What a rotten shame that this should happen to him just as he was beginning his U.S. book promotion tour.
Good to know that his publisher had a press release ready to “lament” it, though (and to attribute his exclusion to – in part – his “self crucifixion”).
The guy’s an obvious attention whore. In view of all the recent bogus memoirs, I am wondering if anyone in the U.K. has bothered fact-checking all his lurid “confessions,” or why the N.Y.T./Reuters would so un-critically repeat them as though factual (or, as though newsworthy).
Ahhh . . . too late to edit but I would not oppose a mod adding in this jackanapes’s name to the title – loath though I am to thus grant him the very publicity he’s after. I guess my meta point had been that he is nobody except insofar as he is a faceless type: the ‘controversy’-mongering attention whore. Seen one, seen 'em all.
The article was apparently shortened when it was posted to the net. The longer original article in the print Times goes on at great length about how his claims cannot be proven and how he admits that they are a combination of real and invented.
Yeah I read that in the Times today. It appears Immigration officials enforced a very sensible law to me, even if (as said before) the authors credentials of nefariousness are is serious doubt. This is news?
I would imagine his “deportation” took place after many serious efforts on his part to convince them of his “outrageousness” (one of his quotes had him “admitting” that he was dressed “flamboyantly” and claiming that he was “interrogated” for seven hours). Certainly no immigration or customs officer has ever demanded to know from me whether I had used drugs years ago.
I very much doubt the fact that he was about to launch his U.S. book tour is unrelated to this fact (by which I impugn not the motives of the immigration officials, but of him – I’d imagine it took some heroic efforts on his part to stir up enough of a scene that they finally just put him back on the plane to avoid dealing with his drama queening).
I can’t begin to speculate what a guy who would crucify himself thinks is good publicity. For normal people, the publicity value of a book tour far outweighs the one day story of his being denied entry. Being able to shock people daily always beats a singleton.
Well, since neither I nor anyone had ever heard of him until yesterday (in their charmingly second-rate way, the Brits seem about four years behind the Americans in discovering the fake-rehab-memoir genre), I suspect round one goes to him: he made the front page of the N.Y.T.
Now, your book tour point is good – but what are you thinking are the odds that his “deportation” is rather swiftly resolved, and the tour resumes, postponed, perhaps, by a bit, but with scads of free publicity? After all, he admitted he’s been freely travelling to the U.S. for years until this Unfortunate Incident.
As I think about it more, his story is stupid on its face. I think one of the articles posted said he managed to muster a measly one long-ago conviction. Even assuming Interpol and the FBI computers are meshing seamlessly, to assume that he was excluded for the “moral turpitude” inherent in his other “crimes” is to assume that Homeland Security guards were diligently reading fey Brit memoirs (or, reading, period), and posting BOLOs at Newark to keep this decadent ‘author’ from corrupting the youth of Hackensack and Piscataway. Does. Not. Compute.
bolding mine
One of the hallmarks of of America is that everyone is equal befor the law. So if we are not going to all this gentleman to enter the country for these reasons, then nobody who has admitted to a drug addiction can be allowed inside. Anyone who is a member of AA would not be allowed inside.
Using this rule to keep out people we don’t like is wrong. I don’t care how he was dressed, if this was the rule used to deny him entry, then that rule should apply to all.
I think you are missing the point of my OP. There is almost zero chance that the U.S. border guards went snooping through his past to find and act against “moral turpitude” in a selective, unfair fashion, just because this twit is a “controversial” “author.” There’s just no way it comes up unless and until he makes the valiant effort to volunteer extensive (and probably fictional) information regarding his extensive (and probably fictional) past drug addiction. As noted, his actual criminal record is essentially nil and, as noted, he’s never been stopped before his book was launched here, and as noted, to assume that the U.S. government is actively monitoring, and then selectively acting against, the authors of foppish literary stunts is laughable. That the U.S. does not generally ban entry by past casual drug users, despite the existence of laws saying they can, is an instance of selective enforcement coupled with pragmatism, which happens in other cases too. But anyone who believes for a minute that this guy was in any way singled out for his “literature” or beliefs is falling for a rather stupid scam by a rather lame Attention Whore.
No, this hack decided that it would be really fresh and exciting to exhume the corpse of Oscar Wilde, adopt not only his mannerisims but also his supposed martyrdom, toss in a bit of James Frey, and land on the front page of the N.Y.T. And that worthy journal was stupid enough to fall for the stunt.
I would say that only people who buy his book fall for his ‘scam’ as you put it.
Of course if think Oscar Wilde martydom, or as I call it, being put in prision for being gay, is only supposed, maybe you think again about it.
You clearly don’t like this author. Do you think letting him enter the country and do his book tour is more or less pubicity than denying him entry and making him national news.
I disagree. Anyone who treats his “exclusion” as newsworthy will, necessarily, help him sell books, and will thus be his tool.
I think that immigration would have been more than willing to let him in the country. I think that he (and likely his publisher) came prepared with a well-thought-out plan to stage a “deportation” that would never, ever, ever otherwise have entered the minds of the lowly-paid Homeland Security types. I suspect that when he sashayed into the security airport in his cape or whatever and loudly started informing an uninterested security staff of his terrible, horrible decadent past (which is, recall, in large part imaginary), the minimum wage functionaries had no idea what to do about the contrived scene he was playing out and so, eventually (and after valiant efforts on his part) did what the proprietors of most establishments (not least airports) do when someone is being loudly uncooperative and insisting on making a scene – suggested that he go back where he came from. I think that when this happened (routine denial of entry to someone who was holding up the security process with histrionics; or, put differently, lame-ass performance art stunt ends with Attention Whore told to leave), the national media should never have let it “make national news.”
Ok, Horsely was wearing a top hat and ‘something else’ not specified.
What is your cite for the rest of his behavior that you are claiming? What makes you say it was ‘staged’. I agree that the Homeland Security people probably never heard of this guy.
Even if he was wearing a top and cape, to quote Eric Cartman “What’s the big f***ing deal?” Denying a person based on how they are dressed is not ‘ok’, denying a person because you don’t like them or their book and you think are attention whores is not ‘ok’.