Those who write history with a "hidden agenda" and jaundiced view are not historians. Revisionists such as Thomas Reeves are nothing more than the Kitty Kelleys of academia who want to sell sensationalism and books rather than present objectivity in facts and events. Muckrakers comes to mind, although some redeeming value came from muckrakers in some of their work at the turn of the century. There is no redeeming value in Reeves' book.
Reeves' "A Question of Character: A Life of John Kennedy" (June 23) is the type of historical storytelling that one would find in the National Enquirer rather than in the classrooms of academia. The title alone suggests his bias and his thesis, both of which he apparently set out to prove. His approach was similar to Kelley's.
I'll keep my "Camelot" and its warm memories and leave the fantasy writing to the Kelleys and Reeves of America.
DR. ALFRED LIGHTFOOT