Tuesday, December 6, 2022

Yet Another Peter Haining Fraud

Recently I came across a reference to a long lost silent film, The Werewolf (1913), reportedly the first werewolf film. It was short, a two-reeler (18 minutes long, according to IMDB),  with a script by Ruth Ann Baldwin, based on a short story (supposedly) by "Henry" Beaugrand. The film was lost in a studio fire in 1924.

I was curious to read the story. The first place I found it was in Peter Haining's Werewolf: Horror Stories of the Man-Beast (1987). In his introduction, Haining wrote:

Henry Beaugrand (1855-1929) was an American magazine writer with an abiding interest in American Indian history and folklore, and he contributed stories and essays on these subjects to various periodicals of the day, including The Century Magazine, which published "The Werwolves" in its issue of August 1898. It has never been collected in book form, a fact which is all the more surprising because the Canadian film director, Henry McRae, used it as the basis for his silent movie, The Werewolf, made in 1913. This pioneering film starred Chester Graves as an Indian brave who changes into a wolf to persecute the soldiers, trappers and settlers who are intruding on his tribal lands. Though the short film was very unsophisticated by today's standards--the transformation taking place through a quick camera dissolve from the man to a live wolf--there is no denying its position as the forerunner in a whole genre of popular movies. 

I know better than to take anything Haining says at face value (and have previously detailed another of his frauds from this specific book here). In brief I find two major problems with his above statements, and one larger problem with the story itself as he reprinted it. 

 
The first problem is with the authorship Haining cites. The original publication, which is indeed in the August 1898 issue of The Century Magazine, is signed only as "H. Beaugrand" (see above), a byline which is otherwise and authoritatively identified as the Canadian soldier, newspaper owner, politician and author, Honoré Beaugrand (1848-1906),  A full description of his life can be found in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography, here, including the mention of this specific story. Haining's attribution to the erroneous author is currently repeated all over the web, exhibiting another instance of the lasting effect of his frauds.

The next problem with Haining's account is over his synopsis of the lost film. His account does not match contemporary descriptions. (Of course he gives no source for his account of a film lost since 1924!) Chester Graves did not star in it at all--and there is no "Indian brave who changes into a wolf" The werewolf in the film is not a man but a native American woman. Did Haining invent his description merely to sound more authoritative, figuring no one would call him out?  The 1913 poster for the film (seen at right) describes the film as follows: "A beautiful story, based on an Indian legend. Watuma, daughter of a wronged Indian squaw, is turned into a wolf. She returns, years later, as a 'wolf-woman' to wreak vengeance on Clifford, reincarnated as a prospector." The plot of the silent film, as it survives, can seem a  bit confusing.  I refer the reader to the "official synopsis" of the film as cited by Brad Middleton at his blog, My Bloody Obsession. Scroll down here.

Haining's worst crime is in how he mis-presents the text of the story.  In its Century Magazine appearance (pp. 814-823), it is a story in three parts, the third of which is larger than the first two combined. Haining prints only the first two parts (pp. 814-818), and omits the rest of the story, which curiously, given that it covers the native woman's vengeance in the form of a wolf against her unfaithful husband, is actually the part of the story which supplied the basis for the 1913 film.  An accurate description of the full story is given by Jess Nevins here, in his Encyclopedia of Fantastic Victoriana


7 comments:

  1. I have enjoyed many of Haining's anthologies, but it's sad that his legacy is marred by this kind of thing. Anyone can make mistakes but this appears suspicious. I well remember being fooled by his assertions about Sweeney Todd being a real person until I read a more authoritative book on the subject by Robert L. Mack.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I recently re-read August Derleth's short story "The Lonesome Place" in NIGHTFRIGHTS, one of the numerous Haining anthologies published by Taplinger in the late 1960s and ‘70s. After reading the Derleth story and one by John Wyndham called "Close Behind Him," I looked at the copyright credits. For Derleth's story, Haining says it was published in WEIRD TALES in 1941 and also references SOMETHING STRANGE. I thought, What book is that? Did he mean SOMETHING NEAR, a Derleth collection published by Arkham House? But when I checked ISFDB it says the story was first published in the February 1948 issue of FAMOUS FANTASTIC MYSTERIES! So it couldn't have appeared in SOMETHING NEAR and I can't identify a book titled SOMETHING STRANGE. Problems with the copyright page continue with the Wyndham story. Haining says it was published in STRANGE TALES in 1942 and reprinted in COLLECTED STORIES from Doubleday. Again, both of these credits are wrong. The story was first published in the January-February 1953 issue of FANTASTIC. As for COLLECTED STORIES (by Wyndham?) it doesn't seem to exist. Do Haining’s frauds extend to the copyright pages of his books?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The short answer is: yes. You simply can't trust anything Haining has said without corroborating it elsewhere.

      Delete
  3. I remember reading Hainings' Sweeny Todd 'biography' and being nonplussed by the lack of index or footnotes. I ask myself - what was Hainings' real intention? Did he not understand that his readers would feel deceived? If he had prefaced that book with a note stating that it was 'faction' it would be forgivable.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What would someone gain by doing this? I can see why someone might claim someone else's work as their own, but why make up where stories were first published, or misattribute authors? Makes no sense to me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Apart from the time saved by invention and misattribution rather than research, someone with a malevolent sense of humour or vanity might meddle with historical records. An anthology editor would be well-placed to do so. Examples in other areas are Edmund Backhouse - "the hermit of Peking" - or Richard Meinertzhagen' s ornithological records. "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" are probably the most infamous instance of the misuse of historical records.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suspect Haining's motives were mixed. Perhaps the process started out as a way to save time. Later on, some stories were certainly devised to help his anthologies sell (e.g. a collection of Irish stories would perhaps be more salable with an unknown story attributed to Dorothy Macardle instead of its actually author Lyllian Huntly Harris, see http://desturmobed.blogspot.com/2011/07/lyllian-huntley-harris.html). Later it seems to have become a game for Haining.

      Delete