Letters

Likewise “Bea Golden,” unless old Andrews’s or young Mack’s curiosity gets out of hand. She is, I cannot say safe, but safely disposed of. Her disposer, however — the squire of “Comalot”—remains a troubling enigma. I had supposed Jerome Bray no more than a crank, perhaps even a madman; now I am persuaded that while he may be mad, he is not merely so. I even begin to wonder whether his connection with the Burlingames may not go deeper than I’d supposed; whether that bizarre “machine” and Bray’s strange behavior may not be exotic camouflage. I suspect he may have abilities, capacities, as extraordinary as yours and mine. In the “Washington” action, for example, I seriously put the man’s person at risk. I even imagined, not without relief, that our friends from Patuxent Naval Air Station had obligingly, if unwittingly, “wasted” him in their routine gunnery practice over the lower marshes on that Sunday night. Then Bray appeared, unaccountably and unscathed, in my locked office in the cottage next noon, as I was in mid-metamorphosis between Castine and Cook! Disconcerting!

He exercises, moreover, a Svengali-like authority (but I think by pharmacological, not psychological, means) upon a young woman of our company, formerly his associate, who had fled to us in fear of her life last spring. We found her unconscious near the Prohibited Area that Sunday night with an obvious injection bruise on her buttock; upon her reviving, she was convinced that she was doomed. I later dispatched her to “Comalot” ostensibly for a week’s trial reconciliation with her nemesis, actually to survey the scene there and report to me. I anticipated hysterical objections, but she went like one whose will was not her own. (I should add that her lover, Reg Prinz, had abandoned her that same night; the girl was both desperate and drugged.) A week later she dutifully returned to Barataria and dutifully reported that Bea Golden is comatose, concealed, and “seeded” (?); that Todd Andrews himself had appeared at Comalot, made inquiries, had been sent packing; that she repented her mistaken defection of April and wished to return to Bray’s service. It was clear to me that she had already quite done so. I dismissed her; she is with him now. The question is, is he with us? And what is he?

It will not surprise me to see him again at Fort McHenry: Bray seems to understand that what began as Prinz’s movie — a film in its own right and for its own sake, however obscure its content and aesthetics — has become the vehicle for something else entirely, a vehicle whose original driver is now barely a passenger. Bray declares that his own “published literary works” (I have not seen them) are comparable — coded messages and instructions disguised as works of fiction — and that the “revolutionary new medium” which he and his computer have concocted will be in fact a “new medium of revolution.” I have in process a last long shot to rid us of him by his own agency before he decides to rid himself of us. Whether his madness is feigned or real, Bray has, like Hamlet, an exploitable weakness, which I believe I understand (he is a half relative of ours) and can play upon.

Now, the movie. Its two remaining “scenes”—the Attack on Fort McHenry and the Destruction of Barataria — should provide opportunity for me (Us? I pray so) to deal with at least some of these threats and nuisances, some final rehearsal in the diversion of media and “available action” to our purposes, and (as when the U.S. Navy destroyed Jean Lafitte’s base on Grande-Terre Island on September 16, 1814) a covering of our tracks in readiness for the fall/spring season. When, blending less obtrusively with our surroundings, we will ring down the curtain on Act One (the 1960’s, the First 7-Year Plan) and raise it on Act Two.

I had thought, Henry, to commence that act, and the new decade, and the Second 7-Year Plan, by marrying Jane Mack in January 1970. Last March I set that as my “target date” for enlisting you to me by putting in your way the record of our forebear’s proud and pathetic attempt to transcend the fateful Pattern of our history — that endless canceling of Cooks by Burlingames, Burlingames by Cooks, which he was the first of our line to recognize — by rebelling against himself before his children could rebel against him. Those four “prenatal” letters (which I myself discovered just two years ago in the archives of the Erie County Historical Museum in Buffalo, and which the historian Germaine Pitt was to have annotated and published) were meant to say to you what I yearned and feared to say myself. I would then have reintroduced myself to you in my proper person, who would in turn have introduced you to your prospective stepmother. Moreover, I would have introduced you, for the first time in your conscious life, to your biological mother, whom History and Necessity (read “Baron André Castine”) have dealt with sorely indeed in this particular.