BOOKS

Notices and reviews of books, articles, plays and poetry dealing with homosexuality and the sex variant. Readers are invited to send in reviews or printed matter for review.

THE HOMOSEXUAL REVOLU. TION, by R. E. L. Masters, Julian Press, New York, 1962; 230 pp., $5.95.

I am quite sure that an unbiased and accurate appraisal of the aims, objectives and accomplishments of the homophile movement in the world today, together with an equally unbiased and accurate appraisal of the status of the individual homosexual in modern society could be both interesting and useful. If such an appraisal could be, or should be, made by a heterosexual it would be all the better. This, apparently, is what THE HOMOSEXUAL REVOLUTION purports to be; it is to be regretted that it falls so far short of its goal.

I suppose it is almost impossible in today's world for any heterosexual to approach the subject of homosexuality with any semblance of real objectivity. Most writers are so afraid of becoming, suspect themselves, by reason of their very interest in the subject, that they become peculiarly concerned with establishing beyond any shadow of a doubt the fact of their own complete heterosexuality. Mr. Masters is no exception. Unfortunately, Mr. Masters is somewhat more devious about establishing this than many, and has resorted primarily to the use of certain tricks which, while they succeed in conveying to the reader that he has no personal

interest in the lot of the homosexual, manage at the same time to give the impression that he is, if anything, leaning over backward to be fair, honest and completely objective. Mr. Masters is quite careful, for the most part, to avoid making any openly critical or disparaging statement about the condition of homosexuality itself, but he is not above resorting to semantic tricks to express his distaste for the whole nasty business. All too frequently and unnecessarily he uses loaded or emotionally charged words, harmless in one context, extremely damaging in another -words like "secret," "cult," "lavender," "orgy," and so forth. For example, there is nothing really wrong with calling ONE Inc. "society," even though, strictly speaking, it is not, but when it is labeled a "secret society," which definitely it is not, an impression has been created which no amount of honest explanation is going to dispel. Then, if in the same paragraph, or on the same page, there can but appear a few words such as "swish." "obscene," even though they have no direct connection with the word "society," the reader is quite likely to be trapped into making an association or forming an impression which cannot be attributed to any actual statement the writer has made.

Mr. Masters employs another and more insidious trick-that of causing

a

19