Did anyone else think that The Salt Path was seriously overrated?

An appalling book. I read it when it first came out in 2018, and was hugely underwhelmed. The writing is really third-rate, and the self-pitying entitlement of the couple, together with their own sense of superiority, and lack of empathy is hideous. It always felt fake to me, but I could never put my finger on it. The "legal situation" that causes them to take to the road in the first place is highly improbable, and I always suspected that a number of the events and characters they "encountered" were pure fiction, and Winn isn't skilled enough to carry that kind of invention off. Even if the majority of events are factually correct, Winn and Moth would still come over as feckless, irresponsible, and difficult to like, let alone sympathise with. Rightly exposed for the frauds they are. Nice cover by Angela Harding though (as always). 😄

I would imagine there is also the possibility that he was misdiagnosed in the first place - accurate diagnosis for such conditions is often difficult. Its reasonable to assume specialists giving an opinion on the individual have access to his medical records - there would be nothing to stop them pointing out if the diagnosis never happened.

The “you don’t look sick” part of the piece was one I found most irritating. I have one of those varying state immune/neurological conditions and could easily be subject to this because I’m also a regular (if slow) walker. I also don’t show the “normal” progression. I walk because it helps and every walking group I’ve ever met has people with similar stories. There are many experiences of people whose adoption of walking coincides with a slow down in progression of immune/neurological conditions. That doesn’t make walking a cure or even suitable for everyone but its a common experience. Any journo deciding to “investigate” me would be able to find experts who say that its simply not possible to do the level of walking or gain any improvement that way because there is no data on this.

All of us get tarred with “you don’t look sick”. Not a problem for me - I was already established in an in-demand profession when I was diagnosed which means I’ve never been dependent on the state. However I’m very aware that if I were a lower status more replaceable employee I’d have been managed out rather than afforded flexibility I needed to keep bringing the money in. That would make me one of those benefits scroungers being pointed at as “must be fit to work because walking” (ignoring the unwillingness of employers to take on disabled staff) so beloved by journalists who trot off to find medical professionals with differing opinions and present that as evidence.

Immunological and progressive neurological disease is still poorly understood outside a handful of famous conditions, especially in the bodies of women.

The news in the Times today is that RW has issued a statement following consultation with her lawyers. She has also issued redacted copies of letters from two neurological consultants. The consultant in the first letter 'speculates' that this could be a mild form lf the condition.
^^
In another letter, dated February this year, another consultant neurologist described his case as “unusual”. The doctor wrote: “The clinical course in this case has been so atypical that we shouldn’t discount any possibility. His clinical story has been unique.”

Im sure people will draw their own conclusions from this regarding the medical issue.

She also apologises for any mistakes she made with her former employer's money.

There are ways of confirming a diagnosis without revealing your entire medical history

Well I suspect that a journo writing a hit piece isn’t going to be interested in anything other than full disclosure but bluntly any journalist asking me to justify my disability would to told to FOAD.

As I said - I never read them as the schmaltzy heroes portrayed in the article and I’m surprised others did. It was clear in the book that they were middling sympathetic at best and had made plenty of bad judgements. The book was about the experience of the walking. Its seems a lot of people read what they wanted to hear which is not unusual but doesn’t make for good facts.

Sorry late coming back to this but the article very carefully doesn’t state that Winn was an embezzler. Its reports other people accusing her of being embezzler.

As I said, I’ve no idea whether it was incompetent book keeping, succumbing to embezzlement to pay other debts assuming it would be returned (a common pattern in small scale embezzling) or if she is a hardened criminal. That article provides no evidence of the third and the only police action was to “question” - she was never even charged or followed up. Victims don’t make decisions to drop charges, especially with sums of the claimed size. The “smart lawyer” was the loan shark’s smart lawyer not theirs.

Similarly the article strongly implies the illness is faked but carefully doesn’t state that (which would be actionable). It simply says they spoke to consultants who hadn’t seen that pattern of disease. Anyone with an immune/neurological condition (I’m one) will know that patterns of disease vary, accurate diagnosis can be very difficult and opinions from specialists can vary hugely.

Mostly though what made me feel this was very unObserver like was the free pass given to the dodgy deal over the loans. We have a “business man” who gives two people with no funds or means to repay 100k in loans secured on their house, whose solicitor demands NDAs from those involved and then declares bankruptcy relatively soon afterward. I cannot imagine the real Observer investigative team giving him the same sympathetic free pass.

I’ve subsequently heard many “reputable” journalists trotting out “they were faking it” based on that article as their only evidence, despite it being plain many of them haven’t read the article or the book. Journalism is not what it was years ago - competing with clickbait has reduced standards across the board IMO.

I used to be a regular subscriber to the Guardian. I ditched that a couple of years into Viner’s tenure due to the drop in quality of the journalism. I’d only kept subscribing that long as the Observer was still a good investigative paper. I noted how all those reporters were banged out on the last day before the transition to Tortoise.

Tortoise/Bylines were both productions I looked at as alternatives to the Grauniad. Both started well but rapidly became clickbait. Most of the quality investigations appearing in Tortoise have been independently done and sold to Tortoise rather than their own research. I don’t think Tortoise/Bylines are any worse than eg the Daily Mail or Daily Mirror but I don’t take them any more seriously either.

Agreed.

The solicitor of the family she stole from is quoted in the article.

If it hadn't been true the Walkers could have stopped publication

The article says they have embezzled £64K from a former employer, it would be libel if it wasn't true so the Observer must be pretty confident in its sources.

Have you seen this?

Yes exactly this. The way in the book they justified stealing , lying, deceiving.

"They seem to have an almost sociopathic attitude to wrong doing, we are not bad people so what we do is not really bad either."

There are ways of confirming a diagnosis without revealing your entire medical history. Frankly the 'mix up' over his illness is the least of it. It's possible that he was misdiagnosed, that's the kindest perspective I can put on it, but he wasn't 'cured', and that could well have given false hope to some seriously ill people which is not something I can just brush off I'm afraid.

I had never been attracted to the book, which looked drippy and not very well written, but sort of thought I ought to read it. When I saw them on Rick Stein's Cornwall programme I thought they were extremely odd, and that put me off even more.

They seem to have an almost sociopathic attitude to wrong doing, we are not bad people so what we do is not really bad either.

I await with interest to see how things unfold!

You've completely misrepresented (or misunderstood) what the article says.

i listened to the Salt Path as an audiobook and enjoyed it mostly - I knew some of the areas they were walking and it was quite evocative. The book did not leave me thinking they were entirely victims - more that they had had some bad luck, made some bad decisions. It wouldn’t surprise me if the real decisions were spectacularly bad. That kind of biographical writing is never the unvarnished truth.

However that article reads more like a classic tabloid hit piece on someone who has become a minor celeb than traditional Observer quality journalism. I wouldn’t assume its any more accurate than the original book. Much of it is based on claims by the “life coach” married to the loan shark whose loans got them into escalating debt and whose solicitor demanded NDAs from others involved. A life coach whose “name was changed for privacy” but is quite happy to be photographed for the press. I’m sure her business will benefit from the publicity.
The police comment was merely “Winn had been questioned”, not that he had been charged (and in the case of fraud, its they/CPS who make the decision to investigate and prosecute once involved). Even the opening paragraph “I’ve been waiting for a journalist to call” is a bit weird. Nor do I see why anyone should share their private medical records just because a journo wants to make a few quid on a hit piece and has found consultants saying they personally have not seen the reported pattern of disease. I’ve no idea whether the guy has the condition described in the book, was misdiagnosed or has something else altogether.
Claiming they were not homeless because someone said they had some land in France (such an easy option to leave when you have no funds) just increases the sense of a tabloid hit piece.

So to be honest whilst I’m sceptical about some parts of the book I’m equally sceptical about the hit piece.

For one brief moment I thought all my suspicions were going to prove to be unfounded! I still have a hope in the goodness of people

Wow. The Observer story is eye opening.
I knew their story was full of holes but I assumed the background was incompetence not serious criminality that ruined someone else's life.

And (as someone with a neurological condition) the medical side had made me uneasy but I felt mean thinking it! But it definitely made me feel ashamed I couldn't "walk myself better". I hope the book gets pulled. I hope the film gets pulled.

Maybe someone can write the real story as a book and film!

Yes, there's a discussion about this on AIBU just now. The Observer article is interesting; worth a look.

Sorry, not quite sure why my link hasn't posted. There's an article in The Observer today about 'The Real Salt Path'. It answers a lot of the concerns on this thread.

Will anyone want to read it after this?

It’s 99p today if anyone does want to read it!

https://amzn.to/4ezVBio

I’m about a third of the way in and struggling which surprises me because I usually love this sort of book.

The court case stuff is weird - the only explanation I can see is that the whole thing had been done and dusted for ages and they just hadn’t bothered to prepare or think about it or engage with the court. Bailiffs aren’t just sent round at a moments notice - - the claim has to have been decided and then subsequently enforced with about 6 months gap.

Then the constant snarkiness about other people including people who went really out of their way to help them. And very little so far at least about the path or the scenery except that it is hot and hilly and they forgot sun cream…).

Saw the film yesterday , enjoyed it (Jason Isaacs is lovely), but it felt a bit long.

The book infuriated me. The stories of how they ended up in such hardship was so full of holes.
They seemed like people who constantly made poor decisions and blamed everyone else.

Some of the descriptions of the coastline were nice but the totally lack of honesty amd ability to make sensible decisions just made it so hard to enjoy

Hated it. First impression was of a couple so smug and self confident ( arrogant), that they assumed their superior intelligence would allow them to plough through the legal system and emerge victorious from a legal battle that is never explained, other than that "it was lost through an administration error"' then their home and garm were almost immediately possessed by bailiffs leaving them penniless and homeless??? Pretty unlikely and I cannot find anything about this online ?? Following that, poorly written and unlikeable people with zn unshakeable belief in their selves which unfortunately people have proved to them with their uncritical praise of this book and now by casting Gillian Anderson as Raynor Winn.
Does anyone know what the actual court case was ( I mean more than just their account?)

I gave up after 50 pages...I found the couple feckless.

Thank goodness others found the salt path tedious and cliched. I lived in Cornwall most of my life and frankly I barely recognised it!