Playboy Japan denial

[jbor at bigpond.com]

So, it seems as if we've got the probable date (Jan 9 2002) that the  
phone call was made -- a call specifically requesting the Melanie  
Jackson Agency to confirm the authenticity of the Playboy Japan article  
-- and the MJA spokesperson's denial was given. Though no-one will own  
up to making the call or even knowing it occurred, or what transpired,  
odds are that it did occur, and that a denial was issued. The source of  
the info about the call and denial (who cannot be named though pretty  
much everyone knows who it is anyway) is of course a reliable one, and  
it surprises me to see his reliability continually questioned as it has  
been.

There's also a high likelihood that those involved and privy to the  
details didn't want or expect the answer that came to their inquiry, so  
they buried it, tried to pretend the call never took place. Which is  
kinda disrespectful, if you think about it. (And which is also why it  
took over two and a half years for any report that the call occurred to  
be made public, and why the person who cannot be named didn't think  
twice before mentioning it back in Nov '04.)

My position still is, even after the information about the denial was  
leaked, and reconfirmed recently, and even as Doug & co's long-time  
cover-up reveals itself (see additional archive excerpts and Wikipedia  
edit below), that the article could have been the record of a private  
conversation with Pynchon that was written up subsequently and  
published without his knowledge or consent, or that it's a fake.

That really should be an end to it.

best
rob j

> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:03:57 -0800 (PST)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@[omitted]>
> Subject: Re: unsubstantiated rumor that Melanie Jackson denied Playboy  
> Japan interview
> To: pynchon-l@[omitted]
>
> As it happens, I'm having lunch with Rich Romeo this
> afternoon in San Francisco, I'll ask him about it.
>
> But it seems to me that it was davemarc who called
> Melanie Jackson's office and was told by somebody - I
> don't believe he claimed it was Ms Jackson herself,
> maybe davemarc will clear this up if he did make the
> call - made some sort of denial.  Hardly
> authoritative, the way I first heard this story.

http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0411&msg=95144

and

> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:17:01 -0700 (PDT)
> From: pynchonoid <pynchonoid@[omitted]>
> Subject: Playboy Japan interview
> To: pynchon-l@[omitted]
>
> nobody could remember exactly who called Melanie
> Jackson's office and exactly what transpired

http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0607&msg=103128

And this "anonymous" edit which appeared on the Wikipedia Thomas  
Pynchon page on July 17 2006:

"An interview with Pynchon in the wake of the September 11 attacks on  
the U.S. appeared in the December 2001 issue of Playboy Japan. Pynchon  
has never denied giving this interview, nor has his agent, lawyer, or  
other spokesperson. Playboy Japan, when questioned at the time of  
publication, defended the authenticity of the interview. A reference to  
the interview is included in the cumulative bibliography in Pynchon  
Notes. Despite an aggressive campaign in the Pynchon-L email discussion  
group to discredit the Playboy Japan interview, no credible evidence  
exists to support the notion that the article is not what it claims to  
be, an interview with Pynchon conducted by a freelance journalist."

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? 
title=Thomas_Pynchon&diff=64213831&oldid=63966293

(P.S. The person who cannot be named mentioned that he much preferred  
the older edit, the one on the left, describing it as "pretty close to  
ideally neutral". He said he would like to see the addition of "a  
spokesperson for the Melanie Jackson Agency" instead of "Melanie  
Jackson", and acknowledged the conflation of the two as being his own.)

On 23/09/2006:
>
>> Speaking of the pynchon-l archives, below is what looks like the  
>> precise moment when Doug found out that the spokesperson for the  
>> Melanie Jackson Agency had denied that Pynchon gave the Playboy Japan  
>> interview. Note the premature gloating in the first excerpt, followed  
>> by the backslide into the absurd argument that "the real proof" will  
>> only come when Pynchon initiates legal action against Playboy Japan  
>> in the second.
>>
>> My "sin", of mentioning the name of the person who fed me the  
>> information (twice!) about the MJA phone call and denial, the sin of  
>> "naming names" as it were, absolutely pales into insignificance  
>> beside the blatant cover-up which Doug and his cronies perpetrated  
>> here for two and a half years or more after the denial was given.
>>
>>>> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 19:20:49 -0800
>>>> To: pynchon-l@[omitted]
>>>> From: Doug Millison <millison@[omitted]>
>>>> Subject: resending re Re: better version of Playboy Japan interview  
>>>> with
>>>>
>>>> [...] I happen to know that several people are inquiring into this  
>>>> matter, and I
>>>> wouldn't be surprised to learn something definitive about it sooner  
>>>> rather
>>>> than later. [...]
>>
>> http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0201&msg=64064
>>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 09:38:03 -0800
>>>>> To: pynchon-l@[omitted]
>>>>> From: Doug Millison <millison@[omitted]>
>>>>> Subject: more re that interview
>>>>>
>>>>> [...] an all-out assault on Pynchon for expressing these opinions
>>>>> (again, assuming it is Pynchon -- the real proof will come if he  
>>>>> takes
>>>>> legal action against Playboy Japan, and I don't think anybody's  
>>>>> heard a
>>>>> whisper about that yet), so you dump on your favorite targets  
>>>>> instead.
>>>>> It's childish and predictable -- and indeed I predicted as much  
>>>>> when John
>>>>> Krafft suggested that I share the interview with Pynchon-L.  [...]
>>
>> http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0201&msg=64091