Writing about Sir Laurens
From Mrs Jane Bedford Sir: J.D.F. Jones, the official biographer of Sir Laurens van der Post, claims in his letter (27 October) that he spent 'countless hours' talking to members of the family, and in particular with Jane and Tom Bedford.
I have just returned from the funeral of Sir Laurens's last surviving sibling, Tom's mother Ella. At his sole interview with her, J.D.F. Jones arrived late and left early, and having thus failed to win her trust he elicited little information. He promised to return but did not. Other relatives I met were indignant that claims in the footnotes to have interviewed them were false or exaggerated, and were incensed to find in the book much that they knew to be untrue. J.D.F.'s interviews with Tom and me were minimal, and mostly consisted of him gleefully regaling us with examples of Sir Laurens's deviousness — so much so that we wrote to him several months before publication expressing our concern at his attitude.
At Sir Laurens's 90th birthday party, a few days before his death, J.D.F. Jones was one of the friends invited to speak about Sir Laurens and his literary work, which he did most movingly. Sir Laurens was clearly deeply touched by his words. That memory strikes me as odd now, seeing the few good words about Sir Laurens in this biography sitting among the accusations and negative interpretations like occasional little flowers erupting from a compost heap.
Jane Bedford London w it
From Mr J.D.F. Jones
Sir: I risk wearying your readers, but I must remind Christopher Booker (Books, 20 October) — that faithful fan of Laurens van der Post — that I have in my possession the file of his correspondence with his hero. It would provide much material for the `O.B.N.' column in his early employer, Private Eye, and contains long-running evidence of Booker's interest in writing the biography — OK, not a biography, he now says, 'a personal book about him'.
I stand corrected and shall look forward to reviewing that book in the unlikely event
of its appearance. But I refuse to be corrected about the many hours I spent in interviews with the family, both near and far, while researching my biography Storyteller. As for the charge that I got the facts about Sir Laurens's life 'consistently wrong', it would help if we were given evidence of that consistency.
I'm afraid that Booker continues to be misinformed by his sources. Contrary to his version, a large payment for 'authorising' the biography was indeed made to Sir Laurens's daughter at her own suggestion — it had never been intended by the publisher.
I realise that the results of my research have been distressing both to the family and to friends like Booker, who have been embarrassed to discover that the great man turns out to have been a charming fraud and a ruthless conman. He also wrote some good books. Should I have suppressed what I discovered?
J.D.F. Jones
Ilford, Ilminster, Somerset
From Mr Grant McIntyre Sir: In criticising J.D.F. Jones's 'inaccuracy', Christopher Booker has strayed beyond his own knowledge. It certainly is not John Murray's policy to discuss contracts for books with people not party to them. Mr Booker writes with confidence that 'it belatedly came to light that the publishers always intended that part of the advance should go to the Estate'. In fact, he can know nothing of our intentions, discussions or conclusions concerning that issue. He never asked us what they were, and we would not have told him.
Grant McIntyre Editorial Director, John Murray, London WI
Previous page
