Letters, Dec. 2, 1946

Smalltown, U.S.A.

Sirs:

May the editor of the Oakland (pop. 1,317), Iowa, Acorn (circ. 1,840) register a protest on behalf of hundreds of long-suffering weekly newspaper editors?

TIME’s issue of Nov. 11 would not in itself merit this protest. But as one of a long series of tongue-in-cheek, let’s-try-to-understand-these-poor-yokels pieces, it is one too many.

Not TIME, nor any other periodical, can overemphasize the admitted provincialism of Smalltown, U.S.A., nor call too much attention to the shortcomings of their newspapers which “come smudgily from flat-bed presses. . . .” But when TIME, with all other periodicals, observes only the typical and never the multitude of exceptions, the burden grows great.

Is TIME unaware of the millions of denizens of Smalltown who are reasonably literate—read TIME and even more liberal publications?

Of Smalltown’s press, the Pawnee Chief, the Lenox Time Table, the Hills Crescent may be typical. But has TIME never seen one of the hundreds of Smalltown newspapers which match the typographical and journalistic standards of their big brothers in the cities ?

TIME’s charge that the typical Smalltown weekly takes no stand on issues of the day may be supported by facts, but falls on deaf ears in the case of half a dozen Smalltown newspapers in this Iowa congressional district which fought all the way—fruitlessly, it must be admitted—to unseat a Congressman . . . who accepted the political endorsement of Gerald L. K. Smith. . . . The city dailies of the district supported this Congressman.

We’re not ashamed that crops, weather, family visits, meetings of Ladies’ Aid societies, Jolly Hour clubs, bridge and church groups constitute the backbone of the news we print. But we are fed up with the insinuation that we are spineless, illiterate hicks.

JOHN M. HARRISON

Editor

The Oakland Acorn

Oakland, Iowa

¶ To spiny, literate Editor Harrison, TIME’s salute for a spirited defense of grassroots life. TIME’S editors, writers and reporters are all hicks at heart.—ED.

Selection v. Recommendation

Sirs:

In a most astonishing comment on the Religious Book Club appearing in TIME [Nov. 4], you refer to the “religious laxity” of our board of editors for recommending King Jesus by Robert Graves.

Obviously, your commentator neglected to read our capsule review in the Religious Book Club Bulletin, which provided a brief outline of the book and its contents, stating its objectionable features and plainly referring to it as “shockingly sacrilegious.”

This review appeared under a heading, “Also Recommended,” which carries the following note in bold-face type: “Recommendation does not mean that the committee or management agrees with all points of view expressed by the author.”

We have received many letters and comments . . . which indicate that your readers received the impression that King Jesus was a Religious Book Club selection, which it most certainly was not.

Your commentator chose to pick out the names of four distinguished Protestant leaders stating that they “might well be ashamed of its [the board’s] religious laxity.” The fact is that none of the four gentlemen referred to had any part in the preparation of the review of King Jesus.

JONATHAN D. SPRINGER

Managing Director

Religious Book Club

New York City

¶ But the qualified “recommendation” was sufficiently broad to allow the publishers of King Jesus (Creative Age Press) to advertise: “A Religious Book Club Recommendation.”—ED.

Blocks & Blocks

Sirs:

I am sorry to have to point out two errors in an otherwise accurate and entertaining account of the work of the College Entrance Examination Board [TIME, Nov. 18].

Readers who tried to solve the block-counting questions had an impossible task. Somewhere in the process of publication you have deleted a line from one pile of blocks and added a line to the other, making the blocks in each pile of unequal size. . . .

You mentioned a new test being prepared for the Navy “to pick 5,000 candidates for Annapolis.” Although the Board does prepare the Naval Academy Entrance Examinations, the test referred to is not for candidates for Annapolis. It is the Navy College Aptitude Test to be used as a qualifying examination for the Naval R.O.T.C. and Naval Aviation College Program. . . .

HENRY CHAUNCEY

Director

College Entrance Examination Board

Princeton, NJ.

¶ Herewith the block test (answers: 32 in the first group, 16 in the second) as TIME’s Philadelphia engraver would have shown them if he had not dozed.—ED.

Land of the Free?

Sirs:

Never, never have I read of such terrible intolerance as in the case of the Columbians [TIME, Nov. 11]. To have race prejudice is bad enough in my opinion; but to openly “encourage our people to think in terms of race, nation, and faith,” is too much for any person with moral and human decency to stand. I am appalled! Can this really be “the Land of the Free?”

JAMES W. GERARD

Seattle

Sirs:

I hope the American people will take a serious view of the rising of Fascism in their country in the person of the Columbians. It would be well to note that from such a similar humble origin the Nazi Party was built up; its tenets were in every way similar and its membership comprised of the same brand of hooligans.

The people of the Southern States are extremely susceptible to Fascist doctrines; they show a strong liking for Fascist methods and violence. I do not believe a great deal of time and effort would need to be expended to convert a majority of these people to the Fascist faith. This having occurred, what then might not befall America?

C. A. GREAVES

Curaçao, N.W.I.

Sirs:

The facts are that if the South is left alone to solve the [race] problem we can expect just such hoodlums as the Ku Kluxers, Columbians . . . or Huey Long to solve it. . . . If we are to have freedom and a democracy it will come through Government interference and outside support to the few really good leaders such as Governor Arnall.

R. ALLEN

Nashville

Lively (Sob!) though Educated

Sirs:

Reader Killinger [TIME, Oct. 28] seems to object to your article about Lower Slobbovia [TIME, Oct. 7], and classes the comic strip which inspired it as “trash,” along with all the others. . . .

A great many graduate students and young professional people I have known follow Li’l Abner regularly, and seem to enjoy it without shame. Perhaps they have only a desire for “escape”; I prefer to think that they have a lively sense of humor, even though educated.

ELIZABETH W. PEEL

Rahway, NJ.

Sirs:

. . . Perhaps you had better mark Miscellany “off limits” in Killinger’s issue—he may find something a bit too humorous. . . .

J. DON OUINN

Kansas City, Mo.

Sirs:

. . . Apparently the political insinuation that Mr. Capp has presented in Li’l Abner was missed by Mr. Killinger. . . . True, Lena the Hyena was undoubtedly created to rib Chester (Dick Tracy) Gould; ah, but Lower Slobbovia was also created, I am sure, to rib a certain country. What more appropriate place than in Foreign News could the item have been placed ?

I am delighted that TIME has not lost its sense of humor. The “tongue-in-cheek” way that TIME presents some of the problems of the world makes it more possible for one to consider them sanely; for, unlike most newspapers, TIME never becomes hysterical over any situation, no matter of what grave portent. If one accepts a crisis by looking for whatever humor that crisis may contain, one is surely more apt to reach a sensible, sane and logical conclusion. . . .

G. R. WILSONNE

Horton, Ore.

Sirs:

Of Mr. Killinger’s letter [TIME, Oct. 28] you might say, “Killjoy was here.” Mr. Killinger’s sentiments typify the present murky melancholy which seems to be affecting so many Americans. . . .

JUNE HASTREITER

Birmingham, Mich.

New Lion & Friend

Sirs:

The writer of the otherwise very commendable article, “Something Old, Something New” [TIME, Nov. 4] states:

“The lion and unicorn of England which Revolutionary mobs had neglected to pull down in the 1770s still stood atop the old State House.”

One matter which Revolutionary mobs, and New England ones, in particular, were not negligent about during the 1770s was the destruction of all visible symbols of British sovereignty over the Colonies.

The original lion and unicorn were pulled down and burned on July 18, 1776 on the occasion of the first public reading of the Declaration of Independence in Boston. Those which TIME’s reporter observed, and falsely assumed to be the originals, were, in reality, the second set of replacements put there by the more sentimental restorers of a later generation.

NATHANIEL H. GIFFORD

Cambridge, Mass.

¶ Reader Gifford is right as a Ribstone pippin on the fact, may be a little off on the timing. Another story: lion & unicorn were torn down by Colonial soldiers after the British evacuated Boston March 17, 1776. To TIME’s reporter, a backward look for discounting the ardor of his Revolutionary forbears.—ED.

Man of the Year

Sirs:

Permit me to place in nomination as Man of the Year one of the most brilliant military diplomats of our history—General Mark W. Clark.

EBERHARD P. DEUTSCH

New Orleans

Sirs:

I name no killjoy for Man of the Year. I nominate Kilroy the Man who “was here.”

MORRIS GOODMAN

Montreal

Sirs:

Would not Mr. G.O.P. Elephant be the outstanding personality for 1946, and a fitting portrait to grace your cover ?

ROBERT H. BURGERT

San Diego, Calif.

Sirs:

. . . That man who has done most toward world union and peace. I nominate Jimmy Byrnes.

GRIEG ASPNES

Minneapolis