CHAPTER TEN
I CAN'T STOP DREAMING ABOUT ROGER FEINMAN, YET HE REBUFFS ME
("Play Misty For Me")
By Lifton's own admission, our personal contacts were
minimal, although I remember receiving during the mid- to late-Seventies
somewhat more than just the three telephone calls from him that he indicates.
Nevertheless, he evidently devoted a great deal of thought to me while he was
working on his book. Who is Roger Feinman? What is he doing? What is he
thinking? Why won't he tell me? In his Compuserve essay, he goes so far as to
construct an imaginary theory that he attributes to me, even purporting to give
it a name: the "method actor" hypothesis. Likening himself to some
worldly-wise mentor challenging a laggard pupil, he also confesses that he used
to wait for me to call him ("I wondered whether the phone would ring one
day, whether it would be Roger Feinman, etc."). Why didn't it ever dawn on
Feinman that the body was altered?
Well, I had read Newcomb and Adams' article in Skeptic
in 1975. Why would I believe such a nutty idea? I'm an intelligent human being.
It seems to me as strange now as it did back in the late
Seventies that Lifton, after years of diddling with his notes and memos and a
failed manuscript, would fasten upon an obscure critic who, as he clearly
implies, wanted nothing more than to avoid him, and whose views Mr. Lifton now
so easily distorts and then dismisses. One of the keys to this mystery may lie
in the subjects I was exploring: the role of Dr. Burkley (which seems to have
eluded Lifton [see Chapter 7]), and the possibility of post-autopsy manipulation
for the purposes of the photos and X-rays.
He incessantly requested, both over the phone and in
person, access to whatever research files and whatever draft manuscript I had on
the case. He insisted on coming to my apartment. I refused to allow it. We met
in a student lounge at the New School for Social Research in Greenwich Village,
and then went to a nearby coffee shop, both well- populated areas where I would
feel safe. It will not escape the attention of alert readers of Mr. Lifton's
Compuserve essays that, virtually all of our contacts were initiated by him, not
by me. What may not be quite so obvious (but nonetheless evident from his
essays) is that, while Mr. Lifton was writing his book—after a dozen years of
researching, interviewing, thinking, and even drafting a first, albeit
unpublishable, version of his manuscript—he seems to have obsessed over what I
was thinking and doing, imagining conversations between us that never did and
never would occur.
Lifton says that, if I had showed him my work, he would
have given me full credit in the text of his book for anything he had not found,
and list it in the bibliography. (Just ask Newcomb and Adams, or Harold
Weisberg.) Lifton admits to his refusal to share his research with me. It seems
he expected others to disclose their analyses to him, but he would not
reciprocate in kind unless they spoke his language. I did not regard that as a
suitable basis for collaboration.
He supposes that everyone envies him, from Sylvia Meagher,
who was widely acknowledged to be the preeminent critic of the Warren Commission
and the arbiter of factual disputes concerning its work, to Roger Feinman, a
practicing attorney and virtually unknown critic, who insisted upon meeting him
in a public place instead of inviting him home, and presumably others.
[Note: I do not recall asking Lifton to mention my name to
anyone at the HSCA, unless it was some casual remark I made in response to
Lifton telling me he was speaking to the staff about the medical evidence. I had
my own contacts with them during the Gonzales-Downing-Sprague days, and later
sent Chief Counsel Blakey some materials relating to John J. McCloy that I
thought ought to be explored. Sylvia Meagher and Jerry Policoff, both friends of
mine who had good relations with members of the committee staff, would have been
more likely choices than David Lifton to ask, but it might have happened as he
says.]
Ahead to Chapter Eleven
Back to Chapter Nine
Back to Roger Feinman