Barbara Branden sent me this letter, which has apparently been submitted to Solo but not posted. I can't see why not, given everything that's been posted before in this thread and elsewhere, including about Barbara and her friend. She sent it to me just for my information but has agreed to let me post it myself, though warning me I might catch some flak (that's okay; nobody knows where I live). I should note that I still believe it was a bad idea to submit/post the Kilbourne article.--David

* * *

Barbara's letter:

Now it’s my turn to be angry. I can scarcely believe the things that some of you are saying about James Kilbourne, despite the compliments and praise you properly rained on him in the past  – such as "one of the most honest men on the planet," – "an inspiration to us all" – "we are blessed indeed to have him among our ranks."  Do you think he suddenly jumped out of his skin and become someone else? Do you have no sense of context, and of whom this man is?

He is being attacked for having made public – by posting it on SOLO – his opinion that Lindsay has an alcohol problem. Yet Lindsay has equally made public -- by posting it on SOLO – that some of our most esteemed Soloists are "quisling appeasers," "vile," "scum," "despicable," "loathsome," "vicious," "cowardly vermin, "cheap tawdry boot-lickers,"

I, of course, am a "Namblaphile" and "an apologist for naked evil" – a charge, among a number of others, that Lindsay made publicly against me for the edification of the Internet. Does anyone care to think what these accusations, if they were believed, would do to the reputation I have spent more than forty years earning?

James accepted Lindsay’s apology for the names he was called, and he has made no accusations; after months of trying to privately help this man whom he respected and loved, he finally decided that the best way to do so might be to make the issue public. If you disagree with him, fine, say so – but do not forget everything you know and have admired about James Kilbourne – just as he has forgotten nothing that he knows about Lindsay Perigo or about those among you whom he considered his friends.

Now I would like to say something abut the publication of James’s article, "Drooling Beast." When James sent it to me – after he had sent it to Andrew Bissell, insisting that it must be shown to Lindsay for his approval or rejection – I was certain that Lindsay would not agree to its publication. But when it was published, I could think of only one reason why: that Lindsay agreed with its general premise that he had a drinking problem and that that problem was one source of his SOLO rages. I have since learned that this was not his reason and that he disagrees with the article, although such being the case I have no idea why he allowed it to be published. But it was this belief that caused me to post a note congratulating him on his courage in allowing the article to appear on SOLO and saying "I think it is the truth, from my limited experience with alcoholism." I have also heard that the article was published in order to avoid a "whispering campaign." I cannot believe that this was relevant, since James had neither whispered nor stated his belief to others.

Barbara