EDITORIAL

Of the vast amount of material published each month in the United States, ONE Magazine with its modest thirty-two pages stands practically alone in its attempt to talk about the homosexual: his life, his loveshis future. ONE can hardly afford to make a mistake. Yet ONE's editors are not superhuman.

In trying to bring together the very best and most persuasive thinking of the moment consistent with some literary standard, we naturally have found it necessary to mix many souls with many methods. We have not found them all equally congenial, although there have been surprisingly few that could be described as antipathetic. And in every case it has been our first purpose to set forth the homosexual as the homosexual sees himself, and to explain him on his own terms.

In such a magazine as ONE it is not always possible to please every reader. Following each issue, letters upon letters come in observing our lack of originality or deploring our choice of poetry-"ghastly fiction" -along with an equal amount of praise for the same pieces. We try to give the work of each of our writers and our material generally as comprehensive a treatment as possible within our space limitations. Recently cases have appeared where some of our readers felt that the editors allowed too much latitude.

The loudest and most vigorous protest received in a long time came with the presentation of the story "Joel Beck" (November, 1959). The editors saw in "Joel Beck" a very dramatic representation of the lives of a segment of our homosexual population, which many of our readers would not care to acknowledge, we admit, but is nonetheless very real. "The Junk Dealer" (March, 1960) was offensive to others who felt it to be in questionable taste, but the majority of our readers saw the truth through the clever humor. Cristina Valentine's "Homosexuality as Compared with Child Molestation and Other Compulsions" (April, 1960) has made everyone mad (see "Readers on Writers" section this issue). Not very pleasant reading maybe, but it has stirred many people from their lethargy. With the need to cover so much territory in every issue ONE Magazine has to present varied, often conflicting, viewpoints of the homosexual. It is not the intention of the editors to show only the bad side; but it is necessary to show the good and the bad in proper perspective.

Beyond a question, with the subject of homosexuality and the homosexual the problems to be discussed are endless; the issues to be clarified are without number. It is the duty of the editors of ONE Magazine to tell the whole story and tell it well so that our readers may see their place in modern society. This is a large assignment.

Don Slater, Editor

one

4