To the Editor:

Re “The Scandal of a Nobel Laureate,” by Bret Stephens (column, nytimes.com, Oct. 17):

Peter Handke’s receipt of the Nobel Prize in Literature has unleashed a storm of criticism. The Austrian novelist and playwright has dismissed as unimportant Serbia’s genocidal massacre of thousands of Muslims in the 1990s.

Dissenting, Mr. Stephens contends that art and politics are separate realms. Decry the artist’s politics but treasure his artistry. Mr. Stephens ignores the immense platform or megaphone the Nobel committee has awarded Mr. Handke. There will be those who will be convinced that his false claims must have some legitimacy, simply because he is a Nobel winner.

Why am I so sure? In 2000 I spent 10 weeks in a British court on trial for libel. The Holocaust denier David Irving sued me for calling him a Holocaust denier, an anti-Semite and a racist. Before the trial, many people told me that Mr. Irving’s claims must have some legitimacy because he was such a well-respected writer.

Only when my legal team demonstrated the depth of his falsehoods — the judge called him a “pro-Nazi polemicist” — was his reputation finally broken.