Heading South

I’ll be in Mississippi and environs the week after Memorial Day, with campaign stops in Oxford, Greenwood, Jackson, and New Orleans. I’m also trying to set up an event in Laurel itself, but that’s been tricky. The McGee case, obviously, is still a sore subject there.

Full schedule to follow, but I’ll be starting out in Jackson on Tuesday, June 1st. At noon, I’ll do an event at the Mississippi Department of Archives and History in downtown Jackson. That night, I’ll be at Lemuria Books, a great bookstore on Jackson’s north side. At both places, I’ll be bloviating and presenting a slide show of archival images from the case. At MDAH, I’ll be joined (I hope) by Dr. Luke Lampton, a Mississippi physician who taped interviews with several principals in the McGee case back in the late 1980s, and who was kind enough to share these.

Looking forward to being in Mississippi again!

Art Taylor Blog on McGee

Review and Q & A on Art Taylor’s book blog. Great questions. As you’ll see, we soon get into my thoughts about the weird way this case has been factually mangled over the years. I’ve never seen anything quite like it.

Purple State on Willie McGee

Review of and Q & A about The Eyes of Willie McGee today on Purple State of Mind, a great Web site devoted to finding “common ground” in political and social discussions. Smart questions from Purple State’s John H. Marks. Go here.

James T. Leeson, 1930-2010

My friend Jim Leeson—to whom The Eyes of Willie McGee is dedicated—died earlier this week, in a manner that left hundreds of people who knew and loved him shocked and saddened but not completely surprised. Jim took his own life, and his body was found in the countryside close to where he lived, in a beautiful home he’d designed and built himself on a woodsy ridge south of Nashville, Tennessee. Part of Jim’s famously independent nature was a dread of becoming an invalid, of having to be taken care of and losing control of his own fate. He’d been suffering various health problems for a while, and he had a nagging sense that his memory was eroding, so he obviously decided the time was now. Many people who knew him assumed he might go out this way at some point. We just didn’t think it would be so heartbreakingly soon. You can read a lot more about him at this great page set up by E. Thomas Wood, a Nashville journalist and a former student of Jim’s.

As for my two cents . . . It’s hard to describe Leeson to anybody who didn’t already know him, but he was a man who influenced a huge number of lives through a unique combination of personality, humor, contrariness, talent, caring, and generosity. I met him in 1978 at Vanderbilt University, where he served throughout the seventies and into the eighties as the advisor for student publications. His role was pretty loosely defined: He came in twice a week in one of his wrinkled suits, smelling like hay or manure (back then, he lived on a bigger piece of property where he kept cattle and horses) as he held court in a small office that was always full of magazines, newspapers, and students.

Leeson didn’t have formal control over what we wrote or published, though he would offer advice any time you asked for it. People often remember him for preaching the value of pure objectivity in journalism and nonfiction. What I remember is his emphasis on the value of letting us screw up, making our own mistakes and dealing with the consequences. I made plenty of them, so I should know. At various points during my student-journalism career, I OD’d on the attention you could get by using the blunt tool of being bratty and offensive. Outwardly, I would laugh off the criticism I received. Inwardly, I was bothered by it. Jim, true to form, saw through my posturing and quietly helped me come to terms with the fact that I had some growing up to do.

Since I stayed close to Jim over the years—we even went on a couple of restaurant-binge vacations together, including one to New Orleans just before I started working on the Willie McGee project—people would sometimes ask if I regarded him as a father figure.

No, not really. I had a father who worked just fine as a father figure, and it was he who changed my life by suggesting out of the blue one day that I transfer to Vanderbilt from the state college I was attending in Kansas. My dad, Dr. Kenneth M. Heard, grew up in Oxford, Mississippi, and went to Ole Miss, so like many Southerners he knew that Vanderbilt had a reputation for housing a top-notch English department. Since English seemed to be what I was interested in—however vaguely—he broached the subject one day, during a typically not-wordy conversation between us that went something like this.

“I think you should apply to Vanderbilt. You seem like you want to be a writer, and they have a real literary tradition there.”

“Okay.” Pause. “Where is it?”

My dad was losing a battle with lung cancer at that time, so it was no small thing that I went off to a school so far away. (I now think it was generous of him, selfish of me.) When he died in 1979, I was, as it happened, at Leeson’s farm, taking part in a springtime picnic and softball game that he hosted for students every year. My family had been trying to find me all day—no cell phones, of course—and they finally called Leeson’s place and got him on the line.

Once he knew the basics, he came out and pulled me off the softball field, took me inside, and gave me the news with a mix of understanding and compassion that I’ll always remember. No, he wasn’t my father—he was a friend and mentor who just happened to be 27 years older than me. But on that day—and on a lot of days—he treated me like a son.

The Gaffe and the Fury

As I write about at length in The Eyes of Willie McGee, William Faulkner signed off on a public statement about McGee in 1951, in which he said he thought McGee was innocent of the rape charge leveled against him and should be freed. That caused a few problems—the D.A. in the case, Paul Swartzfager, called the comments “so untrue as to make the blood of any red-blooded American boil”—so Faulkner retreated a bit and said no more.

There were other times when Faulkner opined about race, politics, or current events—and soon wished he hadn’t. The most famous happened in 1956, when he gave an interview to a newsmagazine called The Reporter. Asked about then-current attempts to integrate the University of Alabama, Faulkner said the federal government needed to keep a foot off the pedal on this issue or somebody would wind up getting killed. He wanted integration to happen, but at a slower pace set by the South. Moving too fast would lead to violence, he said, adding, “[I]f it came to fighting I’d fight for Mississippi against the United States, even it meant going into the street and shooting Negroes.” As if that weren’t enough to get the shouting started, he continued like so: “I will go on saying that the Southerners are wrong and that their position is untenable, but if I have to make the same choice that Robert E. Lee made then I’ll make it.”

The uproar over that—which Faulkner tried to dodge by insisting he’d been “grossly misquoted”—drowned out other aspects of this interview that were quite fascinating. Faulkner offered a tart analysis of Mississippi’s education crisis (he said all the schools were lousy), opined that the average black workingman was fundamentally smarter than his white counterpart, said racism was a management-labor tool (designed by upper-class whites to keep lower-class whites panting and huffing about something other than their own economic exploitation), and predicted that white and black would merge into a single mocha-colored race within 300 years.

As for his allegation that he’d been misquoted . . . probably not. The interviewer—a New York-based correspondent for the London Sunday Times named Russell Warren Howe—responded in print and sounded convincing. “All the statements attributed to Mr. Faulkner were transcribed by me from verbatim shorthand notes of the interview,” he wrote in The Reporter. “If the more Dixiecratic remarks misconstrue his thoughts, I, as an admirer or Mr. Faulkner’s, am glad to know it. But what I set down is what he said.”

For more on this turbulent period in the life of Mr. Bill, check out this excellent paper by Louis Daniel Brodsky, which makes use of 43 unpublished letters addressed to Faulkner during these months, some of them touching on the Howe interview. Not shockingly, Brodsky believes that the root cause of Faulkner’s foot-in-mouth problem with Howe was simple: He was drunk.

Harrying Harry

Like any president, Harry Truman took a few licks from voters during his years in office, often on the subject of civil rights, where he caught it from every direction. Many white southerners hated him because—as I explore in-depth in my account of the Willie McGee story—he actually did something about the fundamental rights due to African-Americans, getting behind a push for legislation on then-controversial measures such as a federal anti-lynching law and abolition of the poll tax. (These failed, but he tried, and of course he did successfully desegregate the armed forces.) Communists weren’t especially thrilled with him, either, arguing that the federal government singled them out for abuse during the early years of the Cold War.

One of my most pleasant days of research while working on The Eyes of Willie McGee took place at the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri, where they make it very easy to find what you’re looking for in the vast record related to Truman’s presidency. Among the artifacts I came across was a letter sent by an African-American woman from Kansas City on April 13, 1945, the day after FDR’s death put Truman in the Oval Office. Written by Mrs. Lora J. Haynes and addressed to FDR aid Stephen Early, it was basically a demand for intervention, because Haynes was convinced Truman was a hopeless racist.

“I am so hurt, I can hardly set hear a rite,” she said, “but I am speaking for 13 million negros . . . The thing I am riteing you for, is will you try to make clear to Mr. Truman what the negroes want and that is first class citizen ship. We know Mr. Roosevelt would have give us that.” As Haynes went on to indicate, she put more hope in FDR’s former Vice President, Henry Wallace, who would run against Truman from the left in the historic election of 1948. That same year, he faced a revolt on the right (from the Dixiecrats) and a formidable Republican opponent in Thomas Dewey. It’s a miracle he won.

When the McGee case reached its climax in the the early months of 1951, Truman heard a lot about it, from people all over the U.S. and the world who demanded that he step in and pardon McGee. He had no intention of doing so—the support McGee got from the Communist Party was, by itself, enough to make that a certainty. In this letter, he gets scorched by woman in Richmond, California, who had supported him in 1948.

Truman Letter

Didn’t Seem Worth Keeping . . .

On his blog at the Jackson Clarion-Ledger Web site, reporter Jerry Mitchell writes about the F.B.I.’s destruction of files in the 1954 murder of an Arkansas man named Isadore Banks, an African-American who was burned to death by men who were never identified, captured, or punished.

The FBI files on this case were destroyed in 1992, under the retention guidelines set for the FBI in conjunction with the National Archives and Records Administration. I delved into the mechanics of that odd system in this 2008 article. I’ve never seen a better example than this case of how nonsensical the retention rules can be. How could anybody have examined the Banks file and decided it wasn’t worth preserving? Read more about Banks in this story from CNN.

Why a “Traveling” Electric Chair?

Between 1940 and 1955, Mississippi executions were carried out in a portable electric chair that usually was set up in the same courtroom where a condemned man had been convicted. During my research for The Eyes of Willie McGee, I read once or twice that Mississippi did it this way because the state’s cruel and unusual politicians thought public executions at the local level were the next best thing to a lynching.

That’s not accurate, and it’s not logical, either, since the dreaded device was used on both black and white defendants, though disproportionately on blacks. During the lifespan of the state’s mobile chair, approximately 43 black males and 16 white males went out this way. (These figures are a guess because, as I explained in an earlier post, Mississippi’s death penalty records are incomplete.) Continue reading

More on Richard Barrett

This just in: murder suspect claims he didn’t know about Barrett’s racist views.

The tawdriest of the theories about the murder of white supremacist Richard Barrett is trending upward this morning. Details here.

Couple of early reviews …

. . . in Mother Jones (see Blurbs & Reviews page for a PDF) and on a blogger site called Booklust.

These both happen to be favorable, but I promise to keep you similarly informed when I get drop-kicked. No false URLs or whining. Note to other book bloggers: If you don’t have the book, and you’re interested, let me know.