Letters

The Making of Leonard Peltier
"Peter Matthiessen is an honest man and a great investigative reporter," Leonard Peltier stated on June 21. "He wrote In the Spirit of Crazy Horse in an effort to right an injustice. I stand by the book and by Peter with my life."

Leonard Peltier and the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee condemn the gross insults and insinuations in Scott Anderson's article "The Martyrdom of Leonard Peltier" (July) regarding the integrity and expertise of author Peter Matthiessen. Matthiessen's acclaimed book In the Spirit of Crazy Horse has exposed the injustices suffered not only by Peltier, but by the American Indian Movement and all traditional Native Americans. As we move closer to justice and the clemency campaign intensifies, Anderson has assaulted one of our most dedicated and respected friends. The accusations that Anderson directs at Matthiessen are a blatant bid to undermine Peltier's pursuit of freedom through ugly attempts to discredit the publication that opened Peltier's case to the eyes of the world. Matthiessen's book is thoroughly and expertly researched and is filled with well-documented evidence. It has sparked renewed interest in the Peltier case and inspired members of the U.S. House and Senate, as well as government officials worldwide, to view the situation as a flagrant blemish on this country's promise of "justice for all." In the Spirit of Crazy Horse brought Peltier's voice to the public, despite a virtual media blackout and massive lawsuits filed against the book in an organized effort to obscure the truth. Matthiessen wrote this book because he had discovered a grave injustice that he could not ignore. He made a decision to donate half of any income from the book to the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee--a spontaneous act of generosity. We ask why Anderson chose this crucial time to voice dissension and to try to invalidate the work of one of Peltier's most effective supporters. Lakota medicine man Archie Fire Lame Deer has advised that one should always look much harder and harsher upon the messenger of criticism than upon the one being criticized. It is not the professionalism of Peter Matthiessen that should be called into question, but the character and true intentions of his antagonists.

Leonard Peltier Defense Committee
Lawrence, Kansas

I am no bleeding-heart milksop; anyone who murders FBI agents should be strapped to skis and pointed toward hell. Indeed, it is precisely because I'm a gung-ho, truth-and-justice-loving American that I must take issue with Anderson's well-written but misleading article. It implies that Matthiessen knew the mysterious Mr. X was a fraud (but quotes only Dino Butler, another defendant in the murders, on this allegation). It also implies that Matthiessen was among the "supporters" who knowingly foisted the fraud upon the public. Bullshit. I was with Matthiessen shortly after he heard about the existence of Mr. X. He is a writer, not an actor; his surprise and elation that day were genuine. If Mr. X is a fake, then Matthiessen was duped right along with 60 Minutes. That's possible. Matthiessen isn't naive, but neither is he omniscient. This kind of mistake, however, is a far cry from contributing to a conspiracy to perpetuate fraud. Is Matthiessen an unrepentant liberal? You bet. But a liar? No way.

Randy Wayne White
Fort Myers, Florida

Scott Anderson replies: I'd like to assure Randy Wayne White that nowhere did I--or Dino Butler, for that matter--accuse Matthiessen of knowingly assisting in the Mr. X fraud. I have no doubt that Matthiessen was genuinely surprised and elated at Mr. X's sudden emergence. But I would suggest that Matthiessen's passionate advocacy in the Peltier case led him to overlook glaring problems in Mr. X's story--and how remarkably convenient Mr. X was for the movement to free Peltier.

Outside is to be praised for publishing Anderson's thorough, gutsy, and enlightening investigation of Leonard Peltier. Three years ago, after Peltier's first appearance on 60 Minutes, he called me from his cell block in Leavenworth and hired me to collaborate with him on his autobiography. I spent the following four months establishing a nationwide network of researchers, interviewing Peltier and others involved in the case, and preparing the book proposal. What my research concluded was that, beyond the headlines and under strict scrutiny, Peltier is clearly culpable in the two murders, and his story has been twisted to grasp at the hearts, not the heads, of pedestrian supporters. Anderson's methodically documented conclusions--that Peltier has wrapped his hopes of freedom in the dark flag of ominous government conspiracy, that Matthiessen played fast and loose with the facts in writing In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, and that the efforts of most Peltier supporters may actually be working against his clemency--confirm my hard-earned personal knowledge. The day after receiving a $70,000 offer from Random House for the book, Peltier fired me as his author, saying that he would write it himself. He didn't, nor did he pay me. I feel vindicated by Anderson's good work.

Fredric Alan Maxwell
Washington, D.C.

What an exceptionally great story on the mythologizing of Leonard Peltier. It takes courage to question politically correct opinions, especially when the overall thrust of those opinions is well intentioned. Native Americans have been unfairly discriminated against in this country--but Peltier may not have been. Thanks to Anderson for transcending the myth and symbolism to ambitiously seek the truth.

Rick Telander
Chicago, Illinois

Editor's note The October issue of Outside will feature further debate on the Peltier case, including responses from Peter Matthiessen and William M. Kunstler.