Section 1:
Q: We'll go from some
of the information that you've sent me
already, Jim. From what I saw on your
biographical sketch, it took a while for you
to actually begin your career in journalism.
In fact, your education, where you entered -
I guess you were nearly thirty before you
decided to begin. How did you decide on
journalism and what had you been doing
before? Had you been writing before?
A: I actually started a long time before
in journalism. When I was in high school, I
edited a publication, a family publication
called "The Back Porch," which was just about
stuff around the farm. I really had
ambitions to write the Great American Novel.
That's what I started out to do when I went
to the University of Iowa. I hoped to write
the Great American Novel and I was in Paul
Engle's Writers' Workshop before the war.
But during the war, and partly with the
encouragement of a counselor, a registration
counselor at the University of Iowa, he kind
of encouraged me to steer away from not the
Great American Novel, but I thought I wanted
to go into magazine journalism and he talked
about how competitive it was and how you
really had to have a lot on the ball. I
think that was a mistake to be not
encouraging me to follow my dream, but I did
take him at his word and then signed up for
journalism. This was after the war [World
War II]. I had had quite a bit of time to
think during the war, so that's how I
started. After I graduated in journalism, I
got my first job in journalism, so I've been
with it all my life.
Q: That was the Rock Island Argus?
A: That's right.
Q: For a couple of years. And then you
went to the Register, as a copy editor. How
did that change come about, from the Argus to
the Register?
A: I think that Frank Eyerly was looking
for someone to help in the farm department.
Larry Hutchinson was my immediate superior
and he apparently needed more help. So they
searched around for someone with farm
experience. So they called Les Molar at the
University of Iowa and Les knew that I had
taken a farm job at the Rock Island Argus.
So he gave them my name and they invited me.
J.S. Russell, who was head of the farm
department, invited me over and we had an
interview and it went very well. Mary Lou
was tickled pink because it was her home
town. It was a step up, too, from the Argus
to the Register, I think. So, I just
happened to luck out there, I think. I was a
copy editor when I first started out. I
really wanted to be a writer more than a copy
editor. And I thought that there wasn't much
satisfaction in being an editor. But I found
out later, when I actually became an editor,
an editor of a department, that it's very
satisfying, very, very creative, and I was
glad that I became an editor. I don't think
I really had that gift of writing that I
thought I had. I was adequate, I think, but
not really talented in writing.
Q: But you had done stories. I mean, you
were a reporter?
A: Oh, yes, I did. And I think I did a
good job. But when you see so many other
talented writers around, some of them have it
and some of them don't. I think my role as
editor was more helpful than my role as a
writer.
Q: I'd like to ask you more about that
later, because that was one of my questions.
But I wanted to back up a little here. You
were writing farm stories for the Rock Island
Argus. What was it that got you in that
direction?
A: I think the reason I took that job at
the Argus was because I was a farm boy, to
begin with, and I thought my farm background
would work well with that job. And I was a
little bit afraid of going into full time,
daily journalism, general journalism. I
don't know whether this was lack of
confidence or what. But I thought I would
have more competence in the farm field. I
didn't know as much about the farm stuff as I
thought I did, though, but I knew enough to
get by.
Q: What were the kinds of stories that you
covered back then, with the Argus, as a farm
reporter?
A: Mostly things like farm family of the
week, which was a pretty simple formula. You
find someone who had some success in the farm
field and then you go out and interview them
and they'd tell you what their projects were
and you'd write about them. It was an easy
thing.
Q: Then how did that change when you went
to the Register?
A: When I went to the Register, I didn't
write anything at all. I was strictly a copy
editor. And I did that for about - oh, I
don't know, ten years, I suppose, seven,
eight, ten years.
[phone rings in background]
Q: Because there was a time when you
recalled -
A: Oh, that's right. I spent a year in
the Navy, recalled.
Q: Then you came back, as not a copy
editor. You were an assistant news editor.
A: Yes. Sometimes they give you those
titles that don't mean a lot. Instead of a
raise, they give you a title. I don't know
whether that was the case then or not, but I
became Larry Hutchinson's right hand man.
And I was pretty good at that. Larry had a
hard time deciding things, it seemed to me.
And he'd debate whether to use this cover or
that cover or this way or that way, or crop
it this way or crop it that way. And I used
to just shove them over, one way or the
other.
Q: What was your title?
A: I believe his title was Farm News
Editor. He later got a title of Assistant to
the Managing Editor. I followed Larry all
the way through at the Register. He
appreciated me and I was on the Register as
editor and he preceded me as editor of what
we then called the Women's Section. So, he
taught me an awful lot, he really did. He
was kind of a tough task-master. But I
needed that, I think. --
Section 2:
Q: What were some of the lessons you
learned from Larry, that you thought were
valuable?
A: He taught me a lot about make-up. He
had a real flair for make-up. Making a
presentation, he would pull you into the
story, not just from the words, but also from
the appearance of the page. He loved white
space. That, at that time, was kind of new.
It's become pretty standard now. He loved to
give a good picture a big play and smaller,
lesser pictures around it. That's kind of an
art. Some artists do have it. Lyle Boone is
one. He's now still there, he's still at the
Register.
Q: What's his name again?
A: Lyle Boone. He's, I believe, art
director now. He had a lot of talent that
way. That was one thing Larry told me.
Also, accuracy. He really stressed accuracy,
not only in grammar but spelling. I think
they're a little slipshod about some of that,
actually, now.
Q: What do you think is the reason for
that?
A: I think it's the lack of coordination
between editors and writers. When I was an
editor, I always had access to the writer and
I could question the writer and check with
them and talk with them. But when the
computers came in, you lost that. You didn't
have that conference. You would always confer
with the writers before, but when I went back
to work part-time after my retirement, and I
was a copy editor, I couldn't - you could
write them a letter or email them or
something like that, but that isn't the same
as exchanging ideas about something or
questioning them about something. I remember
after we went to computers, I edited a story
of Walter Shotwell's. It was about Pearl
Harbor Days and he was trying to write
around. He wanted to use that "day of
infamy" quote from Franklin D. Roosevelt and
he wanted to use that quote up high in the
lead. And I didn't understand what he was
doing, but I made the mistake, since I didn't
have a chance to confer with him, I changed
it slightly. And I made the "day of infamy"
speech a day earlier or a day later - I
forget. A day earlier, it must have been,
because he made it before Congress, not on
Pearl Harbor Day. You see what I'm saying?
Q: No. You're talking about Shotwell's
article? He was quoting Roosevelt's speech?
A: I think what I did, inadvertently, was
I put it on the day of Pearl Harbor. And it
didn't actually occur until the day after
Pearl Harbor. And boy, Shotty was really
steamed over that and I don't blame him. It
was quite a while before we got back on a
friendly basis. I just used that to
illustrate what has changed. Since we're
working with computers now, you've lost that
personal contact between the editor or copy
editor and the writer. They say, well, you
can still call them up. Well, yeah, I tried
to. Walt contacted Shotty, but he wasn't in,
so I just went ahead and did what I thought
was right and it happened to be wrong.
Q: You mean a lack of communication
between the copy editor and the writer allows
for these types of mistakes to happen?
A: That's right. That's one of the things
that happens, yes. Also, another thing is -
and I don't know whether this is true or not,
but I believe that reporters or writers do
their own copy editing. They see what they
want to see. They see what they think
they're seeing and they don't catch those
errors. I think that's bad. That's the only
reason I can think of for some of the blatant
errors appearing in the paper. I think they
do, now a much greater extent than they did
back - I don't like to say this, but back in
my time. Boy, if an error got through then,
you heard about it. And you should, you
should. I don't think that there is that
much accountability anymore. There doesn't
seem to be.
Q: Were there more copy editors back in
your day?
A: Oh, yes, much more. The copy went
through several hands before it went onto
paper. I don't think that happens anymore.
Well, they don't have proofreaders. We used
to have a room full of proofreaders. I think
they focused mainly on spellings and not so
much on grammar, but I don't think they do
that now. I don't know.
Q: What were those consequences when there
was something that slipped through?
A: Oh, not terrible, but they'd call you
on the carpet, chew you out a little bit.
Say, "You let this thing get through."
Nobody ever got fired over them, I don't
think. --
Section 3:
Q: I've heard Eyerly was a stickler for
accuracy.
A: He was. And he had a bark, too.
[laughter]. He chewed me out one time and
I've never forgotten it.
Q: What were the circumstances? Do you
remember?
A: It was about the time of Silent
Spring1.
Q: The book by Rachel Carson.
A: Rachel Carson's Silent Spring. I'm
sorry but during my time in the farm
department, I contributed an awful lot to the
very thing she was writing about, pesticide.
We encouraged flagrant use of insecticide and
pesticides and chemicals and all that. I
really contributed a lot to it. I'm sorry
about it, but I did. Anyway, Gwen Cunningham
wrote a funny little story, I thought it was
funny, about a robin eating a worm that had
eaten pesticides or something. I really
don't remember the story too well, but
Eyerly's wife, Denette Eyerly, she was a
great person for Rachel Carson's theme, for
protecting wildlife and that sort of thing.
I don't know whether she put a bug in
Eyerly's ear when the robin story first
appeared or not, but he came out of his
office and he lit all over me. He really
did! He said, "We're just not going to have
that kind of thing happen any more!"
[laughter]. I'm sorry I can't give you a
better description of the story because it
would make more sense if you knew what it
was, but it was anti-Rachel Carson. That's
really what it was, anti-Silent Spring.
Q: So the ecology movement - her movement
was mentioned specifically in your story?
A: No, no it wasn't. But it was in the
background. --
Section 4:
Q: Back to the nuts and bolts here, when
you were hired, how much were you paid?
A: Oh, gosh, I don't remember. I just
don't remember.
Q: Was there any attempt, at the time - I
mean, those early days, to unionize?
A: Not that early time, but I don't know
what time. There were two attempts to
unionize the newsroom. The first time, it
was rejected by the newsroom people, flatly.
Most of the people - I wish I knew the dates
on this, but the second time, it was very
evenly split. It split the newsroom right
down the middle. It made a difference in
friendships. You were either on one side or
the other. I was more in a management
position then and I was really, personally,
not in favor of unionizing. I didn't see how
it could work in a newsroom. I thought it
would be too controlling or too oppressive to
have to check in and check out with time and
all that stuff. One thing about the
Register, they gave you just freedom to come
and go and take as long as you wanted on a
story and I didn't see how that could work
with a union. So it was narrowly defeated
that time, just like one or two votes or
something like that. But I think the paper
has tried to stay pretty competitive in terms
of pay and extra perks of any kind. In my
first ten years there, I don't believe
anybody ever left the paper. I remember when
a - I don't remember his name now, but he was
a picture editor and he decided he was going
to go to greener pastures. And I thought,
"Wow!" People couldn't believe it, that
somebody would leave. The word was then that
if you left, you wouldn't be invited back. I
mean, that was it. Now that did change later
and some people who did leave did come back.
I still don't think a union shop fits in
quite with a newsroom.
Q: The fact that it would be more
structured?
A: It would be too structured, much too
structured, I would think.
Q: Regarding the second time the attempt
was made to try and unionize, what were the
grievances of the people that did want the
union?
A: I suppose they wanted more money,
although I don't recall that as being a
definite issue. It wasn't talked about in
those terms. I mean, "we want so many more
dollars an hour" or anything like that.
Nobody knew what anybody made anyway. I
didn't know what anybody else made. I never,
in all my time there, had to ask for a raise.
I never did. Not once. I may have felt
like I had to or ought to but I never had to
ask for one.
Q: But you received periodic raises?
A: Oh, yes. In fact, at one point, I
received it so rapidly I thought it was kind
of embarrassing. I think they were trying to
even up maybe, department heads, so that they
would all get about the same pay.
Q: At what time was that? What were you
the editor of that time?
A: I was the All in the Family editor.
Q: And how frequent were those?
A: Oh, like three months.
Q: Every three months?
A: Yes. I couldn't make sense out of it,
but I didn't fight it.
Q: I don't mean to pry, but how much were
the raises?
A: They were always - well, not always. I
was going to say they were always kind of
small, like five or ten dollars a week or
something like that, but I remember getting
some hefty ones in there, too. I think what
was behind that was not that I was so
talented, but that they were trying
to...somebody was trying to equalize things
or make sure I didn't go someplace else or
something. I don't think they were afraid of
me going someplace else so much. I think
they wanted to stave off another attempt at
union organization. That's my guess.
Q: So the raises came after the time when
the union attempts were?
A: Yes. --
Section 5:
Q: Talk about some of those more memorable
stories that you worked on, because you gave
me a list here, and I thought it was...the
fact that you kind of spear-headed the effort
to get - what was it? The safety issue. The
lights ----
A: I still think that it ought to be a
law. You go out on these country roads and
in the fall, especially, when it gets dusk
and farmers are working late. You can't see
those tractors very well, so shortly before
Christmas, I got the idea of writing an open
letter to farm wives. For very little money
- I think it was about fifty dollars or less
- they could have those flashing lights
installed on their tractors. And you could
see those flashing lights for half a mile or
more away. So I wrote an open letter to farm
wives urging them to get their husbands
flashing lights for their tractors as a
Christmas present. And it stirred up a
little excitement. I don't think that it was
as successful as I wanted it to be. One of
the things working against it was that the
Future Farmers of America had promoted red
triangle signs to warn people of slow-moving
vehicles. This was a good safety project for
the FFA boys and they were very successful at
it. They got those triangles on practically
every slow-moving farm vehicle. But it
really wasn't enough. The flashing lights
were so superior and I still think that they
should be required on the highways. There
have been a lot of horrible accidents on
roadways. Well, I milked it for all it was
worth and that wasn't quite enough, so we
dropped it.
Q: That would have been a position of
advocacy. As the assistant editor, you were
pushing what maybe even determined the
editorial.
A: Yes, that's right. That's why I made
it an open letter. It gave me a little more
license to do that. But I talked to safety
people and backed it up and got stories that
would back that up. I just wish I had been
more successful.
Q: Have you ever considered writing
editorials, being on the editorial page?
A: Yes, I considered it. But I didn't
ever follow it up. I didn't ever really have
the opportunity to do so. In the Farm and
Home Register, that was a tabloid and we did
have an editorial page at the back of the
book. I did write some, I suppose. I must
have written something. I really don't
recall now if I did. I don't recall any
editorials that I wrote, but we also had, on
page two, kind of an introduction to the
book, an informal thing that was called the
Editor's Toys or something like that. It
gave you an opportunity to write some opinion
pieces or something that would pass for
opinion pieces. We did have opportunities to
do that, but not any serious editorial
writing. No, I don't think so.
Q: When you said introduction to the book,
you meant the -
A: The tabloid. I think it was about a
40-page book, tabloid. It was 40-50 pages
maybe.
Q: A book meaning a newsprint magazine?
A: Yes, in tabloid format.
Q: Okay, so that's what is called a book?
A: That's what we did then. I don't know
if most people do or not. --
Section 6:
Q: Also, talk about that story that you
wrote concerning the disease and the swine
herds and how, in fact, that ended up on the
front page.
A: You're talking about the one that - I
think it happened to be a slow news day.
Q: Because you talked to the state
veterinarian?
A: I went over to the state veterinarian.
I forget what the disease was - brucellosis
or something like that - and I got as much
information as I could. It apparently was a
pretty widespread disease. So, I ran into
George Mills at the statehouse and he asked
me what I was doing over there. I normally
spent most of my time back at the shop. So I
told him. Then I went back to the office to
write the story. The farm page was located
back on page 20 or something like that. And
that's what I was writing for. I was writing
for the farm page. On the farm page, there
wasn't much. That was your job was to get
stories into the farm page, so you get to
write the story and put it in there and that
was the end of it. But while I was writing
it, the news editor came up. I don't know
who was news editor at that time. Herb
Kelly, maybe. But they started poking around
and asked me what I was writing about. I
showed them my lead. Heretofore, they had
never shown much interest in farm stories.
If you wanted a story on page one, you had to
work for it. You had to sell them on the
idea of getting a story on page one. So, I
finished up the story and they asked to see
it before I sent to the composing room. So,
the next morning, I woke up and found my
story as a banner story on page one. It was
the first time I had ever one. I really
think George Mills was the one that tipped
off the news editor about it.
Q: In terms of the people in the news
room, what was the importance of having a
story on page one? Just the byline?
A: Well, yea. The byline on page one and
having it on page one, too. I suppose it's
commonplace for some reporters to have a
story on page one. It was not for me. It
was a real thrill for me to get that story on
page one. Recognition is not - I mean, you
had the best story in the paper that day, so
it was the kind of thing that you put on your
refrigerator today. --
Section 7:
Q: Talk about the workplace in general,
too, with regard to, I don't know -
minorities and women in the newsroom. If
there were - obviously there were women. Not
many minorities, at the time you were there.
A: I was very sympathetic with the idea of
giving minorities a start. I remember
telling Ed Hines, who was managing editor, I
guess, then, that if he ever found some -
this was when I was in Home and Family
section.
Q: What year would this have been?
A: It would be between the sixties and
seventies.
Q: During that period.
A: If he knew of some talented minority
person, that wanted to work for the paper,
that I would be willing to work with that
person. It did turn out that he hired, over
time, I remember four minority persons. And
at least three of them, I think, were in our
department. I remember one that did not know
how to handle quotes. She apparently thought
that you just put a little quote here and a
little quote there. She had no training
whatsoever in the field. It didn't take, if
she had training it didn't take. So I really
had to sit down with her one day and say,
"Look, if you're going to be in this
business, you got to know how to handle
quotes." So I gave her a training session
and she got to be pretty proficient in it.
She was impossible before that, though. I
don't think that was her fault - well, maybe
it was her fault that she didn't pay
attention when they were teaching it that
day. She didn't have it.
Q: What was the problem again?
A: Punctuation. She didn't know how to do
punctuation. She didn't know that when
you're quoting a person, the words had to be,
to put an opening quotation mark and a
closing quotation mark at the end and a comma
and all that stuff. She didn't know that.
She didn't have any idea. And here she was
working for a newspaper. It just boggled my
mind that she didn't. So I took on the job
of training her, I guess.
Q: How long did she last?
A: I don't remember, I really don't. I
remember another minority person who could
not take criticism of any kind. She just
bristled every time you wanted to offer
constructive criticism of any kind. She was
hard to work with. I had to go through
another woman to get instructions across to
her. She was a nice girl, real nice girl.
Eleanor Tate, I think, was possibly the
first. She was not in our department. But
she was a talented writer and poet. Since I
didn't work with her, I don't know how she
worked out as a reporter. I don't know that.
Q: I've heard good things about her.
Which department was she in?
A: As I recall, I believe she worked for
the Tribune news side. I think she was a
Tribune reporter. --
Section 8:
Q: You and I touched on politics in the
newsroom a little before we started taping
here. Clearly, there are politics in any
work place, so what were some of the politics
of the Register news room and what were the
issues?
A: The unionizing thing was definitely
one. I remember one time, while this labor
thing was fomenting, management called people
into a conference on how to combat the
unionization effort. There was some talk in
there about well, this guy owes me so much or
I've got something on this guy or that guy.
I didn't like the atmosphere. It reminded me
of the Mafia, it really did. After I got
back to my desk, I wrote a letter to Ken
MacDonald, objecting to that tone. I didn't
mind them planning how to combat
unionization. That didn't bother me. But
the tone of the people in there did bother
me. And he thanked me for my letter, but I
don't know whether it changed anything. When
you say politics in the newsroom, it's hard
to think of it, think of issues that came up.
Q: Perhaps people getting ahead that
shouldn't be getting ahead, that shouldn't be
getting the raises that they did or somebody
doing something to get ahead in an unethical
way?
A: I can think of one situation, but I
don't want to talk about it. As far as
knowing who got a raise, you didn't know.
Just you and your supervisor, and no one ever
knew and I didn't tell anybody. When I was a
supervisor, I didn't tell anybody. --
Section 9:
Q: I want to go back a ways. When you
came to the Register, did you know at the
time, how prestigious the Register was and
well recognized it was, not only in Iowa, but
throughout the country?
A: I certainly did, as far as Iowa was
concerned. I probably did, too,
country-wide. Maybe I didn't realize how
well respected it was. I doubt if I knew
then what I know now, what I knew later.
Q: And subsequently you found out?
A: Oh yes. Well, when we started winning
Pulitzer Prizes. That made a difference.
Also, when I would travel anyplace and see
other papers, the comparison was really
strongly in favor of the Register. I think a
lot of that is due to habit. All subscribers
get in the habit of the paper they are used
to subscribing to, but I think the Register
stuck up well especially against Washington
papers. I thought it did very well. In some
ways, I think, in appearance anyway, it
stacked up well against the New York Times.
I think the New York Times is so dead looking
and the Register was not. I just grew to
respect the paper. The longer I stayed
there, the more I respected it. And I still
respect it, although I don't respect it quite
as much today as I did when I was working
there. I think it stems from when Gannett
took over.
Q: You said you traveled to these small
towns, not just small towns but other towns,
including Boston and looked at the paper and
compared it to the Register. What were you
seeing that made the Register better as far
as you were concerned? Not just with the
appearance, but writing?
A: The Boston papers were, it seemed to
me, competing with each other. There were so
many of them at that time. I think they had
four or five papers from Boston. They were
competing with each other and would
sensationalize in order to compete. And
trash. They were more trashy than it seemed
that the Register was. I think the Register
was more responsible.
Q: Were there other things that made the
Register a great paper?
A: What I think made the Register great
was that it hired talented people, the most
talented people it could find, and paid them
competitive salaries. I don't think they
overdid themselves every time on that score,
but they were competitive. Well, the fact
that nobody ever left indicates that. And
another thing, I think, is that they gave
talented people the opportunity to use their
talents, the freedom to use their talent. I
think of Lil McLaughlin. She was a very
talented writer. And they just gave her the
head. And that's what I tried to do when I
became editor of the Home and Family section.
There was so much talent - if you've got
talented people in the first place and let
them use those talents, it just shows. It
shows the effort and that makes it a good
paper. Lauren Soth. If they hadn't given
him the opportunity to do any thought, he
never would have written that little
editorial about inviting [Nikita] Khrushchev
over here. I don't think he would have. But
he had the freedom to do that, is what I'm
saying. That exists in every department in
the paper. It existed in photography. It
exists in art design. It exists in editorial
and reporting. Maybe they do that in other
papers, too, I don't know. Maybe that is
true everywhere. I don't think so, though.
I think also, another factor of economics, I
suppose, is being willing to spend money to
get good stuff. Send photographers down to
the football game where the Pulitzer Prize
picture was taken, Don Ultang's picture. To
hire a plane down there? To get thirty
minutes or whatever it is, of football game?
That's expensive. They were willing to do
that, when I was there. I don't know whether
they are now or not. I see a lot of space in
the paper today using AP stories. I'm not
putting AP down, but to depend upon AP, I
think is short-sighted. It's cheaper. It's
available. But I don't think that makes it
good. --
Section 10:
Q: And also, talk about some of the
significant people that you worked with,
because in your day, there was a long list of
them.
A: Oh, a great bunch of people.
Q: The guy that keeps coming up in some of
the conversations is that English
photographer, George Yates. He was a
character.
A: Yes, he was enjoyable. Very, very
distinguished gentleman. He acted like an
English gentleman, too. He was one of them.
There were so many of them.
Q: You were there since 1950.
A: Yes. I think of Elizabeth Clarkson
Schwartz in the same breath as George Yates,
because they had the little cubicles near
each other.
Q: What did she do?
A: She wrote a column. It was kind of a
personal interest column, I suppose you would
call it. Little anecdotes. She was a member
of the old family, the Clarksons, who owned
part of the paper way back, I guess.
Q: Even before Cowles bought it?
A: Yes.
Q: What makes her stick out in your mind?
Would you say something about her?
A: You mentioned George Yates. That's why
I just jumped to her. I used to feed her a
lot of little anecdotes from my own family
experience. That was one thing I would liked
to have done would be write a little column
like that. Like - you probably don't
remember him - Bob McIntyre? He was a
syndicated columnist a long time ago, who
wrote a little like Harlan Miller. He wrote
a little bit like him. [chuckles] I don't
want to say what I was going to say.
Q: About Harlan Miller?
A: Yes.
Q: Harlan Miller was with the Tribune, is
that right?
A: He was with the Register.
Q: And he wrote a daily column?
A: Over the Coffee. [inaudible - talking
at same time]. That's where the name of his
column came from.
Q: Did you socialize with some of these
people, like Harlan Miller?
A: I didn't socialize with Harlan Miller.
We lived in the same neighborhood, but I
didn't. He was older than I was. I knew his
sons better than I knew him. But yes, we
socialized a lot. One of the good things we
had was the - I forget the name of it - a
club of newspaper people. I suppose there
might have been regular people too, I don't
know. I'm just trying to think of what the
name of it was. I can't think of it. But
they used to have a party about once a month.
We had some good times. We also had a lot
of parties in just private homes. I remember
going to Lil McLaughlin's apartment one time.
Gordon Gammack had some parties. And if
anybody left, they'd throw a party. There
was quite a bit of socializing or just going
out for a beer or something.
Q: Gordon Gammack wrote a column for the
Tribune. What do you remember about him, in
particular?
A: I liked him very, very much. We became
good friends. He used to give me a ride to
work. We lived about a block and a half
apart. Our kids and his kids were about the
same age and they were in a carpool. So he
used to give me a ride to work. This was
late in his life and he told me one day that
he had terminal cancer. My reaction was kind
of stupid, I think. I told him that I was
sorry to hear it, but that it was something
that I wouldn't want to know. If I had
terminal cancer, I wouldn't want to be told.
I think that was kind of a stupid thing to
say. But, anyway, after that time, we
accompanied each other downtown to work every
day and we just got to be closer friends.
Even when he was in the hospital, I know
we're getting way off the track from your
subject. I wrote to him in the hospital. I
should have gone to see him. But, forget it.
It's a little too personal.
Q: Sure. He died in the mid-seventies, is
that right?
A: I think so. I think it would be about
the mid-seventies, yes.
