As far as I’m concerned, we should plan on two distinctly separate trips inre: DC—one, the column, which is mine, and, two, the political coverage, which is Rolling Stone’s. We’ll have to figure out the technical aspects of the format, but that should be easy. I’ll call before shoving off for NY & Boston.
There remains, of course, the problem of my attorneys. What can I say? Oscar’s trial begins on Jan 5—and as far as I’m concerned Clancy’s should have been yesterday. I have changed my mind about the Death Penalty.
The only other problem that comes to mind is Janey [Wenner]’s muddle-headed notion that I’m a decent person with right & proper instincts but I think maybe I managed to solve that one, too. Probably you shouldn’t mention my thing with Carol Doda,2 but I guess that bastard Felton let the pig out of the bag anyway, so fuck it.
OK for now. This no-sleep trip is beginning to wear me down. I think I’ll go over & pack my rhinoceros skin bag & hit the road. Thanx for a good week.
HST
TO JANN WENNER, ROLLING STONE:
Thompson chose Rolling Stone staffer Timothy Crouse—a Peace Corps veteran, Harvard graduate, and son of Pulitzer Prize–winning playwright Russel Crouse—as his assistant on the ’72 campaign trail, an apprenticeship Crouse made the most of. His book The Boys on the Bus: Riding with the Campaign Press Corps, published by Random House in 1973, became a critically acclaimed best-seller that The New York Times’s David Halberstam called “the best writing about journalism I have ever read.”
January 14, 1972
Washington, D.C.
Jann:
Here’s the general outlook for political coverage for issues #102 thru #106—mainly in terms of coordinating things between me & Tim Crouse visà-vis the N.H. & Fla. Primaries.
The only serious problem looks to be issue #105, which will be going to press just about the time the deal goes down in New Hampshire. The election there is on Tues, March 7, which puts us in a bit of a bind … and which will also determine what kind of coverage we schedule for issues #104 and possibly even #103.
The main question, I think, has to be whether Tim should do an overall N.H. wrap-up piece for #104/#103 or try to file a last-minute “results piece” for #105—keeping in mind the real distribution & mail delivery dates for #104, which would get a N.H. wrap-up to most readers about a week before voting time in N.H.
On the other hand, this would make things very difficult for Tim—having to wrap the fucker up two weeks before it happens. But maybe he could do this with a sort of Question–Issue piece for #104, and then me filing a last minute thing from D.C. when the N.H. results are final around midnight EST (using the xerox).
That’s one option. The other would be for me to go up to Manchester, with the xerox transmitter, and help Tim file a last-minute “results” piece for #105. This could be a real nightmare, if the results are still hazy by midnight; we might find ourselves going to press on #105 with the real meaning of N.H. still up in the air. The only essential questions up there concern the size of the vote McGovern and McCloskey3 will pull—and this figure could hang until noon the next day. (There is, of course, the unlikely possibility that either George or Pete will jump off to an early lead and then hold it—in which case we’d have to wait, as long as that possibility existed.)
Anyway, you see the problem for #105. Ponder it and let me know, because what we do with that one will have a definite influence on my own plans for #103–4–5 and #106.
On #102, I’m pretty clear. I’ll cover the Mass. Rad/Lib Caucus4 on Sat 1/15, then move across the border to spend a few days with McGovern & then file a piece on his stance & general outlook in both Mass & N.H. (If the Mass Rad/Lib caucus rejects him, however, the Young/Left vote has to make a choice among 3 or 4 candidates. The winner will be ahead not only in Mass., but all over the country in terms of long-range publicity.)
Tim is also pretty clear for #102. He’s onto McCloskey. We’ll meet in Manchester on Monday and figure out the details from there—but it’s already definite that we have two separate pieces for #102: McCloskey, and McGovern against the background of whatever happens in Mass. on Sat.
The problems begin with #103—mainly because of the problem with #105. I’ll talk to Tim & get his ideas, but whatever he has in mind won’t much affect the question of whether I should do my “Lindsay in Florida” thing for #103 or #104. In any case, I’ll plan to leave N.H. in time to get down to Florida so I can do a Lindsay piece for #103—although it might be better to save it for #104, which would leave me free to do a D.C. piece (maybe “the Real Nixon,” etc.) for #103, then Lindsay in Fla. for #104, then a last-minute “results” piece on N.H. for #105 … and then back to Fla. for an “election nite & what now?” piece from Florida, combining the N.H. & Fla. Results—with the added advantage of having 3 days between the election & the Fri 3/17 deadline to get the piece in via Xerox.
Actually, this piece would seem almost mandatory, either way … so the question is how to space out my movements for #103–4 and #105 … and this depends on how we plan to handle #105, vis-à-vis the 3/7 voting date in N.H.
I assume all this is at least tolerably clear. The only gut problem is how to handle #105 … and my own inclination would be to have Tim do his final N.H. piece for #104, then have me do a last-minute thing on the N.H. results for #105 from DC, instead of N.H. Personally, I don’t much give a fuck. I’d just as soon take the transmitter up to Manchester & do a Results story with Tim for #105—but I think this would be very risky. On the other hand, we’re going to have problems with #105 no matter how we try to fuck with it. If we spring for the last-minute Results story, for instance, that will leave Tim on the loose for #103 and #104. But if he does his N.H. wrapup for #104, that would leave him loose for #105 and a very belated analysis thing on “The effect of the Youth Vote in N.H.?” for #106—along with my Fla. wrapup.
On balance, however, I think I would argue for this. The fuckup possibilities of trying to get the N.H. results & analysis into #105 are immense—unless Tim can somehow do a sort of “overnight” wrapup that we could lash together at the last moment, and hope to sweet jesus that the final results go according to form. (The only upbeat note, here, is that we should both—Tim & I—know a lot more about how N.H. looks by the time #102 goes down: so maybe there’s solace in that. But not much … keep in mind that I spent a month in N.H. in ’68, & even with my pro-McCarthy bent I was stunned by the size of his vote; and I can’t really recall anybody up there who was more optimistic about McCarthy’s chances than I was … so we may as well assume that any attempt to predict ’72 is subject to at least a 30% error factor—which is all either McG. or McC. needs to claim a “victory.”)
OK for all that. The only immediate question, for right now, is whether I should plan to file from Fla. on Lindsay for #103 or #104. I’ll go down there anyway, after N.H., but let’s keep in mind that we’ll have a valid chance for filing a DC-datelined piece on something like “the Real Nixon” for #103, then doing a long & fairly well-written piece on Lindsay in Fla. for #104—which would still leave me loose for whatever we need for #105, then back to Fla. again for a final for #106.
Shit … no point in scrambling this up any more than it already is. I have it all charted out, but I refuse to send my only copy of the chart & I still can’t get the Xerox people to deliver the machine. I’ve already signed a contract & given them a deposit of $18 for the delivery fee, but they refuse to be definite about delivering the fucker. If it’s not here by the time I get back from N.H. I’ll get another brand. According to [consumer crusader Ralph] Nader, Xerox is not the best, anyway …but what the hell? The point here is that you’ll have to make your own chart of this “#103 thru #106 coverage” problem.
Right after I talked to you tonight I had a long chat with Tyler Knapp, Nader’s Volvo raider, & as of now I get the feeling he’s ready. I’m leaving him with about six projects, including the writing of a “story” on the “Volvo Myth,” based on his own massiv
e research. What he does for Nader, he says, is usually prepare lengthy “research memos” that Nader usually edits for speeches or personal presentation in one form or another. So I told him to do one for RS on “What’s Happened to Volvo.” And, in addition to that, I left him with about five fairly prickly problems to solve … so I should know about that when I get back, & I’ll let you know at once.
OK for now. I’ll check in with Landau on Sat nite or Sunday, & then meet Tim at McGovern hq. in Manchester at Monday noon. McGovern will be in N.H. until noon, Wed. & at that point I’ll head back here—then down to Fla. But I’ll talk to you before then.
Ciao,
HST
TO BERNARD SHIR-CLIFF, POCKET BOOKS:
Convinced that Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas would be a hit, Thompson lobbied Shir-Cliff to buy the paperback rights.
January 30, 1972
Woody Creek, CO
Dear Bernard:
I was shocked & deeply saddened by the general style & tone of your talk the other afternoon. It was bad enough to find out that you didn’t know Rolling Stone from the Journal of Addictions—which explains your failure to notice a new work by Raoul Duke—but even after long thought on the subject I can’t see any graceful way for you to explain that gibberish about having to catch the Next Train to West Egg,5 or whatever, and maybe we could have a drink around lunchtime whenever I came up with something that might pass off as a legitimate lunch/talk expense.
It was a bummer, Bernard… a stone bummer.
But I decided to send you this thing anyway—mainly because you’re the only paperback editor I know in a personal sort of way who can also sign big checks. And also—in what has now become a peripheral consideration—I’m assuming there must be something left of your sense of humor.
I could lay a lot of heavy advertisements and flashy endorsements for this thing on you, but I figure you should just sit down & read the bugger first—because it runs its own interference. In football terms, Bernard, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is what us fans call a Naked Reverse, which means that the offensive blockers all move in a false direction, forcing the defense to roll with them, and then the ball-carrier—usually a flanker—suddenly takes off in the opposite direction with no blockers at all, depending entirely on his own speed & strange moves to turn the corner & go long.
But this is getting a bit heavy, eh? But you want to keep in mind that I’ve spent the last two months in the shadow of the White House, where Jimmy the Greek6 takes his cocktails.
Anyway, read the fucker and then call me for the corporate checkbook before you ring up Silberman. When I first called you the paperback price was $100K—but 4 hrs later, when you failed to call back, it was up to $110K. And by the time you get this letter, Bernard, god only knows what it might be when you finally get around to reading it. My guess is that we could maybe settle for $125K if you can come up with a cashier’s check by this Friday.
But what the fuck, Bernard? Why worry about money? This book is pure fucking gold. There are only two kinds of people who could lose money on it: a fascist waterhead publisher, and a fascist anal-retentive distributor … but in either case they would need the help of an ignorant, humorless, fascist, anal-retentive editor.
None of which is likely. Things are well under control at the moment. I’ve already taken care of all of those problems we had with the Hell’s Angels gig—things like advance publicity, legal squabbles, film sales, preparing the market, lashing the ms. into final galleys, art, the whole nasty trip … it’s all been taken care of, Bernard; we’re home free.
Which explains the price, eh? A flat-out fucking bargain at $150K …
… which reminds me that you once sent me a book called A Clockwork Orange and asked me what I thought about it, and I remember telling you it was one of the best things I’d ever read … which immediately caused you & Ian [Ballantine] to dump the fucker and let poor Burgess piss away his film rights for $10K.7
But to hell with all that. I’ve never been one to get ugly about past blunders, or to hold grudges any longer than absolutely necessary … and it might also be worth mentioning, at this point, that in the long run I have almost never been wrong.
I say “almost” out of modesty, Bernard. But the really terrifying truth is … well … shucks … let’s save it for later.
In the meantime, read Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, then crank out a check for $175K. About the only guarantee I can make you right now is that you’ll take any ties; that’s for old time’s sake.
I never forget my friends, Bernard. And I know you feel exactly the same way. But keep in mind that if I don’t have your check by Lincoln’s birthday you’d better put a fucking wolf-lock on the door to your office, because I’ll be sending my attorney around to find out what your problem is.
Sincerely,
Hunter
TO MARK LEBEAU:
Thompson sent an encouraging reply to a young fan from Minneapolis who had written of his disillusionment with the upcoming presidential election.
February, 1972
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mark …
Thanx for the note & the cheerful upbeat flash that came with it. When you talk about voting, however, keep in mind that it’s no real trick to vote for “the best” of a bad lot. You’ll get a little tired of that after you’ve voted a few times. I’ve tried it, & my feeling now is that the compromise/lesser-of-2-evils game doesn’t seem to be getting us anywhere.
So I’m looking for something in the way of candidates or ideas that might really change the institutionally corrupt nature of politics in this country. So don’t mistake anger for pessimism. I believe the democratic process can work in America—but not as long as the Major Parties keep forcing us to choose between double-negatives.
Anyway, keep an open mind. There’s still a chance that something Right could happen in this election … & who knows? You might even want to vote for it.
OK,
Hunter S. Thompson
TO JANN WENNER, ROLLING STONE:
This is the first of many dispatches Thompson would send Wenner from the ’72 campaign trail.
Late February, 1972
Washington, D.C.
Campaign Trail
Dear Jann—
Jesus, what’s the other one? Every journalist in America knows the “Five W’s.” But I can only remember four. “Who, What, Why, Where” … and, yes … of course … “When!”
But what the hell? An item like that tends to pinch the interest gland …so you figure it’s time to move out: Pack up the $419 Abercrombie & Fitch elephant skin suitcase; send the phones and the scanner and the tape viewers by Separate Float, load everything else into the weightless Magnesium Kitbag … then call for a high-speed cab to the airport; load on and zip off to wherever The Word says it’s happening.
The public expects no less. They want a man who can zap around the nation like a goddamn methedrine bat: Racing from airport to airport, from one crisis to another—sucking up the news and then spewing it out by the “Five W’s” in a package that makes perfect sense.
Why not? With the truth so dull and depressing, the only working alternative is wild bursts of madness and filigree. Or fly off and write nothing at all; get a room on the edge of Chicago and shoot up for about sixteen straight days—then wander back to Washington with a notebook full of finely-honed insights on “The Mood of the Midwest.”
Be warned. The word among wizards is that [Maine senator Edmund] Muskie will have the Democratic nomination locked up when the votes are counted in Wisconsin … and never mind the fact that only 12 percent of the potential voters will go to the polls in that state. (The Arizona pols—using bullhorns, billboards, and fleets of roving Voter Buses—managed to drag out 13 or 14 percent.)
This ugly truth is beginning to dawn on the big-time Demos. They commandeered a whole network the other night for a TV broadside called “The Loyal Opposition”—featuring Larry O’Brien8 and all the top managers di
scussing The Party’s prospects for 1972.
It was a terrible bummer. Even though I am paid to watch this kind of atavistic swill, I could barely keep a fix on it. It was like watching a gaggle of Woolworth stockholders, bitching about all the trouble they were having getting the company to hire an executive-level Jew.
Whatever O’Brien and his people had in mind, it didn’t come across. They looked and talked like a bunch of surly, burned-out Republicans—still wondering why Hubert Humphrey didn’t make it in ’68 with his Politics of Joy.
Jesus, what a shock it was! The Hube always seemed like a Natural. But something went wrong … What was it?
The Democrats don’t seem to know; or if they do they don’t want to talk about it. They had a big fund-raising dinner for “the candidates” the other night at a ballroom in downtown Washington, but the people who went said it sucked. No candidates showed up—except Humphrey, and he couldn’t stay for dinner. Gene McCarthy was introduced, but he didn’t feel like talking. Ted Kennedy stayed for dinner, but nobody mentioned his name … and when the party broke up before midnight, the chairman was still looking for somebody who could say something meaningful. But nobody seemed to be ready—or none of the regulars, at least, and when it comes to party affairs, the regulars are the ones who do the talking.
People who went to the party—at $500 a head—said the crowd got strangely restive toward the end of the evening when it finally became apparent that nobody was going to say anything.
It was very unsettling, they said—like going to a pep rally with no cheerleaders. One report said Ted Kennedy “just sat there, looking very uncomfortable.”