Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Just out. (Portland, OR) 1983-2013 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 1, 1987)
AIDS as you've never read it before B Y W . C . M c R A E And the Band Played On: Politics, People and the AID S Epidemic; by Randy Shills (Sc. Mar tins, $24.95) ock Hudson may have given the AIDS epidemic a face. But San Francisco journalist Randy Shilts has given the health crisis its First best-seller. “ And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic” is a monumental ex ercise o f investigative reporting and the first R book to fully chart our institutional response to the AIDS crisis. At the same time, it tells the stories o f people who fall victim both to the virus itself and to our society's reaction. Shilts begins his book in Africa, in 1976, where a Danish lesbian doctor becomes the first non-African victim of HIV infection; it ends with the announcement in 1985 that Rock Hudson has AIDS. In the nearly 6(X) pages between these two precipitous events, Shilts charts a story of government inaction, gay polit ical indifference and cynicism, and medical ineffectuality. The book’s real power comes from the ex haustive documentation — from internal memos and candid conversations — that de monstrate the indifference o f our institutions to AIDS. “ The federal government viewed AIDS as a budget problem, local public health offi cials saw it as a political problem, gay leaders considered AIDS a public relations problem, and the news media regarded it as a homosexual problem that wouldn’t interest anybody else.” In Shilt’s hands, the reporting of such wholesale dithering becomes a factually-driven narrative o f compelling interest. Shilts documents the spoiling for funds and for rec ognition that hampered federal research into AIDS, and exposes the passionless leadership of federal public health officials. He also details Dr. Robert G allo’s sleazy appropriation of the French Pasteur Institute’s discovery o f LAV (later renamed HIV), a story I personally think cannot tix> often be retold. The gay orthixloxy is cited for its commer cially and politically motivated allegiance to goals o f ever-increased promiscuity, even after evidence had clearly demonstrated sexual activity led to AIDS infection. Hut however compelling is the history of our institutions failing us in crisis, not many readers would make it through this volume if it were only internal memos from the Centers for Dis ease Control, rhroughout the book. Shilts has intertwined a semi-fictional narrative detailing the personalities and lives of the individuals affected by both the disease and our society’s priggish reaction to it. But therein lies the rub. By introducing ele ments o f fiction, Shilts becomes tied to conven tions o f narrative which often detract from straightforward reporting. Early on, the virus is described as "something new and horrible ris ing slowly from the earth’s biological land scape” ; and “ slowly, almost imperceptibly, the killer was awakening.’ ’ This kind of writing is closer to Stephen King than journalism. The characterizations of bumbling government offi cials and self-serving politicians are made the more insidious by borrowing from other horror traditions — the book sometimes seems like Jaws with a virus. In the process o f narration, activists like Larry Kramer and Bill Krauss become assailed, John Wayne-like loners, who then partake in the kind o f reverence our fictive traditions ac cord such heroes. Gaetan Dugas, the gay Don Juan-cum-Typhoid Mary who becomes AIDS "Patient Zero,” is a creation of purest stereotype. The power of the personal stories is undeniable; however, the book would withstand stronger analysis had Shilts decided whether he was writing journalism or a roman a clef. “ And the Band Played O n” is a very power ful and impressive book. It ought to be required reading for anyone with any interest in AIDS, or for that matter, anyone interested in a prog nosis o f our shallow, uncaring society. I spoke with Randy Shilts from the St. M artin’s offices in New York. What are your Oregon connections? I moved out there in 1970 because Oregon’s a nice place to live. I attended PCC. and then went down to Eugene for university. I was chairman o f the Gay People’s Alliance until 1973 When I went into journalism, I stopped being an activist. I don’t think you can do both at the same time. Are you surprised at the success o f “And the Band Played On” ? I knew it would be successful, but I had no idea it would be this successful. How do you account fo r its success? I think people are hungry for information about AIDS. O f a couple o f friends who have read excerpts o f the book, one characterized you as a “gay Bob Wootlward.'' How do you respond to that? I'm an investigative reporter. The book is just old-fashioned journalism. I mean. 1 filed for Freedom of Information material, I went and talked to everyone. It was just shoe-leather style journalism. To me. this is the kind of informa tion that should have been in the newspapers all along. We've moved our northwest location to 801 N.W. 23rd W () M A N IMAGINATIVE f l o r a l d e s ig n Celebrate a Friendship Thanksgiving, November 26 233-7335 S u s a n H e s s e l g r a v e 2 0 5 S.E. GRAND AVE. SUITE 101 PORTLAND. OREGON 97214 J iL t l O m T • 2 6 • November. I9R7 M U 5 IC M IL L E N N IU M R EC O R D S & TAPES FROM TV € EEO R -E W H O K N O W M U S C 32nd & E. Burnside 231-8926 801 N.W. 23rd 248-0163 E. Ann Hinds Randy Shilts' new hook about people , institutions and AIDS is highly compelling and controversial; he speaks out about being outspoken. The other friend characterized you as a gay Geraldo Rivera. Is that someone who’s read the book? He read the excerpts in California magazine, the Patient Zero stuff. Nobody who has read the entire book could say that. Were you surprised by the coverage and ac claim you received in the press? It seems to me that there’s an element o f ‘ ‘making up fo r lost time ” in AIDS coverage by reproducing large portions o f your book in the press. I think most of the media is aware that they blew it. What I’m hoping is that the book will lead them on to do a good job. It’s great that people are covering the book, but that doesn't replace coverage of the disease. Why did no one else write this book? I am the only gay person in a prominent position in a major paper. And I don’t think that straight people care about the story. You still think it’s still that divided? Look, the only people who write about AIDS patients in national papers are women. They don’t put investigative reporters on AIDS cases. Who did you think o f as the audience fo r the book? Myself. You've got to remember that when we were trying to sell the book, we had a dif ficult time finding a publisher. Publishers thought a straight audience wouldn’t want to hear what I was saying, and that what I was saying was too radical for a gay audience. But I felt it was time to tell the truth. I didn’t feel I could be tough on Reagan without being tough — accountable — on gay politicians. Well, it seems like you ’ ve cut yourselfa fairly small piece o f turf. Basically anyone who has been involved in the reaction to AIDS is given his comeuppance. The book does document institutions that have failed, but there are also a pretty good number that did a good job. There were a lot of doctors, activists, who didn't even know how this thing was spread who were trying to make a difference. And there were a lot of peole who had AIDS who were really out there, trying to make people wake up to the threat. How do you respond to charges o f hindsight? In the book. I’m not talking about what people in 1987 say about how we conducted AIDS in 1982. 1 demonstrate that in 1982, 1983 people were begging and pleading to the gov ernment for leadership, pointing to the dark future ahead. This is not hindsight: it is thoroughly documented that four or five years ago the government decided not to take an ac tive role against the AIDS crisis. / was thinking more o f your criticism o f gay- reaction. Much o f the gay reaction to AIDS you characterize as purely commercial or politically based. Wasn't part o f this reaction based on ignorance due to government inaction? In 1981.1982.perhaps Bv 1983.particularly on the coasts, there was more than adequate information about what was going on. It's curi ous who turned out to be the "radicals’' for this cause. The gay grassroots was changing ahead o f its leaders. I think that by 1984 the average gay man was changing much faster than the gay politicians realized. You don’t much mention the role o f lesbians in the reaction to AIDS. H ad you written the book about Portland and its reaction, many o f the leaders would have been women. I’ve got Lu Chaitin, w ho’s a major figure. There’s a lot of people who deserve to be mentioned. I wasn’t putting together a scrap book. Some people here [in New York CityJ say, “ Oh, you should have mentioned so and so." My God, this is the only place where I’ve run into people who think that book isn’t long enough! I mean, I think the book plenty long. Well, maybe not expensive enough. Why don’t you make it $28.95? Your book ends with Rock Hudson. There’s the unwritten assumption that things change after him. To some extent, it did. The history o f AIDS after Rock Hudson is different from the history before. After Rock Hudson, the press started to pay attention. But the government response was just as wacky as before. It was wacky in a different way. It’s not like they’re ignoring AIDS anymore. A recent San Francisco Chronicle profile o f you said you hate to be criticized. How has the gay press received your book? The Bay Area Reporter gave me a good re view. I just about fell off my chair. The New York Native has run a headline, “ You can live without Shilts.” Some o f the characters that you view sympa thetically in the book receive hostility from gay institutions. By characterizing that hostility, were you anticipating the controversy that you would generate? In one sense. I've been amazed at the positive reaction there has been. But no, I wasn’t doing that. All the stuff I reported happened. You give what must be one o f the most kindly characterizations o f Larry Kramer ever in print. Between your characterizations o f him and Bill Krauss / read a defense o f your some times unpopular role as a journalist. A lot o f people don’t like Larry Kramer’s style but a lot of people I talk to here in New York have to admit he’s right. And inasmuch as I share their attitudes, I suppose — but I don’t feel I have to defend myself because I’m not a gay leader. My job is to write stories. D o you think vcur book will change things? I hope so. I think it w ill put a big spotlight on things, particularly for the government. I can’t imagine the government can ignore it any longer. I ve put it all down in black-and-white. Randy Shilts will appear Nov. 18. 7:30 at the First Congregational Church. 1126 SW Park. Portland. Tickets are $7.50, and are available at all Powell’s Bookstores.