The Gates of Janus

by Ian Brady

  What I’m advised should happen now is that a precise response needs to be made to Ashworth’s 8 points along with details of the primary sources and a proposal made re an erratum slip. This is a letter Colin will need to write - hopefully with our help and Ben Birnberg’s. I hope he is willing to take this advice - I can’t see any reason why not but it is something that needs to be handled in a relatively professional manner… Our lawyer believes that once this is done, Ashworth should back off as the points they make are weak and the erratum slip is a relatively generous way of dealing with them. This, of course, is an optimistic view as they may try and play hardball - it just depends how much money they have to burn and how obsessive they want to be about things. That said, as you probably know, lawyers usually give you the worst case scenario so I do think this is pretty positive. The other issues:

  p14 David Smith. Possibly defamatory statement made about D Smith - ‘while not homosexual etc’. This is a v minor point but probably worth finding out where D Smith is etc. Will ask Colin what he knows.

  p133 Graham Young‘s records show that the hospital authorities saw nothing remarkable in the fact etc etc’ probably worth looking at source for this comment - again something for Colin but again not a big concern.

  p267 Special Task Force

  ‘Considering the ineptitude and complete lack…’ Could be interpreted as defamatory but viewed as fair comment.

  p279 Dr Orme

  Some v minor concern here but on re-reading my notes not altogether clear as to what it was save that it’s v unlikely to be a problem - more on this possibly when we get written report. Might be worth finding out if he’s still alive but I don’t think any reason for concern.

  PETER SOTOS CHAPTER

  Somewhat ironically this seemed to be of more concern than practically everything else put together though much of this seemed to stem from the fact that it seems unclear to many as to what it’s actually about.

  With replies (caps are Adam’s)

  Q: p5 Otis Elwood Toole- “another illiterate, homosexual hobo” Again could be defamatory though v unlikely to be an issue unless he’s now a DA. Worth finding out who and where he is - perhaps something you could ascertain?

  AP: Ottis (that’s how you spell it) Toole is dead - And he’s far worse than how Brady put it, in every way.

  Q: p303 seems to be a cause of concern. I think I know the answer to the question but who is “This child pornographer shares a chapter…”? And, less clear to me is who is “This gross monster, this fucking gross pig…and puts them in the pages of Show Me”

  AP: Sotos is talking about himself

  Q: p304 again, who is “This prick yanking lonely degenerate…”? ls it Will McBride?

  AP: SOTOS IS TALKING ABOUT HIMSELF

  Q: Who is Tim Tate? Is he alive? Is it reasonable to describe him as “lazy”?

  AP: TIM TATE IS AMERICAN WRITER, AND IT IS NOT DEFAMATION TO CALL A WRITER LAZY.

  (He is British, actually)

  Q: None of this may be of any concern but your response to these questions would be appreciated. Nicola also raised the question of whether or not Colin Wilson or lan Brady were aware of the Sotos chapter.

  AP: THOUGH COLIN WILSON AND IAN BRADY HAVE NOT SPECIFICALLY SEEN THE SOTOS CHAPTER THEY KNEW FROM SEEING AN EARLIER VERSION OF THE PUBLISHER’S NOTE THAT IT INVOLVED ANOTHER MORE CONTRARY VIEW OF BRADY’S IDEAS. HAVING AN INFORMED OPINION IS NOT DEFAMATION. THERE IS NO CASE HERE, COLIN WILSON SHOWED MY EARLIER PUBLISHER’S NOTE THAT WAS FAR MORE STRONG ABOUT THIS MATTER TO BRADY A COUPLE MONTHS AGO. SO IT SHOULD NOT COME AS A SURPRISE.

  Q: Depressing as it may seem there is a view that as Wilson and Brady have moral rights in their work they should be happy with what’s published and the Sotos material could be viewed as a derogatory treatment of their work.

  AP: IAN BRADY WAS FAR MORE DEROGATORY ABOUT WILSON’S WORK IN THE BOOK THAN SOTOS. DO YOU SERIOUSLY BELIEVE THAT COLIN WILSON WOULD SUE YOU ABOUT SOTOS’ NOT SO HARSH COMMENTS? A STRANGE THOUGHT.

  Q: Nicola asks if there is a contract in existence and suggests that it’s possible that the implied terms could leave you open to legal action from them if they have not seen the Sotos piece and view it as derogatory. This, to me, sounds a little far fetched but I can see that it could make them absolutely livid and Brady, at least, is known to be litigious. Ben Birnberg would, I fear, might be extremely willing to offer support if he felt that his position on the book had somehow been undermined. I don’t know whether this is a nonsense or not but it may need some rational consideration.

  AP: I CAN SEE THEM NOT BEING TOTALLY HAPPY ABOUT PETER SOTOS’ AFTERWORD, BUT THIS IS A PUBLISHING DECISION THAT THEY WERE MADE AWARE ABOUT LONG AGO. THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN IS THAT IAN BRADY DOESN'T WRITE ME ANOTHER LETTER, AND COLIN WILSON SENDS ME A PISSY EMAIL. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHEN AN OPINION WILL BE MADE ON WHAT TO DO.

  Concurrent email from Adam to distributors:

  (Distributor) said in Bookseller magazine that it’s not distributing the book. But (distributor) then says to almost everyone I speak to, including journalists, that it will be distributing the book. Read the letter below from Time magazine. It’s one of many I’m receiving, calls, too, and everybody wants the book pronto. She wants to know who is distributing the book, and I feel like an asshole every time I’m asked. Because I cannot answer anybody about this. How many books get Time magazine and the Sunday Times and the BBC calling and calling again and again for an answer about distribution, and the distributor keeps stalling and stalling until, perhaps, the interest is TOTALLY MINIMIZED. Please give me an answer that you hold to. As soon as possible.

  Concurrent email Adam sent in answer to the BBC about the stall in distribution:

  I’m so glad that you have finally received your copies. (The distributors are) trying to decide whether or not they’re going to distribute the book, which was read with a legal magnifying lens by Nicola Solomon of Finers Stephens Innocent. Ms. Solomon thought that potential legal problems, particularly with Ashworth, are minimal, and can be corrected, if need be, by a small and simple errata sheet, once a couple things are verified with Colin Wilson.

  I hope that you do not find it too unpleasant to have this email sent on to (the distributors) but I’m trying to get some sort of answer from him whether or not (they) will distribute the book.

  If they do not, I intend to fly to the UK and have a couple friends assist me with a small-time distribution. But at least the book will be found in the UK at a number of outlets.

  The book is already available from Feral House’s website, and will be within days from Amazon.com. I don’t know how Amazon.co.uk picks up their books, but it is already listed there, and should be available for sale just as soon as the specifics are worked out with (the distributors).

  The clarifications that the hospital asked for were as follows:

  Ashworth Hospital wish it to be known that computers were taken away from all patients and not just Mr. Brady.

  The girl of eight, referred to as ‘daughter of an Ashworth employee’ was in fact the daughter of an ex-patient who visited the hospital.

  Medical evidence was produced on behalf of the hospital, which showed that Mr. Brady’s wrist was not broken during the move from Jade ward. At the judicial hearing held in the High Court in Liverpool on 10th March 2000 Mr. Justice Kay, in his public summing up, spoke of ‘An undisplaced crack fracture of Brady’s right arm.’

  It was a bucket handle found taped under a sink and not a knife.

  Ashworth Hospital Authority dispute Mr. Brady’s allegations that ‘Guards talked in loud voices outside his door all night preventing him from sleeping.’ They wish to point out that there are no guards on the wards and all staff are either registered mental nurses or nursing assistants. There was no deliberate attempt to prevent Mr. Brady from sleeping.

  Back and forth, a few months before:

  ADAM: I truly do not understand why Ian, an individual with such contempt for human opinion,
and particularly British opinion about his specific case, would find it so undesirable to be characterized as being “hated”. Because “hated” he is. And tremendously so. You wrote me earlier that this was truly the case.

  This sobriquet was from a reading line, and I can use “Britain’s most notorious serial killer” without much trouble, except for putting across the point that Ian’s book describes serial murder itself. And not his own.

  Perhaps I’m less sensitive than you are, but it strikes me that Ian would actually appreciate being characterized as “hated”. Whatever the case may be, I will use the phrase less troublesome for you.

  COLIN: Yes, I’d certainly be grateful if you would change the cover comment to “England’s most notorious serial killer”. The reason is simply that I am pretty sure that Ian really wants to publish his book to hand a copy to his mother, who is in her nineties. And you wouldn’t want to hand your mother a book declaring that you are America’s most hated man, would you?

  ADAM: Please explain where you would like the “blurb” below to be situated. Are you thinking of press releases, or the back cover, or something else?

  Is Ian truly anxious to receive his dying mother’s love? How do you suppose the subject matter - that of serial killers - might affect her? I doubt she'd like it however the reading line on the cover reads.

  Adam Parfrey did not ask Ian Brady’s permission to include my afterword with his book. Brady was asked if the book could be published under his own name when it was explained to him that it was the single most important condition with which the book could see publication. Brady agreed with the understanding that, on its own merits, as a book about serial killing from a serial killer, the book would only invite the speculation of who wrote an otherwise completely mysterious text, thus diminishing the authenticity of his opinions and experience. It’s nice, as in quaint, to imagine him demanding that hard thinking and deep introspection and personal experience would add up to a more academic struggle than anything worth publishing to the crowded market for serial killer literature. He had good reasons to see the work as more than a cut-and-paste job. And he did want the book published. Perhaps he also did it as a favor to Colin Wilson who had worked so hard to focus his thoughts away from his present boredom. Perhaps then he did it as part of his, possibly pleasurable, ongoing and frustrating or comforting arguments with Colin Wilson.

  From the Mirror, 2013:

  Wearing a dark suit, white shirt and tie and his customary dark glasses, Brady told his lawyer, Nathalie Lieven QC, about his life since he was jailed for murder in 1966.

  Speaking in a low, halting Scottish accent, said: “Erm, I studied psychology, er, German. … Aldermaston College, the British Institute.”

  Brady said he set up a Braille unit and also worked as a barber at Wormwood Scrubs in the 1970s.

  Asked about relations with staff and patients at Ashworth Hospital, where he has been held since 1983, Brady said he enjoyed conversations about “everything.”

  “Eclectic, I can’t stand robotic, feeble, whether psychologists or just ordinary people, if I think they are just going through a list of check points.

  “Eclectic, free-wheeling conversation. I don’t choose the subjects.

  “That’s what I enjoy.”97

  Other possibilities include that Wilson couldn’t find another publisher willing to do the book. Wilson is clear in his introduction that he approached Adam specifically due to Adam’s and Feral House’s reputation for, if not bravery or extremely liberal thinking, then, perhaps again, shit-stirring and tackiness. That Wilson didn’t approach Adam at all is contentious to Brady and was to Wilson. Both Adam and I tried to make that clear in the original publication.

  Wilson “interviewed at Tetherdown” from September 2007, well enough after the publication of Gates of Janus:

  When I first got to know Brady—I never met him because they wouldn’t let me go to the hospital—when I first met him through correspondence, I thought, I don’t understand it, he’s so intelligent, that how come? That he wanted to commit crimes and all the rest of it and didn’t seem to see this relation between that and spending his life behind bars. And then, I gradually began to realise that the real trouble was a curious lack of self-discipline; it was a kind of spoiltness, like a child losing his temper when he can’t have what he wants, and you know, kicking the nearest object. And this is Brady very much, he just has that sort of rather nasty streak. I used to have a cousin like that, my cousin John, although the poor chap’s dead now, but erm, he just had that very spoilt streak, and he was very nice to play with when you were a kid because he was quite talented and interesting, and this kind of thing, but always he would suddenly turn nasty, and you’d think “I’ll never talk to that bugger again.” And because he was so charming and had this sort of ability, you always did; but that kind of spoiltness in him was what made him so annoying. And this again and again I find is the basis of the criminal mentality, they’ve got this odd kind of spoiltness.

  And.

  I thought he’s so intelligent, a good thing to do would be get him to write a book. And so finally I persuaded him to write a book, and he did this book which was called The Gates of Janus, and I wrote a long introduction to it and found a publisher for him, an American publisher and then Ashworth Hospital, the hospital where Brady is, heard that he was going to publish a book and wrote to me and said they wanted to see the manuscript, in case he attacked them in it, which they deserved, they’re a lousy lot. So I sent it along and said, yeah, sure, you know, there’s nothing here, he doesn’t mention you. And they said oh yes well, you in your introduction have said… and then they specified these one or two things that they wanted me to take out. And I argued that all of these things were perfectly true, for example one of the things about Ashworth Hospital is that they’d allowed the daughter of one of the guards, who was only about ten years old, to spend quite a lot of time on the wards with these murderous nuts. And they said Ah, that’s not true, but it was true, and various other things were true of the same sort. Anyway, finally, because the publisher was getting a bit worried about all this, whether they sued him, what I did finally was to put in little kind of notes stuck on the back of the title page, saying please disregard so and so, etc. And it was fairly clear from my ironic tone that I was saying that they’re bloody liars. Anyway when Brady finally got his own copy of the book and found this in it, he hit the ceiling. His lawyer said he screamed abuse and obscenities for two hours nonstop [laughs]. And this is typical, I’d done all this to help him, and what’s more, I hadn’t accepted any money at all, the publisher gave him $5000, which I think he gave to his mother or something of the sort. But anyway, this is just a typical example of Brady’s incredible spoiltness.98

  More from Adam’s 2001 BBC interview:

  “I understand and appreciate the determination of some victims to prohibit this book from being sold, but I believe that limiting our ability to understand the thoughts and motives of criminals does not help us in any way whatsoever.

  “It is Feral House’s publishing niche to explore sociological extremes, as with my own book, Apocalypse Culture. And though we publish quite a few books that provoke discomfort, The Gates of Janus qualifies as being one of the most difficult.

  “I have already received a lot of hate mail. How could I publish such a book? How could I promote a child murderer?

  “People misunderstand that publishing a book that sells a couple of thousand copies seriously analysing the behaviour of criminals is not the same as promoting it. The tabloids themselves that sell hundreds of thousands of copies featuring the most negligible stories of Ian Brady are the ones cynically profiting off his crimes.

  “Rarely does a book reflect the essence of its author, but The Gates of Janus does so astonishingly well. You’d have to say that the book was quite well written.

  “The Gates of Janus provides authorities as well as laymen with excellent criminal profiling in ways unexplored in books by fo
rensic experts from the FBI.

  “But I also believe that on some level Ian Brady plays games with the reader.

  “But those games do not go unnoticed by me, in the Publisher’s Note, by Colin Wilson in his introduction, and by Peter Sotos, in his Afterword.

  “So you cannot say that Feral House promotes Brady’s comments without question. We are being quite responsible in this regard.”99

  Adam and I suspected that Brady wouldn’t attach much worth to my afterword, absolutely. It was Adam’s decision to include it as well as to not to tell Ian Brady beforehand as his permission wasn’t ever needed. It was Brady’s decision to include the Keightley introduction. This was a tacky, obvious attempt to sway the look of the book into something it certainly was not. And thus my inclusion was as much an attempt to counter that as it was to publish something that wasn’t playing games with how to only kid the larger possible public. Perhaps Brady and Wilson should have given more thought to what Adam and Feral House do rather than appear to sell. The idea to treat The Gates of Janus as a book of philosophical insight to an audience of suckers may well have been something that Ian didn’t quite grasp or thought was good bitter fun. Maybe he’s gotten used to that too. The bulk of reviews the book received tend to mention Brady’s intelligence almost as often as a transparent desire to seem intelligent. Reviews mentioned here because they are of concern to Brady. There’s a lot of preconceived notions Brady was going to have to vault between anyone buying the book and then anyone actually reading it. The Keightley introduction was a ham-fisted way to handle a clumsy setup that could only make everything after ridiculous. Get it? And both Adam and I figured the book, with help from the reader, was better than that. We took it—all—more seriously perhaps. Keightley’s claims to have been handed something he didn’t know the provenance of would have since proved embarrassing. To Brady. Showing him as a liar—lazy, silly—from the very beginning, an author who would connive, or fail to think through, a gothic marketing scheme. An easy lie to an audience prone to easy suggestions and dovey points. The definition of a hack, actually.