took two days out of his schedule to show Mr. King around the feud region.  Of course the land magnate’s time was not wasted, as the end result was a book that showed ALL the people of the feud area to be such low types that Mr. King’s stated “hero” of his story is the murderer of sleeping coal miners, Dan Cunningham.

When one looks at Mr. King’s Facebook page and sees the number of descendants of the people he maligns who are helping him to sell his massive libel of their ancestors, and, by extension, themselves, one sees the Stockholm Syndrome writ large.

The one that galls me most is a photo of King with descendants of Ellison Hatfield on his FB page, helping him sell his lies about their ancestor. King writes that Ellison Hatfield, one of the most respected men in Tug Valley, started the Election Day fight but drawing a knife on Tolbert McCoy.
Growing up on Blackberry in the 1940’s and ‘50’s,I heard the story of that fight from a dozen people who were eyewitnesses. I delivered the Williamson Daily News to the son of Preacher Anse who lived in Preacher Anse’s house from 1952-55. NO eyewitness, none of whom had a dog in the fight, placed a knife in Ellison’s hand. Not a single court record has a word of testimony placing a knife in Ellison’s hand. Yet, people directly descended from Ellison Hatfield help King sell that egregious lie about their ancestor.

If the pine knots are not taken up soon then the future is indeed bleak for such a people.

Categories
Dean King Hokum Uncategorized

The Library of Virginia’s “People’s Choice” Writer Survives Ambush in Feud Country—Twice!

 

Two thirds of Mingo County, West Virginia is owned today by five out-of-state coal and land companies. The Forestland Group controls over three and one half million acres of land in the US. Seven Hundred twenty-three thousand acres are in West Virginia and Kentucky. As the map shows, it is not a great overstatement to say that they “own West Virginia.”  http://www.forestlandgroup.com/about.html

forestland

From the company’s website, we see:

Craig R. Kaderavek
Senior Director of Forest Operations-Appalachian Region

 

According to Dean King, Mr. Kaderavek and one of his associates (p.348) took the intrepid explorer/writer on a tour of the Valley in the summer of 2009. At the mouth of Thacker Creek, the group was fired upon by the barbaric descendants of the feudists. (p.xii)

This essay, in its entirety, can be read in my book, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Feud Tales.”  https://www.amazon.com/dp/1977716814/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1511238586&sr=1-1&keywords=Lies%2C+Damned+Lies%2C+and+Feud+Tales

 

Categories
Dean King Hokum Hatfield-McCoy Feud Hokum

Library of Virginia’s “People’s Choice Award” Won by a Fraudster

The Library of Virginia’s 2014 People’s Choice Award for non-fiction has gone to a book that is probably the biggest literary hoax since Clifford Irving’s bogus “Autobiography of Howard Hughes” more than forty years ago.

This is the first in a series of posts I will make which will prove conclusively—by the record—that Dean King’s “The Feud: The Hatfields and McCoys, The True Story” is one of the biggest collections of falsehood ever sold as non-fiction.

If I covered all of King’s distortions of the record and outright lies, this series would be longer than King’s four hundred thirty page book; therefore, I will cover only a dozen or so of the most egregious examples of the perfidy of this “historian.”

This story can be read in my book, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Feud Tales.”  https://tinyurl.com/ycqlg3oy

 

Categories
Hatfield-McCoy Feud Hokum Uncategorized

A Tale of Two Jims

The above sketch is by Tug Valley’s own Vera Kay Fink Hankins.

As I wrote in my book, there were no heroes in the Hatfield and McCoy feud. Some partisans—yes, there are still partisans today—go to great lengths to find heroes.  These same partisans also have villains.

Feud writers concentrate on Ran’l McCoy and Anse Hatfield, but the actual history is presented much better with the stories of two men named Jim–Jim McCoy and Jim Vance.

This story can be read in my book, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Feud Tales.”  https://tinyurl.com/ycqlg3oy

Categories
Dean King Hokum Hatfield & McCoy Hokum in Books

Dean King: A Review of a Review

In early 2012, I read on the “Real Hatfield, Real McCoy…” Facebook page that a writer named Dean King was soon to publish a book on the Hatfield and McCoy feud.  I was interested, of course, as I had been hoping for someone to write a book undoing the damage to the reputations of my ancestors that originated with the yellow journalists of the 1880s and continued through the ersatz “history” written by Otis Rice in 1982, wherein he cited journalists over one hundred fifty times in one hundred twenty-six pages.

In preparation for the advent of the King opus, I went to the library and checked out his “Patrick O’ Brien: A Life Revealed.” I hadn’t read more than a dozen pages before I realized that what I was reading was fiction: No one could possibly know the details that King claimed to know about O’Brian.

I pre-ordered the King feud book, grandiosely titled “The True Story,” on Amazon, and received one of the first copies.  I was not at all surprised to see many direct quotations of words King claimed to know were spoken more than a century ago in the woods of the Tug Valley. I was only mildly surprised to read what people thought and smelled in the Tug Valley woods long ago.

I was, however, actually surprised at the number of egregious and easily proven lies in King’s book.

Given his connections in the publishing industry—he tells us early on that his brother-in-law runs one of the big New York publishing houses—I was not surprised to see glowing blurbs in his Amazon listing from the shills at organs like the Wall Street Journal and the Boston Globe, so I went looking for reviews of his prior efforts.  After wading through several boiler-plate reviews by American reviewers, I came across one from the Mother Country that intrigued me: Jan Morris–photo above– reviewed the book on O’ Brien for the Guardian-Observer in 2000.  http://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/sep/03/biography

I had read Morris’s two books on Venice, and, in spite of her troubled personal life, I considered her an outstanding writer, so I was interested in her review of King.  Morris was born “James Humphrey” Morris, in 1926. She continued to be James Humphrey for forty-six years, during which time (s)he married Elizabeth Tuckness and fathered five children.  In 1972, James Humphrey went to Morocco to avail himself of the services of an Arab surgeon.  Here’s Jan when she was a good-looking guy named James:

Jan as James

Whether the Bedouin used a scimitar or a scalpel, we do not know, but we do know that as a result of his ministrations, James Humphrey became “Jan,” and remains so to this day.

In her review of King’s “biography” of O’ Brien, Morris apparently saw what I see in his “True Story” of the feud. Morris says: “King’s telling of the puzzling tale is decent, fair and extremely thorough, but often ingenuous. There was no Australian Embassy in 1929; there never has been such a thing as ‘England’s Air Force’; the Basque country is not the same as Catalonia, as page 168 seems to imply. Who cares that, on a journey in France: ‘Patrick revved the engine of the little 2CV to pass slow-moving traffic on the winding two-lane roads’? “

Morris obviously sees the same disregard for fact in the O’Brien book that King exhibits in his “True Story” of the feud.  He claims to know what O’Brien did on a country road in France, just as he purports to know what Anse Hatfield and Sam McCoy did and thought in the West Virginia woods, and this reviewer caught onto it!

The last sentence in the review is: “In O’Brian, on the contrary, I am reading the work of an artificer, a contriver of genius and, well, a liar.” While Morris calls King’s subject in that book a liar, I call King, himself a liar. Dean King is a talented writer, but he is also a liar. There is a huge difference between Morris’s accusation and mine, in that O’Brien is dead and cannot sue Morris for libel, while King is alive and needs only to file a suit and prove that I am lying when I call him a liar.  His suit could definitely be worthwhile, because I made a million dollars in one year while King was still in school.

I know that the first reaction of people reading this is that, as King is a public figure, he would have a hard row to hoe in suing me for libel, but that is not so. A public figure has the same protection as a private individual if he can show that the libel was intended to do him professional or financial harm, and I freely admit that when I warn the public that King’s book is a collection of lies, I am doing just that.  My goal is to stop completely the sale of his compendium of lies about my ancestors, thus depriving him of that source of income.

I wouldn’t care if King made millions from writing about my people, IF he would tell the truth and say that he was writing “historical fiction,” but when he titled it “The TRUE Story,” he crossed a line that I must defend.  Historical fiction is partly true, but a “True Story” is a true story. If a writer says he is telling a “True Story,” and then writes what he knows to be untrue, or writes with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of what he writes, then he lied when he wrote the title.

All he has to do is prove his case, but I have no worries whatsoever, because, in an American court, truth is an absolute defense to a claim of libel.