Reader Mail

Send your letters to the Free Press, PMB #178, 1463 E Republican ST, Seattle WA 98112, or email [email protected]. Keep them short. Longer letters will be edited down. Letters do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Free Press. Letters which respond to Free Press articles will be given precedence.


The True Story

Dear Editor:

Please be advised that I represent Patrice McFarland, who was mentioned several times in an article, "Anti-Monopoly," published in the November/ December, 1998 issue of the Washington Free Press.

monopoly The author of this article did not contact Patrice McFarland to verify the information (nor, of course, did the Washington Free Press). That article was filled with inaccuracies, and I ask that you publish this letter in your next issue, retracting all references to Ms. McFarland. There are a number of misstatements in the article which I will not address. However, others need to be corrected.

While Mr. Anspach may have his own agenda regarding the purpose of the game of Monopoly, Ms. McFarland has had limited dealings with Mr. Anspach and does not share his goals. In fact, a number of years ago Ms. McFarland wrote Mr. Anspach, stating he did not have her permission to publicize any information she had discussed with him. Because Ms. McFarland was concerned, she cut off all correspondence with Mr. Anspach years ago. The article's first paragraph is completely untrue as it relates to Ms. McFarland, and it is absurd to make the statement "that [she] has vowed that before [she] die[s] the world will know that the original purpose of the Monopoly game was to teach the evils of exploitation . . . [etc.]"

The second paragraph indicates that "Anspach and McFarland have experienced widespread resistance . . ." While that may be true as far as Mr. Anspach is concerned, Ms. McFarland has not met with resistance in her particular endeavors. Furthermore, we object to the linking of Ms. McFarland to Mr. Anspach as a "determined pair." As noted above, there is no connection between these two individuals, as is implied in this statement.

Paragraph three states that Ms. McFarland is a "New York-based free-lance writer." This is untrue. Additionally, she has no idea whether few or many publications would publish her material.

Perhaps the most outrageous statement may be found in paragraph eleven, suggesting that Ms. McFarland learned "the true story" from Mr. Anspach. Mr. Anspach may have "experienced scant success in [his] quest," but to suggest that Ms. McFarland has had a similar experience, or indeed that her interests are the same as Mr. Anspach's, and most especially to suggest that the source/trigger for Ms. McFarland was a discovery by Mr. Anspach, is to indulge in creative writing.

I believe it is incumbent upon publishers, large or small, to verify the information published. I do not know if Mr. Wolfe contacted Mr. Anspach; however, Ms. McFarland was not contacted for this article.

In any event, the material relating to Ms. McFarland is not true.

Sincerely yours,
Eileen M. Kelly
Attorney at Law


Burton H. Wolfe responds:

For Patrice McFarland to complain about my article, on her own or through counsel, is absurd. Though the letter is so off base that it does not merit a response, I reply for the record.

Patrice McFarland called me long distance to praise a previous article of mine on the Monopoly game. She told me she is devoting her life to publicizing the truth about its origin, and part of that effort is a book by her on the life of Lizzie Magie (Phillips), inventor of the game on which Monopoly is based. Recently I wrote two letters to Patrice, informing her of my intention to update the Monopoly story. I invited her to add to what she told me previously. She did not respond. Consequently, attorney Kelly's statement that I "did not contact Patrice McFarland to verify the information" is false. And if Patrice does not like the way I presented her and her rather minor role in this fascinating story that is mostly the work of Ralph Anspach, she has no one to blame but herself.

Kelly's statement that Patrice does not share Ralph's goals is the opposite of what Patrice told me.

If Patrice told Ralph that he does not have "permission to publicize any information she had discussed with him," then she told him what she has no right to tell him, since all information on this subject emanates from Ralph, not Patrice, who entered the picture long after Ralph revealed the truth about it. If Patrice has not met resistance to her efforts, then why has she been unable to find a publisher for her book?

"Connection" is defined in my desk dictionary as a link, and "link" is defined as a bond or tie. Patrice is connected or linked to Ralph Anspach in that both have been working to publicize the truth about the origin of the Monopoly game. Consequently, attorney Kelly's objection to the linking of Patrice and Ralph is overruled. Patrice is in part a free-lance writer and she lives in the state of New York. Consequently, she is a New York-based free-lance writer, though I could think of another term for her.

Any "outrage" in this matter occurs in Eileen Kelly's letter, not my article. The fact is that Patrice McFarland learned about the Monopoly game story from my writing, and I got the material for it from Ralph Anspach, without whose pioneering work the story never would have been known. That is not "creative writing," but fact.

Finally, I quote from an article published in the January 1994 edition of Main Antique Digest, a copy of which was sent to me by no other than Patrice McFarland herself:

"Thank goodness the true story of lthe game of Monopoly is finally seeing the light of day and beginning to rightfully supersede the Charles Darrow myth," said Patrice E. McFarland, a graphic designer and game collector from Averill Park, New York, who is working on a biography of Elizabeth Magie Phillilps as the game's true inventor. After buying an incomplete first edition of the Landlord's Game four years ago and finding the missing board a year later, McFarland was determined to restore Lizzie Magie Phillips to her rightful place in history.

So, Eileen and Patrice, just what are you complaining about?

Burton H. Wolfe
San Francisco


Good Work on Republican Street

Thanks very much for sending me a copy of your newspaper. I had never seen it before, but in Linda Smith's Vancouver, I would not be surprised if the Free Press had been blacklisted. (The irony of your address is particularly satisfying to me).

Please sign me up as a first-time subscriber. The articles seem to hit their marks and I enjoyed the holiday cartoons--especially since I have just finished a personal photography project on The Mall.

Keep up the good work,

--Craig Pozzi


Silly and Slipshod Journalism

Sorry guys, but while we desperately need a progressive voice, your paper isn't it. The holistic [health] article [Jan/Feb 1999] is another ignorant and anti-scientific screed. The left needs intelligence, not kneejerk anti-intellectual ravings about quack therapies with no controls. Your Monopoly article wasn't much better.

Add an anti-Bill Gates silly article and an even sillier anti-tipping article (both take cheap shots without offering any real analysis or solutions) and I failed to find anything of value. I wanted to subscribe to your paper, but giving money would just encourage this slipshod journalism.

-anonymous


H O M E