Talk:Hell's Angels (book)

Title spelling

• The correct way to spell "Hells Angels" is without an apostrophe ("Hells" not "Hell's"), but it seems like all of Thompson's book covers use the incorrect apostrophe spelling. I haven't read the book yet, so I'm not sure if this was an editor's mistake or not, but if it isn't then maybe the article title and the name through the article and elsewhere should be changed to reflect the erroneous but true-to-published usage by Thompson. --Tarnas 28 June 2005 21:04 (UTC)

• According to Sonny Barger in his book "Hell's Angel" the correct spelling is with the apostrophe, they just don't have it on the patch.Natt the Hatt (talk) 03:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Role as a journalist

• It's documented in Thompson's own letters (The Proud Highway: The Fear and Loathing Letters, Vol. 1) that he had introduced himself to the Angels as a journalist during their first encounter at one of their meetings. Logan 5 22:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

McWilliams's role

• Actually, McWilliams was the once who suggested the article to Thompson in the first place. Originally it was pitched as an article about outsiders, not the Angels in particular. So I'm thinking that the wording in that sentence should be less ambiguous than 'offered to publish' the article.Logan 5 19:43, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

• I'll have to get the book, or read Thompson's letters about it. Did McWilliams ask for the article before his time with the Angels? What year did Thompson spend with the Angels? 1964-65? I'm going to read the Nation article right now, I've been putting it off. In the reprinted intro it says: In 1965 Hunter Thompson was living in San Francisco. He had recently quit the National Observer and was dead broke. When Carey McWilliams sent him a query, enclosing a report of the California Attorney General's office on motorcycle gangs and an offer of one hundred dollars for an article, Thompson accepted. He later expanded his Nation article into his bestselling book, Hell's Angels.

McWilliams wrote to Thompson in March 65, and actually did suggest the Angels in particular (my bad). He went to work researching and writing about the Angels almost immediately and had already become associated with them within a couple of weeks of McWilliams offer. He ended up staying close to them until about one year later, in the Spring of 66 just before the book was completed. Logan 5 00:12, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

• So Thompson wrote the Nation article within two months of McWilliam's offer (printed May 17, 1965), and then spent a full year around the Angels in preparation for his book? --Tarnas 04:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that's about it. He wasn't working on anything else at the time and went to work immediately on the article. The article itself didn't take him long to write and once it came out he started getting book offers almost immediately because it was a hot topic at the time. In order to get enough material for a full book he spent the next year with the Angels. Logan 5 14:04, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

What about Terry the Tramp?

If I could find some basic facts, I would like to write a Wiki page about Terry the Tramp (one of the most notorious of the Angels), but when I did a Google search, I could find nothing substantive on him. Does anyone know where I can find some good information about him? Thanks.--Pinko1977 22:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

How about Charger Charlie the Child Molester while you're at it.

During the stomping, didn't Terry the Tramp pull HST's chestnuts out of the flame?Ken Kukec (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

No, it was Tiny. Terry slept in the back of Hunter's car during the whole affair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.245.203.251 (talk) 09:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

You might be interested in this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLaSSo18rzk --144.137.209.80 (talk) 03:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

change name of article?

Regardless of how the motorcycle club spelled their name, the title of the book is with the apostrophe, and it is written as such through out. Since this is an article about the book, the title should reflect that. JesseRafe 03:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Synopsis or Plot?

Would a synopsis or plot or outline be in order here? I think it may be pertinent to point out how he made his way in with them them but then at the end it all went to shit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.145.228.42 (talk) 22:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Gang Rape

The Nation article on which the books is based, and which is linked to from this wiki page has Thompson disproving allegations of gang rape; however, the "Effects and Criticism" section of this wiki page alleges that gang rapes were "commonly engaged in" and Thompson treated these actions flippantly. This contradiction is badly in need of resolution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.8.38.2 (talk) 18:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The book frequently mentions "rape" in connection with the Angels but reported incidents on gang rape are fairly infrequent in the book. I would agree "commonly engaged in" isn't supported by the evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.96.8 (talk) 14:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

The book describes gang rape as a frequent occurrence. The wording could certainly be changed somewhat. ClovisPt (talk) 21:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I qualified "Thompsons flippant treatment of gang rape" as "allegedly flippant", and removed the quotes because they seem one-sided. There may be "flippant" instances of dealing with the topic, very much in accordance with Thompson's way of dealing with every topic, but eg. on page 222-223 he leaves no doubt that he thinks of rape as a deplorable crime. -- Seelefant (talk) 00:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Reason for final assault

Just thought it might be wise if someone adds in some more background information on why HST was stomped. There is this interview which gives some more background information: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccyu44rsaZo

Also, it would be good if someone could include the reaction by members of the Hell's Angels to the book.--144.137.209.80 (talk) 03:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Key revisions

• Added infobox

still hard to find the exact ISBN number

• Removed "lead section" tag (from Sep 09)

lead section is now adequate

• Upgraded article class from "Start" to "C"

This article now has a significant amount of background content, and is relatively informative. Still needs more content (such as plot, themes, critical response, legacy, etc.)

-- Brhiba (talk) 06:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

First Edition: Pub Year, ISBN

There seems to be some discrepancy with the initial publication year. This article consistently lists it as 1966, as do references (which may just be circular) in other HST articles. However, almost all of the online book sellers (that I scanned) listed it as 1967. Weird. Of course, the best source - a physical copy of the first edition of the book itself - would be the most accurate, but I haven't seen one.

A contemporary review in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/1967/01/29/books/thompson-1967-angels.html) is dated Jan 29, 1967, which suggests the book would have had to be published no later than January (small window in '67), or in 1966. So yes, it's most probably '66 - just haven't seen absolute proof online.

Also-- can't seem to find a decent ISBN for the first edition. There are numerous ISBNs for later publication dates, but the one for the 1st Ed is elusive. What I now have listed in the infobox may be the right one but it's hard to tell. (Note: 10-digit ISBNs are prior to 2007; 13-digit ISBNs are after 2007)

-- Brhiba (talk) 06:22, 15 February 2012 (UTC)