In the meantime, I took delivery tonight on the evil tool we spoke of on the phone several nights ago. It’s a de-activated, M-3, .45 ACP grease gun, and the barrel that came with the gun is welded stone shut—which, according to my attorney, means I can ship it across state lines at my whim. It’s too bad we don’t have an open M-C barrel & about 300 rounds of .45 ACP ammo, in order to have some fun with the bugger, eh?
But that’s how the world runs, I guess. In any case, I’ll see you up north—for good or ill—around the middle of June.
OK,
HST
TO JANN WENNER, ROLLING STONE:
Thompson’s article “Fear and Loathing in Washington: The Boys in the Bag” ran in the July 4, 1974, issue of Rolling Stone.
June 7, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Dear Jann:
Here is the bill for “The Boys in the Bag”—$4000 for four RS pages at (jesus!) $1000 each, disregarding any and all copy-cuts, for whatever reason, on your end.
Given all the realities—tangible, personal and otherwise—that I considered in arriving at this figure, it seems both fitting & reasonable at this time…. And if Walsh feels that RS can’t afford to have me cover the Nixon Impeachment Saga at these rates, I’d appreciate a memo to that effect from John, along with yours. And we will naturally want all pertinent correspondence in writing, as you’ve noted many times in the past.
As for the future—given our awkwardly obvious failure to arrive at any mutually-advantageous, long-term relationship vis-à-vis my writing, rates & relationship, etc.—I think $1000 a page should be just about right from now on. If we’re heading for a terminal haggle, I think we should at least do it on righteous terms, eh?
Like you always said: If we must argue, why argue about nickels and dimes?
Why indeed?
So here’s the fucking bill—$4000. With a side-winder’s salute to Tom Rush.15
In any case, if I seem to be grinding down a bit hard in this area, I want to assure you that this is precisely what I mean to be doing, for good or ill, and not without giving adequate thought to the whole situation.
Cazart,
Hunter S. Thompson
PS/Note: I talked to [Carl] Wagner today about Elko one and a half, or whatever, and as a result of that talk I decided that I’ll definitely attend that July meeting in Maine. I won’t have anything special to add, personally, but I have a tape I want to play … and I’ll also make all my own travel & lodging arrangements.
Okay for now,
H
TO JANN WENNER, ROLLING STONE:
Thompson again attempted to sort out his financial terms and future projects with Wenner.
July 4, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Jann …
With dawn coming up on what is always a vicious day in this valley, I want to get off a note on the general action.
One, I’m leaving for DC tomorrow—you can reach me at either the Hilton or c/o Dick in MacLean (?sp?) [McLean, Virginia]. Anyway, I’ll be there for a week or so—it might be worthwhile to talk about the possible result … since at the moment I see no focus at all, beyond the result of the 7/8 Sup. Ct. arguments on Monday, which Dick has hopefully got me accredited for.
Inre: Armstrong16 … I’ll get him together with Dick this week, & we’ll see what happens.
Whatever other stories might or might not be brewing in DC are beyond my ken right now. Lacking any idea of who’s doing what, I think I’ll run my own course & check with Dick for anything new, weird or different. According to our earlier talks, for instance, the Ehrlichman trial is being covered by Szulc.17 (I got a xerox of a Kissinger piece from SF—but, like almost all the xeroxes I get from out there, it was virtually unreadable. Beyond that, there was no byline, so I can’t say much about it.)
As for Chris and/or the question of a secretary in Aspen, Sandy has effectively made that decision for me, to wit: Given the reality that she has to deal with anything of any importance (to me) anyway, I figure we may as well put her to work on a serious basis and pay her, accordingly, for her time … which would amount, on balance, to a lot less than anybody I’d have to hire and cope with. As for money, I think $10 an hour is about right, which would rarely run—I assume—to even $200 a month. That strikes me as the best of all possible worlds, given all our ominous possibilities. If nothing else, Sandy is the only conceivable “secretary” I could hire that I’ll feel free to lean on—or even trust on a personal level, for that matter, so I assume that problem is solved.
One that isn’t solved, however, has to do with that missing $500 (already listed as “paid” in yr. overall accounting statement for ’74), and the $200 basic expenses in connexion with the Freud book.18 I feel I have a pretty wide latitude on that one—beyond the $200—but I have no intention of getting seriously into it (beyond the enclosed) until I get something in writing from you.
Enclosed, meanwhile, is the tape I mentioned & also the typed translation of a 15-page outburst I lashed together on a night when I was probably as deep in the throes of cocomania as I’ll ever get. My idea was to get as crazed as possible on the stuff, then try to write something … and these 6 (enc.) pages are the result.
Strange, eh? I was long past the point of being able to talk into the tape recorder when I wrote this stuff—and it’s absolutely unedited, except for the red marks on this carbon copy.
So … we should think on the question of a relatively long & serious cocaine piece … and also on the question of covering Impeachment vs. getting on with “Guts Ball.”
I assume Walsh is taking care of my credentials for the Ali–Foreman fight in Zaire around mid-September.19
Beyond that, I don’t have much to talk about—except to say you better hope that missing $500 gets to me before I find an occasion to do any talking—on the air or for print—about my general relationship with RS. That was a cheap, street-dealer’s kind of rip-off & depressingly reminiscent of Sidney Zion.
OK for now,
Hunter
TO WARREN HINCKLE:
July 4, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Dear Warren …
I just finished reading & clipping your 7/1 piece on “4 Nixon Justices …” The box-score for the Nixon court, as it were… and I thought I’d send a sort of general “thanx note” or whatever for the help you’ve unwittingly given me over the past two or three years, by means of this same kind of backed-off, main-focus story—on The Court, a Campaign, the Press or anything else.
As I’ve said repeatedly, as an essentially polemic and/or adversary-type writer, I figure I have the best leg men in American journalism working for me, whether they want to or not … and your 7/1 piece on The Court is a perfect example of the kind of story I couldn’t possibly do, myself, but which I also can’t do without.
Anyway, I figure I’ve been stealing from people like you and [David] Broder for so long that I should at least acknowledge the debt in writing. On the more tangible side, I’ll probably be hanging around the Impeachment scene this summer, so if you notice me hunkered down in a corner somewhere in the capital, give me a prod and I’ll buy you a drink. Ok for now …
Hunter S. Thompson
TO WILLIAM FARR, LOS ANGELES TIMES:
Fellow journalist William Farr went to jail for refusing to surrender his “reporter’s notes” in a highly publicized court case. Thompson sent him a few words of encouragement.
July 4, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Dear Mr. Farr …
I’m enclosing an obviously token $100 personal check to help buy your lawyers some lunch while they haggle over various strategies to get you out of jail.
I wish there was something heavier I could do to help—but I’m not that rich and I’m not even sure I can pass this on to Rolling Stone as a legitimate “business expense,” although to my mind it’s one of the most legitimate kind of expenses anybody in journalism could put in for.
Anyway, I assume the
Times is paying your tab—for whatever that’s worth, considering what you’ve been through personally—and I figure this check won’t mean much except to let you know that a lot of people understand that you’re doing time for all of us. The next time I see Fred Dutton (who I assume is still a UC [University of California] Regent) I’m going to tell him he’s the gutless asshole I always thought he was unless he can establish a William Farr Chair [in] Journalism at UCLA or maybe Berkeley.
Meanwhile, it’s nice to know that there are at least a few people in this business with stone brass balls …and if there’s anything else I can do to make your gig a bit easier, let me know what it is and I’ll do what I can. (You can always reach me via the Rolling Stone office at 625 Third St. in San Francisco.)
OK for now, and thanks. Sincerely,
Hunter S. Thompson
FROM CARRIE NEFTZGER (TO ROLLING STONE):
Thompson’s Gonzo style apparently displeased a ninety-one-year-old accidental reader of Rolling Stone, whose letter was forwarded to him by the magazine’s subscription manager, David Obey.
September 18, 1974
Carbondale, IL
President Richard Irvine
of Rolling Stone
625 Third St.
San Francisco, CA 94107
I did not subscribe for your Rolling Stone magazine so you can quit sending it to me as it is embarrassing to me to have it deposited in my mailbox. It is a dirty, low-down, barnyard language sheet that is very offensive to me, so quit sending it.
It first came while I was on vacation and to-day the Oct issue came. So you see that I get no more of that trash.
Your writer Hunter S. Thompson, who himself is so ignorant that he doesn’t know that people with adequate vocabularies and something worthwhile to say do not need to resort to such obvious means of gaining attention and that profanity is a “crutch for conversational cripples.” I am a 91 yr. old woman so vulgarity isn’t smart with me.
Mrs. Carrie Neftzger
TO CARRIE NEFTZGER:
September 27, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Dear Carrie:
David Obey at the main Rolling Stone office in San Francisco has forwarded your letter of Sept 18 to me—the one where you canceled your subscription to RS because of my “vulgarity.”
… and I also want to tell you right now that I never answer mail from readers; but I couldn’t resist talking back to a 91-year-old lady full of zip—and despite the prevailing ignorance of your letter, that zip came thru in every line. If I ever get to be 91, I hope I’ll be as mean as you are.
In any case, I’m enclosing the most recent RS, with my compliments—and despite your nasty language about me, I’m sure you’ll read it. You’ve lived long enough to know that words are just tools, for a writer, and when I write about Richard Nixon I’ll use all the tools I can get my hands on, to make people like you think about why Richard Nixon was elected by a landslide in 1972. My primary idea, whenever I sit down to write, is to get the attention of people like you, and make you think—and your letter of cancellation to Obey tells me I was successful in your case.
If you read the enclosed piece (“The Scum Also Rises”) with any kind of wit, you’ll see that what you react to as “vulgarity” is only a prod to make you listen … and if you disagree, well … I’ve done what I can, eh?
You can run, Carrie, but you can’t hide … not even after 91 years; and if you voted for that cheap, thieving little bastard, then you deserve what you got.
If not, I guess you’re on my side—but I doubt if we’ll ever meet. Anyway, I admire your balls in canceling your subscription to Rolling Stone. … But I get a lot of letters from people with balls, and not many from people with brains.
Why don’t you read the enclosed article and write me one from your head next time?
Sincerely,
Hunter S. Thompson
FROM U.S. SENATOR WALTER F. MONDALE:
October 16, 1974
Washington, D.C.
Dear Hunter:
Many thanks for your nice note of October 8 and for your support of my assessment of Ford’s economic proposals. I’ll be glad to put you and Dick Goodwin on my mailing list and look forward to hearing from you again if one of my statements strikes you one way or another.
In the meantime, my Press Secretary Ernie Lotito and I will look forward to having that drink during one of your visits to Washington.
Keep in touch,
Sincerely,
Walter F. Mondale
FROM ANNIE ACOSTA:
Oscar Acosta, the controversial Chicano lawyer Thompson had befriended and corresponded with for years, had mysteriously disappeared in the spring of 1974. What happened to him remains unknown.
October 22, 1974
Dear Hunter—
I am Oscar Zeta Acosta’s sister Annie—
Oscar has not been heard from since April—’74. Yes—it is unusual as wild as he is; I know & love the big baby & should have heard something—anything, which I have not. He said he was on his way here!
Two ugly rumors—he was shot and on a yacht doing a bit of smuggling! Well Hunter—I am desperate and seriously fear for his life. He has been sought after by too many ugly gabachos & I dare them to think it may have ended, if you know what I mean! Oscar always thought the world of you—hopefully it works both ways. Could you possibly think of something that could be done—I have written & phoned just about everyone here in California that he may possibly have had contact with … nothing.
I have read & re-read all of his past years of correspondence, hopefully covering all possible contacts—
Please R.S.V.P. as soon as possible—
Thanks,
Annie
FROM ROSCOE C. BORN, THE NATIONAL OBSERVER (TO HUGH M. HEFNER, PLAYBOY):
Roscoe C. Born, vice editor of The National Observer, for which Thompson once freelanced, wrote in to comment on the writer’s claims in a Playboy article of his “bitter dispute” with the Observer. Playboy wanted to run Born’s letter along with a response from Thompson.
November 6, 1974
Dear Mr. Hefner:
We all love our legends, and far be it from The National Observer to try to rob Hunter S. Thompson of his (The Playboy Interview, November 1974). As a fascinating figure flitting about on the periphery of journalism, Hunter has a certain value as long as he is not taken too seriously.
So we don’t object if Hunter wants to believe and say that he had “just quit and been fired almost at the same time by The National Observer” because we wouldn’t let him cover “the Free Speech thing at Berkeley.” We think most readers would understand that, well, that’s just Hunter talking.
But to have Playboy accept Hunter’s statement as fact, as you did in the introduction to the Hunter Thompson interview, is another matter. Your intro states that Hunter quit the Observer “in a bitter dispute with his editors over coverage of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement.” Now that’s Playboy talking, not Hunter, so we must object.
In fact, Hunter was not fired, nor did he quit. He was never hired. He was a free-lance, never an employee. As a free-lance, by definition, he was free to cover anything he wanted to cover and to sell to anybody who would buy. If he had a “bitter dispute” or any dispute with anybody here about covering the Free Speech Movement, nobody here can remember it—and a dispute with Hunter Thompson, I should think, is likely to be remembered.
The files disclose this reference to the Free Speech Movement in an Oct. 12, 1964, letter from Hunter:
“The U.C. Berkeley story had a lot of meat to it and I can’t help regretting I didn’t work on that. …Your printed version was too much like a wire-service wrapup—a good one, to be sure, but there was a lot more to it than our writer had space for.”
That’s all. It doesn’t sound much like a bitter dispute, or any dispute at all. And nobody here (including the editor who worked directly and patiently with Hunter) can recall any discussion with him about
the Free Speech Movement. In fact, Hunter continued to send us pieces after the Free Speech episode at Berkeley.
Perhaps Hunter’s lifeview is enriched by imagining some such dramatic event with the Observer, but it didn’t happen.
Sincerely,
Roscoe C. Born
Vice Editor
TO LUCIAN TRUSCOTT, THE VILLAGE VOICE:
An incensed Thompson aired his objections to what he considered a whiny article.
November 15, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Lucian …
Here’s the first “letter to the editor” I’ve written since I was 19 years old. Could you see that it gets printed intact, or not at all—and if “not at all,” I’d like to know whose name to put on The List. OK, & thanx….
I just got back from London & Africa, a hideous nightmare that I doubt will ever see print. In any case, I’m heading into the Jerome in a few hours for the Monday nite futebol. Let me know if you get any hot stock market tips….
HST
LETTER TO THE EDITOR, THE VILLAGE VOICE:
November 15, 1974
Woody Creek, CO
Herr Editor …
I sympathize very deeply with Brock Brower’s “Walking Nervous Breakdown,” as described in your issue of Nov 7 … but I also wonder what kind of presumptuous and gratuitous kind of self-serving bullshit led him to include me in the pantheon of sick crazies he name-dropped in the opening graf of his lame confession about how he couldn’t quite make it in this world by living in Princeton, N.J. and sitting on a log in the woods wearing a hand-loomed irish-balladeer sweater and $55 ascot saddle-strollers.