Former State Representative Maureen Murphy once said the reason there are so few female politicians is that it is too much trouble to put makeup on two faces. In the United States, politicians have the reputation as being lying, two-faced worms who are only in it for the money, the power, and the fame. That being said, certain names in history arise as belonging to those who possess true integrity, honor, and courage. Among those is Martin Luther King, Jr. Not only is King credited as being a peaceful freedom fighter and Baptist minister, King also won the Nobel Peace Prize, earned the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and has a national day in his honor (Wikimedia Foundation). Working with his right hand man and the secretary-treasurer of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Ralph David Abernathy, King and his fellow civil rights fighters traveled across the United States to establish equality for African-Americans. However, unlike most names that have become symbols for heroes and role models for those of proceeding generations, the name Martin Luther King, Jr. has come to represent an incomplete man, a man that is nearly unknown to the public. Though King was known for his compassion and courage in fighting for African-American rights, there is sufficient evidence provided by those close to him to question his morality in other realms. Some even go as far to argue that Martin Luther King, Jr. was not only a racist, but a sexist as well. The point of this paper is not to argue that King was either of those; it merely means to argue that Martin Luther King, Jr. was not the man he led the public to believe he was, either for better or worse. If America knew the

2

full and real Martin Luther King, Jr., it can be brought into question as to whether this name would hold the reverence it does today.

Some time after the death of his friend Martin Luther King, Jr., Southern Christian Leadership Conference officer Ralph David Abernathy wrote an autobiography, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down. Though ridiculed for writing a book that included private parts of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s life that betrayed the image that King himself wanted portrayed, Abernathy felt inclined to describe these events anyway. One can determine after reading this autobiography that Abernathy felt no malice toward King and had no motive for maliciously slandering his name. It is in this book that different faces of Martin Luther King, Jr. emerge. Though some of these faces reveal a man who had an “unflagging capacity to have fun and to make everybody else join in,” they also reveal an often ill and pessimistic man with took ideas and credit from other sources and who did not necessarily have the morality of the minister that is currently connected to Martin Luther King, Jr. (Abernathy, 467).

It is to the regret of Ralph David Abernathy that Martin Luther King, Jr. did not reveal his “fun-loving” side to the world (Abernathy, 467). Flipping through photographs and descriptions of King, one is given the impression of a solemn minister with a reverence for the Lord and non-violent ways. According to Abernathy, there was also a major part of King that involved telling jokes, good naturedly teasing people, reenacting stories, and generally being the life of a party. Martin Luther King, Jr. possessed an “uncanny” ability to absolutely nail people’s idiosyncrasies as he mimicked them and recounted his interactions with them. In addition, he could turn any boring event into a good laugh. Abernathy expresses regret that Americans can not fully appreciate

3

Martin Luther King, Jr. in his entirety because they have missed out on one of the most endearing pieces of him (Abernathy, 468).

There was no maliciousness of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s part when he deliberately chose to portray himself as a solemn minister when in public. King was convinced that if he revealed this side of himself to the public, he would lose his hard-earned supporters faith and he would become the butt of his opponents’ jokes. As Abernathy wrote of their circumstances, “To confront such a situation with frivolity would have been to trivialize the dangers we faced and to suggest to the general public that we were happy-go-lucky “characters” of story and song” (Abernathy, 468). Both Abernathy and King felt that how seriously they represented themselves was the degree to which the public was going to take them seriously. Though it is understandable as to why King would not want to be goofing off while giving a speech at his March on Washington, this is just one example of how little the American public truly knows about Martin Luther King, Jr.

Ralph David Abernathy also discusses the dark side of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s demeanor. According to King’s right hand man, King himself often fell into deep bouts of pessimism. He would threaten to give up his end of the non-violent fight for equality across the board. These episodes would often be accompanied by physical illness attesting to the emotional overflow raging inside of Martin Luther King, Jr. However, Abernathy is quick to point out that these weaknesses were invisible to the public (Abernathy, 491). Each and every time Martin Luther King, Jr. arose to address a crowd, he was the symbol of good health and strength.

4

Delving even deeper into the darker side of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s life, it is inevitable to avoid stumbling on the strong evidence suggesting King was involved in not just one, but numerous extramarital affairs. Until the publication of Abernathy’s autobiography, much of

what was known to the public was speculation. These rumors run the range from a single incidence of sexual relations during his career to the extent that King was involved in the rape of three women, both white and black. Although Abernathy alleges with “the greatest confidence that he was never attracted to white women and had nothing to do with them,” (Abernathy, 472) the color of the women with which King had sexual relations has always been ambiguous. However, it was this infamous and well-publicized comment by Abernathy that earned King, in some eyes, the title of being racist for judging based on the color of one’s skin.

The ethnicity of the women put aside, there is little room for doubt as to whether these affairs actually existed. Abernathy details a private conversation he had with King while sitting out a sentence in a jail cell. When confronting King about the affair he was currently having and addressing the impact it could have on their campaign, King responded, “Ralph, what you say may be right, but I don’t care … I have no intention of cutting off this relationship” (Abernathy, 475). Not only does Martin Luther King, Jr. acknowledge he is having an affair, he refuses to end it even if it affects the credibility of the campaign.

If the public had received wind of these affairs during Martin Luther King, Jr.’s lifetime, there is a high likelihood their reception of him would be much different than it is today. For being a minister, these telling actions speak volumes about King’s morality. Though much of what is spread is based on speculation, it cannot be denied that King was involved in extramarital affairs. As described in a book review by Jon Meacham in Newsweek (1998), Taylor Branch’s

5

Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years 1963-1965 includes details of the night King spent in the Willard Hotel. After the FBI planted bugs in King’s room, “14 hours of party chatter, the clinking of glasses and the sounds of illicit sex–including King’s cries of “I’m f–ing for God”

and “I’m not a Negro tonight!”” were allegedly recorded. However, as per orders of a United States District Judge, the FBI tapes are to remain a part of the “National Archives and sealed from public access until 2027” (Wikimedia). Until this time, only a select handful of individuals truly know what transpired that particular night. However, the fact remains that Martin Luther King, Jr. himself not only did not deny these affairs, he continued them knowing they could endanger his campaign for civil rights if they were unveiled.

There is also a false face that Martin Luther King, Jr. revealed to the public, one which can be supported with documents and texts (Hubbard, 3). As per Abernathy, many of the ideas and speeches that King presented as his own actually were founded by Abernathy himself. Abernathy writes that “as long as he was our leader, I gave him my complete and unqualified support” (Abernathy, 478). In this circumstance, King is, in essence, excused from plagiarism because Abernathy willing handed over rights to these ideas. However, what seems less excusable and infinitely less known to the public was that “he stole his ideas and illustrations from older works” (Abernathy, 479). One of America’s greatest appreciations of Martin Luther King, Jr. is found in his ability to captivate an audience. Excerpts of King’s speeches are constantly referenced and exclaimed over. If the public were to know the extent to which King “borrowed” from others, it is quite possible their appreciation and respect for this minister’s integrity and morals would be demolished.

6

If one were to take a look at other modern icons, such as Martha Stewart, Bill Clinton, and James Frey, it can be determined that the publics opinion of a well-known person if affected by that person’s actions. The public is not fickle in who they pick to exult over, nor is the public naive enough to overlook glaring faults. For example, once Martha Stewart was imprisoned for her illegal activities, her name and face lost much of the integrity they once held. The same applies to Bill Clinton, who lost the respect of many Americans after not only engaging in extramarital activities but also denying them. Finally, author James Frey who falsified his memoir lost the respect of even Oprah after his misdeeds were revealed. Applying these examples to Martin Luther King, Jr., it is difficult to not see how the publics opinion of King would be drastically modified if the public knew all faces of the minister.

In conclusion, one can see that Martin Luther King, Jr. was not the full man he presented to the world. It is clear why he would conceal the joker part of his demeanor in order to gain ground in his civil rights movement. However, if the general public knew during his lifetime what even now few of us know about his indiscretions with women, his illness, and his plagiarizing tendencies, it would be difficult to image that there would be a day devoted to his

honor every year. Though it cannot be denied that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a courageous man who was devoted to his civil rights movement, it also cannot be denied that this minister fell numerous times into serious lies, frauds, and indiscretions that everyday people, ones without a day in their honor, have managed to avoid.