Michael Glickman considers the recent raised profile of ‘human circlemaker’ Matthew Williams…
“Truth exists. Lies are invented.”
GEORGES BRAQUE 1882-1963
This is a shitty job but someone has to do it. I truly would prefer to be studying the circles, but I seem to have drawn the short straw. I hate having to write about liars, fakes, pretenders, cheats, fraudsters, tricksters, dissemblers, exaggerators, con-men, hypocrites, careerists, gangsters, plotters and deceivers. But though my Hate-Mail file is never quiescent I get a steady flow of support from readers (and I thank you) who are really grateful that these scoundrels are occasionally called to task.
So off we unpleasantly go.
About a year ago I blocked circle-claimant Matthew Williams’s e-mails. His tone was consistently embittered, envious, self-pitying and – above all – deceitful. It was clear that he had nothing to offer. But recently, by the unique Chinese Whispers that only the Internet offers, one of his recent outpourings landed on my desk.
This time (another poor-me complaint) the eternally badly-done-by lad bemoans the fact that the Crop Circle Connector website refuses to publish his latest (truly pathetic) oeuvre. He moans that this is “censorship of the truth”. Truth. This is a word he uses widely and promiscuously. He should consider it rather more carefully.
Next, the News of the World, a British Sunday tabloid whose contribution to ethical journalism is similar to Colonel Sanders’s contribution to Haute Cuisine. Young Matt is featured in the now familiar image-rich but fact-poor confection which purports to inform the British public of the crop circles. He participates in a scurrilous article which, among other things, claims that the Milk Hill formation (arguably the most significant formation ever) is man-made.
Is this honestly the man who is so aggrieved to find that crop circle researchers neither trust nor believe him? Honestly?
And then the National Geographic documentary on American TV which featured the ubiquitous Williams, this time with Fred (sic) Presley, whose wisdom about the circles seems to be based entirely on the fact that he apparently had a hit record in the ‘60s. On this occasion the strong implication was that the creative Williams was responsible also for the Chilbolton events.
And this man wants to be taken seriously, to be believed? Perhaps even to be LIKED?
Those of us who are committed to making this story available to a wider audience are nauseated by the ease with which this miscreant gains his publicity. His relentless drive and his murky motives have always been incomprehensible to me. I feel deeply sorry for him.
Truth exists. Lies are invented.
Part of that relentless drive has produced a continuing tidal wave of badly-written stream-of-consciousness paranoia, usually running to several incomprehensible and inconsequential pages. In this, certainly, he has gained a reputation. Those of us who have not electronically blocked him, simply delete the stuff. I hear that some people are now starting actively to object.
Braque’s pithy observation is most useful here. We have viewed ad nauseam Williams’ profoundly mundane design skills which – so far – delineate the limits of his inventive powers. No doubt he will move with ease to new wickednesses. Bless him.
What a lonely life! What a pointless activity! All this noise and not a glimmer of wisdom!