Fireheart

If you take a trip in the Internet Archive Wayback Machine to Patricia Kennealy-Morrison's defunct website, you will find that she talks INCESSENTLY about all the stuff Jim Morrison allegedly left her. I say "allegedly" because the only evidence of this is a single one-page poem which Kennealy claims to have co-authored with her dead lover, which doesn't really sound anything like Morrison and is (like everything Kennealy produced since the Doors movie) ultimately about HER and how awesome she is. The Love Letters, Songs, Drawings and Poetry of Jim Morrison to Patricia Morrison edited and annotated by Patricia Morrison with a foreword by Jim Morrison  Foreword: Help me, this woman won't stop talking about me and let me rest in peace!!!!!!! On 5 May 1995, the twenty-fifth anniversary of James Douglas Morrison's proposing to me, I began to go over the many letters, drawings, poems, songs and notes he had sent or given me, or had left in my keeping to hold against his return, before he went to Paris to his death on 3 July 1971.  All six of them. Seriously, if he had the time to produce half as many items for Kennealy-Morrison as she says, ranging from jewelry to very detailed love letters, he wouldn't have had time to be a rock star. That kind of output for such a short relationship with so little time together would be almost a full-time thing, unless those items were of very poor quality. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-WtRO3j5rWh4/VHTTky-_EeI/AAAAAAAAI7M/XC794OTXaks/s400/melting%2Bfrom%2Bbad%2Bwriting.gif On 24 June 1995, the twenty-fifth anniversary of our handfast wedding ceremony, I completed the anguishing and exalting task of editing (minimally or not at all) and annotating (extensively) this material I had kept so close and cherished so long.  So... she began her editing task on ONE significant date, and just happened to finish on ANOTHER significant date? Did she leave part of it undone until the handfast anniversary, or is she suggesting that their relationship is just so cosmic that the fates arranged it so? Also, the thought of her annotations terrifies me. It's also rather significant that she admits to barely editing his work at all, but includes a LOT of her own annotations. Annotations are really meant for experts, but I suspect it will be another opportunity for Kennealy to rant about how others have done her/Jim wrong and they can all burn in hell. And now in this twenty-fifth anniversary year of Jim's death, I have the very great honor to announce Fireheart, to be published twenty-five years from now, on 3 July 2021, half a century since the day he died.  An interesting question would be: What if she dies before the next ten years are up? This compilation of Jim Morrison's private communications to me during the years 1969, 1970 and 1971 -- his true 'lost writings', though in point of fact they have never been lost, at least not to him and me --  His TRUE lost writings? So what, his OTHER "lost writings" weren't sufficiently lost? Exactly how "lost" do writings have to be before they count? Also, they were never lost. SHE HAD THEM. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/--bSQoETrn0E/VG70nR3kZGI/AAAAAAAAIUE/WUhH-EmrA4Q/s400/motiv%2B-%2Bthe%2Blogic%2Bburns.jpg set aside in a place of safety, there to await the first instant when I (or my heirs or literary executors) shall finally be able to lawfully publish it without having to beg permission to do so from the controllers of my beloved late consort's literary estate -- permission, which, given the rancorous hostile contentions that have historically surrounded Jim and his legacies, would without question have been summarily denied me.  You don't have to BEG. Most people just ASK. But then again, the Courson family is apparently in charge of Jim Morrison's estate. And since Kennealy has poured out endless rivers of vitriol against their daughter - including repeatedly calling her a MURDERER in her book and defunct website, and murdering her in avatar form in her book Blackmantle - they probably WOULD refuse to give permission to her. And I can't blame them, because I would do the same. At least. You can't libel the dead, but you can at least get satisfaction where you can. During the course of our friendship, love, union and what it pleased both Jim and me to call our marriage,  ... and you take every opportunity to mention what you and Jim called it. "During our marriage - which was what JIM called it, since we were MARRIED - I felt that we were married, since Jim said we were in the many letters in which he called me his wife, and himself my husband, because that is what married people call each other, so we did because we were married." Seriously, if you truly considered it a marriage, you would just say "our marriage," without having to hammer it through our skulls every time that Morrison took it VERY VERY SERIOUSLY. Jim saw fit to honor me with many truths.  Such as the Martian brain implant that the government put in his tooth. ... he may have been on drugs when he told me that. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-qKujo2yMqpI/VG7uZCdyQxI/AAAAAAAAGuc/Ywl2-1l7iM0/s400/Delirium%2B-%2BSandman.jpg Save for some confidences which are of such incandescent intimacy as forever to preclude publication (I must keep something for ourselves alone), </b> YES! WE GET IT! YOU HAD SEX AND IT WAS ALLEGEDLY AWESOME. PLEASE SHUT UP. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-sqKs-s_fnd8/VHTb_GTzKcI/AAAAAAAAI-4/1F8ZUR1FH4M/s400/shut%2Bthe%2Bfuck%2Bup%2Byou%2Bcrazy%2Bbitch%2Bwhore.gif Seriously, it's like a more literate version of LKH. words about himself, about me, about us; </b> "Patricia is the awesomest person in the whole wide world, and I'm lucky just to be able to lick her boots." reflections on his childhood and youth, his family and associates; </b> "None of them matter next to my soulmate and WIFE WIFE WIFE, Patricia! Who is my wife! Because we're married! As I do with my WIFE. Whom I'm married to, not Pam. Because she's my WIFE. Have I mentioned Patricia is my WIFE?" observations on his past and present and hopes for the future he promises he would have shared; </b> "I plan to dump the only woman I ever even vaguely stuck with for a woman I hooked up with whenever I was in the neighborhood, in a country that I was about to be jailed by." poems of rare and, some may think, uncharacteristic lyricism -- and unapologetic eroticism also. </b> Again, we don't need to hear about your sex life, lady. We sort of assume that Jim Morrison was having sex with most, if not all, of the young even vaguely attractive women he hung out with. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-vPT45cRe7Og/VG7pK04M0jI/AAAAAAAAFrc/om2fKZ5P7sk/s400/the%2Brock%2Btoy%2Bsex.gif Accompanying the letters and poems (many of which will be shown in facsimile) will be some of the drawings Jim made from time to time, </b> ... which will depict Patricia in the usual Pre-Raphaelite style that he secretly favored, even though nobody else in the whole world saw this. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Cqmn_2Ff3oc/VG7x5K1sPqI/AAAAAAAAHs8/tuUTWXmBYHU/s400/pkm%2Bpre-raphaelite.jpg -- including some nude sketches of me and of us together -- HOLY CRAP, enough about you two having sex. We get it, you screwed like bunnies. several of the hitherto unpublished songs he left with me, perhaps intended for a Doors album that might have followed L.A. Woman, but more likely meant for his own first solo effort, which he had planned to begin recording here in New York when he came back from Paris. </b> Yes, because it makes perfect sense that suddenly his WHOLE focus would shift to New York, even though he spent his whole adult life in California and even named at least one of his songs after L.A. The Jim Morrison of Fireheart, a Jim whom perhaps no one but I was ever privileged to know, </b> ... and thus no one else can confirm or deny. Smooth. is Fireheart (as he names himself in one of the last and loveliest of the poems): </b> Holy shit, how many nicknames did the man need? a man writing the deep secrets of his soul to the woman he calls, in these same writings, his wife, </b> "... so anyone who doesn't believe we were TOTALLY married, NYAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!! You're just a bunch of jellus haterz and I'm gonna prove Jim said we WERE!" https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-f_6KF4HaenI/VG7cI_tqTQI/AAAAAAAAE9Y/-lY8NLgBZ2s/s400/see%2Bthis%2Bis%2Bwhy%2Bnobody%2Blikes%2Byour%2Bstupid%2Bass.jpg the woman he took to himself in an ancient and beautiful ceremony, as he took no other. </b> Uh, by that logic if he had married another woman legally, her handfasting would still be "as he took no other," but he would still have married someone else. This is the Jim I know and love and honor, Jim as he was with me and to me and for me. </b> "... and not that drunken asshole who occasionally passed out on my couch." But oh woe! She hasn't got the right to publish the proof of her legitimate WIFEWIFEWIFE status to the world! Indeed, the very idea of being forced to petition for something that is mine to begin with, given me from Jim's own hand and heart, is hateful and abhorrent in the extreme. It is, also and alas, the law. </b> Uh... no, the right to publish is not something that was hers to begin with. OWNERSHIP and COPYRIGHT are not the same thing at all. I mean, if I found a lost manuscript by JRR Tolkien in a box of used books I had bought, it would be mine. It would belong to me. But I couldn't publish it myself. Merely owning it doesn't give me the right. See? Very little of this material has therefore yet been seen, and none of it at all has been seen by the public. </b> <ol><li> Very little has been seen by WHOM? </li> <li> Uh, we know none of it has been seen by the public. I think more people would believe Kennealy's stories and claims if she backed it up with more evidence than two photographs. </li> <li> I mean, seriously. The only "proof" she's shown us is a poem that doesn't really sound like Morrison at all, especially since it's WAY too literal. </li> <li> The other proof? A pendant with an engraved message on the back… which could have been done anytime. </li> </ol> I have chosen to announce its future publication now, in this silver anniversary year of Jim's death, out of deepest love and respect, as tribute to him and tribute to the world; </b> ... writing it as a tribute to the WORLD? Why? What? I am so confused now. but also perhaps as a kind of subtle vengeance, </b> Ah yes, because she couldn't just make a tribute to Morrison without also flipping the bird at anyone else. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mC3y_IaRyLk/VG7xC2mvlFI/AAAAAAAAHeo/5JMqVX3r8Ck/s400/flipping%2Bthe%2Bbird.gif <b>my own way of combatting the rather more dubious 'tributes' that other individuals, with little or no personal connection to Jim, or at best laughably less cause and connection than I have, will doubtless be rushing to produce. </b> <ol><li> No, there weren't others. Not that I know of. </li> <li> So she's not even flipping the bird at "the haters" or people she actually feels have done her wrong. </li> <li> She's flipping the bird at people she doesn't know, who haven't offended her in any way, and who she really doesn't have any reason to hate. </li> <li> Apparently the only reason she hates their guts is because they didn't know Jim, but they dare to pay tribute to him. Sounds like sour grapes on her part. </li> <li> Also, where is it written that the only people who can write biographies, tributes and stuff are people who actually KNEW the tributee? I mean, who decided that?! By this woman's logic, there should be no biographies of ANYONE who wasn't born in the twentieth century, because the only thing that matters in tributes to a musical genius is how well you knew him. </li> <li> I mean, by that logic Marc Spitz's David Bowie biography is automatically inferior to, say, Angela Bowie's embittered screed or Cyrinda Foxe-Tyler's even bitterer rant about how their husbands are wastes of carbon. Even though Spitz's book is wonderfully written and very fair, it's just "dubious" because Spitz wasn't married to Bowie. </li> <li> And what CAUSE do you need for a tribute? </li> <li> So admiring, respecting and wanting to show your admiration for a person isn't enough, and if you don't have a personal connection to them it's somehow dodgy and creepy to do that? </li> </ol> <b>My original, long-held intention was to destroy all this before my own death, and so to take it with me back to Jim. </b> I'm sure she's simmering with resentment that you can't take it with you. I'd have expected her to demand that it be buried with her so someday, centuries in the future, archaeologists will find the enormous gothic tomb of the legendary Lizard Queen, who they will decide was obviously the queen of all the earth. Millions will desperately pore over the writings found beside her mummy, and the goddess who inspired such glorious writings will be held up alongside such legendary muses as Beatrice, Maude Gonne and Marie-Therese Walter! Then again, I'm sure Kennealy believes devoutly that if she did that, her grave would instantly be despoiled by the Evil Minions of Pamela Courson, who just want the truth of the Glorious Lizard Queen to remain a secret. <b>But I have been persuaded away from this course by those who feared that this incomparable legacy might go forever unseen and unshared, and the Jim Morrison it reveals remain forever unknown. </b> "They tell me that the world will be a poorer place without Jim Morrison's grocery lists!" <b>Fireheart will surprise many and astonish most, will show a Jim that not even my memoir Strange Days could show; and what it will prove most uncontrovertibly is that this is a man of matchless spirit and sensitivity, by no means the alcoholic drug-benumbed sadistic catspaw who is the only Jim his various biographers seem able or willing to understand or accept, a man capable of the deepest feeling and the most loving expression thereof. </b> Uh, he WAS an alcoholic, he took a lot of drugs, and he could be a sadistic asshole. Quite a few biographers have admitted that he was much more than that (I know, because I've read most of them), but they weren't so unprofessional as to try to pretend that didn't happen. Biographers are supposed to recount what happened, not what they WISH happened. I mean, check out the book Break on Through, which is the closest thing to a comprehensive biography of Morrison. They do address some of the assholish things he did and his personal problems, but there is also deep appreciation for him as an artist, as a musician, and often as a man who once cuddled a lamb onstage. They don't ignore the bad, but it's a part of a larger picture of a complex man. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-8mm6MBrSiAM/VG7tHeEswaI/AAAAAAAAGiw/2AAR_gbR300/s400/jim%2Bmorrison%2Band%2Blamb.jpg This is a continuing theme in Kennealy's recountings of Morrison: despite countless people's statements to the contrary, she refuses to believe that he ever was an asshole, a drug user, or an alcoholic. I guess he wouldn't be a suitably awesome mate for someone like her if he were. And she shrugged off accusations of violence against other women in her book as "maybe it was because he thought that was what they expected or deserved from him." Yes, I am serious. She wrote that in a book - she does claim she's not condoning it, but remember that she also praises this man to the skies while mentioning that he TOTALLY might have beaten/sodomized other women, because maybe they deserved it. Naughty naughty! <b>And, yes, it will also prove, once and for all, just how Jim Morrison felt about me, how he spoke of me both to me and in his own heart, and why he kept our union the secret it was from the world at large. </b> ... deep and wrenching shame? Mild embarrassment? https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-wdyGQO6fcJU/VHLgxGHVSaI/AAAAAAAAIl8/OrToGXbpFHs/s400/i%2527m%2Bso%2Bembarrassed%2Bi%2Bwish%2Beveryone%2Belse%2Bwas%2Bdead.gif <b>Quite simply, he thought our love was none of anyone else's business -- not his bandmates', not his associates', not the media's, not the fans' -- </b> ... but that doesn't explain the "secret" part of it. Famous people who consider their personal lives to be nobody's business don't keep their personal lives a SECRET, they just go about their business and do whatever the fuck they want. When rock stars have "secret" affairs, it's usually because they don't want their girlfriends/wives to know. <b>and considering the public torture that Linda Eastman McCartney and Yoko Ono Lennon were enduring at that very time </b> I love how she equates herself to McCartney and Ono, two of the most famous rock wives - LEGAL rock wives who spent the rest of their marriages alongside their husbands - in musical history. (it always seems to be open season on rock wives, or at least on the ones who are strong, independent women with creative lives and careers of their own apart from their mates, while the pretty, parasitic, brainless addicts who so often attach themselves to rock musicians are allowed an endless free ride by men and women alike), <ol><li> Remember that, kids: There are only two kinds of rock wives/girlfriends: pathetic pretty junkie leeches, and strong less-attractive professional women. There is no in-between. </li> <li> Also, it's kind of hilarious how she tries to boil down any problems with these two rock wives down to sexism. Uh, it's a little more complicated than that - people hated Yoko Ono because her affair with Lennon coincided with the breakup of the Beatles, led to Lennon becoming a preachy a-hole, caused him to drop his faithful wife who had tolerated all his infidelities, and because she was a really pretentious, untalented artist. And with both her and Linda, their husbands insisted on collaborating with them ALL THE TIME even though neither of them were good at it. </li> <li> What about Marianne Faithfull, a smart, cultured and creative woman who had her own career apart from Jagger? Anita Pallenberg, a wild scary woman who fucked THREE Rolling Stones and dabbled in witchcraft? Pattie Boyd, who also married a Beatle AND Eric Clapton? Or are these women too attractive to be counted as strong independent women? </li> <li> And on the flipside, plenty of unstable, drug-addicted and/or gorgeous women have NOT been given a free ride. It's just that most of them haven't been remembered. </li> <li> Now I will admit that there is a lot of sexism in the rock world, as evidenced by the hatred for Courtney Love during Cobain's lifetime (above and beyond her bad influence on him, or all the crazy shit she's done since he died). But a lot of times, there's more hostility towards non-rock'n'roll paramours of either gender, merely because they are not from the same world. </li> </ol> <b>we were both -- for of course I shared Jim's feeling on the matter -- quite right to think so. </b> "For of course"? So this strong independent woman with her own life "of course" shared all the same opinions as the Big Strong Man? Convincing. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-83HUDhP8tzQ/VG7omWFIqzI/AAAAAAAAFls/I0EnELNT-Yg/s400/sexism%2Bon%2Bgirls.gif <b>Jim, in his chivalry and protectiveness, wished only to spare me the pain of ordeal by publicity, and the harsh, hurtful personal attacks such attention can bring (and indeed has brought). </b> ... again, I just don't buy this. Rock stars have, at various times, tried to keep relationships secret for various motives. But here's the thing: a real semi-serious relationship with a rock star just can't be hidden. Eventually it gets sniffed out. <b>What he and I could never have foreseen was that our silence and our natural wish for personal privacy for our love would, with ghastly irony, work so against me two decades later, resulting in a far more terrible ordeal, far greater pain, nor yet that I would be left to face it alone. </b> Um…. people DID know about the two of them, including the other Doors. They just don't think they were Troo Wuvs. <b>If we had, our decision would almost certainly have been very different indeed... </b> I thought it was HIS decision. And what decision would that have been? Would they have gotten a legal wedding rather than one that denies her all legal rights as a wife? Would he have changed his will rather than leaving everything to Pamela (as he did)? Would he have just meandered around publicly with her as he did with the woman he spent most of his adult life with? <b>Even so, I kept silence in the face of enormity for twenty-one years before finally speaking out in Strange Days; </b> … no, no she didn't. There were at least three interviews in widely-published books where she gave very frank interviews. Do I need to print the excerpts again? Then again, they're pretty clearly something she would like to forget existed. I think she even made a veiled swipe at one interviewer/editor of that book in her own. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-i6ipKfIJuZ8/VHTUYq0kp-I/AAAAAAAAI8g/Bf95WyXj-vI/s400/memory%2Bwipe.gif <b>no one, I think, can accuse me of rushing to publish, </b> Well, yeah you can. Not after his death, but one year after the Oliver Stone movie which brought Jim Morrison back to the rockscape. <b>and, with a name and a following of my own for my Keltiad, neither can I be accused of being a one-trick author, trading on my association with Jim ad infinitum (and nauseam) because that is all I have to offer. </b> Fast forward to the 2010s. Her Keltiad series has fallen into obscurity, and she's now self-publishing a series of murder mysteries… starring a rock journalist for who falls for a rock god. Yes, she is totally not trading on her association with Jim! She has SO MUCH MORE to offer! <b>Since 3 July 1971 my hands have been tied, my voice (or Jim's voice to and through me) has been stopped. </b> This brings up another question: if Jim Morrison is supposedly making his will known through PKM, and she "speaks" to him regularly as she claims… why has he never said anything that would PROVE this? Like some detail of a day when she was NOT present, but that a third party could verify? Like a childhood memory that he probably would have never mentioned to her? It's almost like she's using the unverifiable but undeniable "Jim's spirit talks to me!" to cover up the fact that she has no special knowledge of his wishes or thoughts! <b>Incredible as it may seem to you, I do not own the publication rights to the love letters sent me by my own husband, nor to the poems he composed for and about me nor the sketches he drew of and for me, nor the songs he sang to and about me. Not even in my own autobiography, my memoir of myself with him; </b> Yes. We know. You said it already. I'm assuming that Kennealy-Morrison's ex-editor did a lot of work ripping out the endless repetition she seems to write. After all, her ex-editor probably spent a lot of time ripping out all the repetition in her books. I mean, her ex-editor was always ripping out the pointless repetition that she wrote. YOU SEE HOW ANNOYING IT IS? https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-vLTA4zQixl4/VG7LH2rpX9I/AAAAAAAAD6E/TjNW7a2RvWs/s400/angry%2Bbaby%2Bhead.jpg That said, we are already aware that she does not have the legal right to publish the love letters she insists she has. I already explained how that works, earlier in the snark. I honestly don't know why she finds this simple fact so baffling, because IT'S NOT THAT COMPLICATED. <b>not to prove my truth, not to defend his name or my own, not to save us both from honest ignorance and outright lies. </b> <ol><li> I hate the phrase "my truth." If it's YOUR truth, why should WE (since we are not you) believe it? </li> <li> How is it defending his name to publish love letters? </li> <li> She seems to have a paranoid fixation on people who consider Pamela Courson to have been Morrison's main squeeze, and seems to think that they're all conspiring against her. Does she really believe in honest ignorance? </li> </ol> <b>As it is, I must wait out a full half century from the day he died before that right can be mine: Copyright obtains for the lifespan of the author plus fifty years; thus Jim's estate, in which I have no legal rights, now controls even these most deeply personal of writings, and I do not. </b> Uh, no it doesn't. It controls the PUBLISHING RIGHTS, but the documents themselves are Kennealy's. They cannot control anything but the publication rights. <b>But the same law that has for so long barred me from making public any of this material will in time free me to do so: If copyright law now holds these writings hostage as part of Jim's literary estate (even though they were never anything but utterly private between Jim and me), then on 3 July 2021, by definition, copyright law must likewise let them go. </b> Not if our dear shitty government and their Hollywood cronies can help it. If they have their way, copyright will be extended into infinity so that nobody but Disney can sell a T-shirt with Micky Fucking Mouse on it. (Seriously, who even cares about Mickey Mouse anymore? That's like trying to keep people from profiting from Felix the fucking Cat). Hell, they would put every public-domain image, book, film or piece of music back OUT of the public domain if they could. God forbid that anyone download an e-copy of a Booth Tarkington book which the publishing companies wouldn't release even if they had the rights! THE PIRATES ARE GETTING STUFF FOR FREE! NOBODY CAN GET ANYTHING FOR FREE! BABIES WILL STARVE IF YOU DOWNLOAD PUBLIC DOMAIN BOOKS! THE TERRORISTS WIN IF YOU GET ANYTHING FOR FREE! Sorry, rant about the copyright Nazis got away from me. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-NKGJp0joeDg/VG7pG1CZBnI/AAAAAAAAFqE/Bo0EU5l0vpg/s400/surprised%2Bspock.gif <b>(Since making these plans, I have learned that a recent modification in American copyright law states that any unpublished material written before 1978 enters the public domain in 2003; </b> As I write this, it is late 2012. According to PKM, this material has been public-domain for almost a decade. You know, books about Jim Morrison are still selling. Most of the major biographies (non-personal ones, that is) have been continuously in print for many years, and a few years ago they came out with a trade paperback edition of the oldest biography of them all. Rock stars are fun to read about. I'm pretty sure that you could easily find a publisher for genuine Jim Morrison letters, poems and artwork. And yet not only has Fireheart not materialized, but Kennealy has gone oddly silent about it. I don't think she's mentioned it in years. I admittedly don't know much about copyright law because whenever I DO learn something about it I get the urge to nuke Washington and Hollywood, but this seems odd to me. <b>whether I will take advantage of this provision to publish earlier, I have not yet decided, though it is quite likely, and for the moment I will keep to the 2021 publication date.) </b> Why? Why would you do that? She keeps dangling this over our heads as the vaunted "proof" that will show all us Evul Haterz that she was right all along, that Jim Morrison loved her best, that he married her, and that he hated Pam and wanted to ditch her and live happily ever after with PKM. WHY WOULD SHE HOLD THIS BACK? It's ALMOST like she doesn't want us to see what she claims the "proof" is! https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-BkydmFrFAxY/VHTTiF3SZ3I/AAAAAAAAI6w/7HQIHKXsMSY/s400/maniacal%2Blaughter%2Bfuturama.gif To set aside snark for a moment, I honestly don't believe that this woman has even half the crap from Morrison she claims she does. Do I think she has letters, notes, even artwork and poems from him? Yes, I do. Do I believe that she has as many as she claims? No. Do I believe that they say everything she claims they do, like comparing Pam to a puddle of vomit and proclaiming his intention to come live HEA with Kennealy? No. Do I believe that every article she has is genuine? Not really. It's an ugly thing to say that somebody faked up stuff, but there are only two possible reasons for Kennealy to withhold this material when she could easily have published it years ago, thus "proving" herself to the world. <ol><li> The material she claims exists does NOT exist, and she's invested too much of her love story in these never-seen letters and poems to ever admit it. </li> <li> The material does exist, but it's by Kennealy and not Morrison, and she does not want the material exposed to the scrutiny of linguistic and handwriting experts. </li> </ol> Either way, it's pretty damning. She never gives any kind of excuse for NOT publishing it except to get pissy and defensive. Honestly, the only material we've seen from her vast trove of alleged material is a single poem that she claims she coauthored with Morrison (although she has also claimed he wrote it alone)… which I guess is her excuse for it sounding nothing like any of his other poems. Here's the poem, by the way. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mbqLYZ5EycM/VG7NBBCGuWI/AAAAAAAAEZ0/ZbR54nBOlpQ/s400/pkm%2Bpoem%2B3.jpg Direct from her website, people. You can see the copyright at the bottom. Translated into text: <i><b>In which he finds a wife at last on the Isle of Stones) They meet in Arden Two young lovers He asks her to wed him She is Sorceress witch his fair enchantress Her magic is silver &amp; golden Circe herself upon her own island could not equal her allure Like Ulysses he is held But unlike the Ithacan he will sail no further There is no Penelope &amp; he will stay w/his lady of the spells </b></i> Yeah, that sounds nothing like Morrison's other poetry. Morrison wrote poetry that was jagged, weird and sometimes incomprehensible. They were full of very vivid fragmented imagery, and he usually didn't write "odes" or straightforward narratives or story-poems like we see here. It's a very clumsy poem too. "Unlike the Ithacan" just makes me wince, and the hamfisted references to Shakespeare and the Odyssey aren't really the sort of thing you'd expect from Morrison's work. Kennealy is not a poet, and it shows. Also, it's kind of suspect how the entire poem is about Kennealy's favorite topics in the world. It is, of course, entirely about her, how Morrison married her, how he TOTALLY didn't have anyone else because she is too awesome, how she's a witch, and claims he is totally going to stay with her forever and ever, so there. <b>My one regret is that it shall take so long to happen; but that is a thing I can neither command nor control. </b> … except for the part where she CAN. And has not. And has no explanation for why. <b>Twenty-five years from now, Fireheart will at last complete the picture Strange Days began to paint -- and the truth is no less true for being delayed. </b> Again, all mentions of this have vanished from… well, everything connected to Kennealy. In fact, she stopped talking about the topic shortly before the 2003 date mentioned. <b>Yet perhaps the knowledge that it will happen -- that Jim's own words are waiting up ahead to point the truth from beyond the grave -- </b> Especially the truth about bunnies. He had some shocking revelations about the bunnies! https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-V0oy7VGaF9w/VG7Lkt4qnEI/AAAAAAAAEC4/8_jGj4nHhew/s400/kissing%2Bbunnies.gif <b>may occasion more care and caution as to what people choose to believe or opine in the meantime, may be a warning to future Morrisonographers to get it right for once, may even prompt reconsideration or repentance of certain past wrongful judgments. </b> Nope, hasn't happened. If anything, the total lack of objectively-confirmed Morrison material has only shored up their arguments. Where is it? Why hasn't it shown up? If it's such hard proof - or at least evidence - why has she suddenly clammed up? <b>I cannot say and dare not hope. But at the very least, come the year 2021, the casual vindictive dismissiveness many have practiced toward me and my part in Jim's life will be considerably more difficult to maintain, </b> We'll see in 2021. I suspect that if Kennealy is still alive in that year, she will not release anything. <b>and those who did so, or who insist on continuing to do so in the face of this evidence so staggeringly to the contrary, will stand branded, by Jim Morrison himself, as the fools and liars they have always been. Nor can I say that the thought of this much displeases me... </b> Yep, if you dare to think that the evidence might be falsified or at least exaggerated, you are an idiot and a liar. HOW DARE YOU! And again, this begins to smell of hollow blustering when you realize how far Kennealy has backed down on this Fireheart thing - all the way. It feels like someone is bluffing with a completely empty hand. <b>By assembling this work, announcing this intent, I break no trust Jim placed in me, have violated no smallest tenet of the covenant we made between us. </b> Trust? I doubt he predicted that one day she would take every scrap of paper he ever doodled on, and use it as "proof" that she meant more to him than Pamela. Why would be trust her NOT to? Then again, maybe he could have. <b>Indeed, I am all the more confident in my conviction that this but enhances the trust and faith we share, the vows we took, the love that was and is and ever shall be; and it is the way I choose to honor him, by enabling him to speak, for once, for himself, and also, for the first time publicly, for us. </b> Can I please point out that he is dead? When you die, people's thoughs on your love life don't really matter anymore. How could it enhance your relationships IF YOU'RE DEAD? As for honoring him… for fuck's sake, she devoted an entire website to screeching abuse at his main squeeze and any fans who don't think Kennealy was his one true love. That doesn't honor him. If anything, it DISHONORS him by extension. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-DF0RkwiKBo8/VG7otGccuNI/AAAAAAAAFns/NNcTfsfZKHg/s400/shock%2Bme%2Bwith%2Bthat%2Bdeviant%2Bbehavior.gif <b>Like Strange Days before it, Fireheart is a gift of love from me to the man I call my husband, the last I shall give him in this lifetime and perhaps the most enduring. </b> This would be very touching and powerful… if we ever had seen it, or any solid evidence/testimony that it exists. <b>The great, the tremendous difference that changes all is that Jim himself created it as gift for me, </b> … no, not really. The book itself (if it exists) was created by Kennealy, out of stuff that she says Morrison sent her. <b>and now at last, at long last, twenty-five years from now, I can return to him, as one creative artist to another, that wondrous gift of love he bestowed upon me twenty-five years ago. </b> I can finally publish all his Star Trek fan fiction! <b>I do not know if, two and a half decades hence, Jim Morrison will still command the same intensity of interest he has aroused in the public during his life, and since the undeserved and untimely death that was so murderously dealt him. </b> I don't know why not. It's less than a decade from now, and Jim Morrison hasn't been forgotten. <b>I realize that many among us may not be around to see published this last loving vindication of a man who has been much and deeply wronged; that I myself, even, may no longer be here in the world to view our triumph but joyfully reunited with Jim according to our vows, moving on together to our next lives, or beyond them. </b> So is she suggesting that even if she dies, this alleged book will be published anyway? By whom? <b>No matter. What does matter is that whoever may come to read Fireheart will find, I think, that it will have been well worth the wait: to meet James Douglas Morrison at last, as he was, and as he was loving enough and courageous enough to reveal himself to his mate, face to face, mind to mind, heart to heart. </b> Well, that sounds nice. So, if she's legally permitted to do so… and this book is such a powerful and impressive experience… and she's so determined to prove us all wrong and honor the man she loves… WHY HASN'T SHE PUBLISHED IT? If the book and its contents are legit and they actually EXIST… WHERE IS IT? Or is she going to pull a Linda Ashcroft and claim that all those documents were stolen, burned or otherwise made unpublishable? Or will she claim that we're a bunch of stupid poopie-heads and don't DESERVE to see it? <b>Or so, at least, he and I both hope. We can wait. Patricia Morrison New York, 1996 </b> I'd like to mention that contrary to Ms. Kennealy-Morrison's claims, I would be perfectly happy to revise my opinions on her, Fireheart, Jim Morrison, etc… if she ever actually produces the damn book, and its contents are verified by objective sources. But you know what? Until that happens, I don't think I'm going to just blindly believe what she says because she says it. Thank you, and good night.

[[Category:X]]