In the March/April 2011 edition of Vintage Motorsport, several issues seemed to collide. On page 122, the "Pick of the Litter" for the October 14-17 2010 get-together of the Sportscar Vintage Racing Association at Road Atlanta was the McLaren M8F owned by Scott Hughes. The Hughes McLaren is presented in the same papaya colors as the 1971 M8F that Peter Revson used to win that year's Can-Am title. Indeed, Hughes has repeatedly stated that this is the very chassis that Revson used that season. The author of the article, Walt Pietrowicz, simply repeated the oft-repeated claim by Hughes as to the provenance of the car.

There is, naturally, just one small problem with Hughes' claim that his McLaren is the one used by Revson during the 1971 season -- that car is owned by Evert Louwman and just happens to reside in the Dutch National Motor Museum in The Hague. The provenance of the Louwman is airtight, something that Revson's sister, Jennifer, can attest to, being very much familiar with both her brother's career and the cars that he drove. In fact, the chassis that Revson used has not been in the USA since 1985.

The "So What?" factor here is several-fold.

First, Scott Hughes has been approached by a number of people, to include Jennifer Revson, regarding the provenance of the car he owns. To date, it appears that Hughes has not taken kindly to any questions regarding the provenance of his car, to include having words with Jennifer Revson. That the preponderance of the evidence is against Hughes there is no doubt, yet this seems not to have deterred him from continuing to pass off the car as the "original" 1971 team car used by Revson.

Second, while this is an extreme example, there are many other such cases of -- to be kind -- "misrepresentation" in many and varying degrees to be found among those who participate in what could be more accurately termed "vanity" racing. No one has an issue with a replica or "tribute" car as long as it is presented as such. However, this may not always be the case, there being more than a few cars present and past who provenance was more than a bit questionable.

Third, although the editor of VM, Randy Riggs, was almost immediately hit with emails and even phone calls by knowledgeable readers regarding the Hughes McLaren, to include Tom Schultz -- the track historian at Road America and, full disclosure, a friend of mine -- and Jennifer Revson, it was not until the deluge became impossible to ignore that he agreed to no long use the author of the piece, Pietrowicz, and would print a correction in the next issue.

While, in my view, simply another tempest in a teapot in a realm of motor sports that I have very mixed feelings about, vintage or vanity racing, there is the consideration that magazines carrying vanity racing reports -- and quite often serve as a means of promoting various cars for subsequent sale, are less vessels for the outpouring of history than means of to a large extent catering to a very special clientele and more-often-than-not in bed with those in the marketplace associated with vanity racing machinery. Not only that, but there are more than a few instances of the articles in the front of magazines not always being good examples of historical research.

One may read much more regarding this contretemps at The Nostalgia Forum found at the Autosport site.*

All of this leads to the issue of automobile racing history being held captive to journalists.

While journalists are said to write the "first draft of history," it seems that journalists -- sports journalists sticking out in particular in this regard -- have little use for historians. Quite the contrary, many in the field of automotive journalism consider themselves to be historians. This thinking is reflected in the association of most automotive "halls of fame" with some organization of journalists who make the selections and write the biographies or citations for the inductees. There are occasions where these supposed journalist-historians get it very, very wrong when it comes to the history of automobile racing. Given that journalists and not historians not only write the first draft, but the subsequent drafts of history there is an inevitable miasma of misinformation that results.

At any rate, just another sign of the Apocalypse.

* Given the genuine antipathy that the clowns running the Autosport.com have for me, it truly pains me to even mention them much less direct anyone their way. Unfortunately, I created a monster in the form of The Nostalgia Forum (TNF) and even in its zombie form it lurches along with the occasion bit of goodness being found among the usual dribble and mindless fluff.