LETTERS: William Shawn-Mary McCarthy correspondence.
Mary McCarthy to William Shawn
1969-1985
McCarthy, Mary. Correspondence with William Shawn, 1969-1985.
14 letters from Mary McCarthy – 1 autograph and 13 typed – to William Shawn, together with his typed responses; also included is a letter from her publisher – regarding her book, Medina – and a letter from her biographer, Carol Gelderman.
Though her letters to Shawn span a sixteen-year period, the bulk of McCarthy’s correspondence dates from 1971-1972, the period in which she reported on the trial of Ernest Medina – the commanding officer in charge of the Charlie Company, who was tried for the brutal murders of Vietnamese women, children, and elderly in the My Lai Massacre.
McCarthy pitched her story to Shawn on February 12, 1971 – three months into the trial of William Calley, Medina’s subordinate, who was charged with premeditated murder of civilians in My Lai. This merits quoting in full:
My idea was to do it as a piece of reporting, rather long, with reflections on the legal and moral issues involved as well as some effort at character study. I don’t share the Leftist view that the real guilt for such a massacre lies with the top brass and that the Calleys and Medinas are just victims and scapegoats, though there is something to be said for the argument, in that these crimes were evidently committed in a permissive climate, and ignorance, real or pretended, on the part of the generals, is no excuse. One can also say that Society is responsible, which has some truth in it too, but you can’t try Society, even if eventually it may have to pay war reparations to the Vietnamese. Other applications of the theory of collective guilt might be discussed in this context, e.g., the Panther claim of a debt owed all blacks by all whites for which the Panthers are acting as a collection agency.
Calley’s trial ended on March 31, 1971, under heavy publicity; he was sentenced to life in prison, but released after his petition for habeas corpus was granted in 1974.
McCarthy’s pitch prompted Shawn to respond with a two-page telegram. He writes that the Calley verdict, “took an unexpectedly powerful and pervasive form. Someone said it caused the greatest outpouring of public opinion in all our history. That may be true.” (April 8, 1971). He goes on to say that he doubts how the Medina trial could possibly compare – he predicts it will be an “anti-climax” – but suggests that he and McCarthy see how events unfurl in the coming weeks before making a decision on the piece; McCarthy maintains her interest (May 12, 1971).
By early September, the Medina trial was under way. McCarthy wrote to Shawn with an update. She reports that it is, in fact, much different from the Calley trial.
Some of the reporters there are convinced, though they don’t write this, that the dullness is purposive, that the government wants the public to lose interest. Hence the apathy of the prosecution, which seems to lack all desire to convict Captain Medina. My own present feeling is that he is guilty of the charges but that the government isn’t proving them, so that if I was on the jury I’d have to vote for his acquittal, even though common sense says that he couldn’t have been in that hamlet three hours and not known what was going on (as he claims).
On February 2, 1972, McCarthy sent her piece to Shawn, along with a letter explaining it; “If what I’m sending you is not at all what we projected and I won’t be hurt if you can’t use it. At some point, scarcely knowing so, I came to a crossroads and decided a short piece was pointless; I had to either give up or enlarge.” Shawn responds by telegram, calling it “a fine piece,” and accepting it for publication; it appeared in the spring. The book publication—by Jovanovich—was published in June.
Inventory:
Autograph note signed, “Mary McCarthy,” to William Shawn; September 14, 1969; ¼ leaf of white paper, recto and verso. Encloses an essay from her forthcoming book.
Print Inquire