READERS write

REVIEW EDITOR: Read with interest Jack Parrish's critique of Roger Gellert's play Quaint Honour. While I enjoyed most of the article I do not agree that the play is stageworthy as a serious drama. I am making my comments based on the fact that I have tried to produce the thing unsuccessfully for the last seven months with the N.Y. Area Council of the Mattachine Society. When one really gets into the thing and starts analyzing it for the stage, the play soon appears to be a farce. I do believe that Mr. Gellert is laughing at homosexuality and is viewing the subject on an infantile level. As I see it, the play would be fine for Hollywood film production but not for the legit stage. Mr. Parrish asks if we are mature enough for it in this country and I say that we are too mature and intelligent for a farce like this. Such activities may go on in cloistered schools but the dialogue seemed entirely too unrealistic. The seduction scene describing the delights of orgasm is just too ridiculous. The play was tested before a private gathering and people laughed in spots which I thought were serious. The thing may be good for a smoker or a party where much liquor and tobacco abound but is too childish and stupid to be considered for the stage.—Mr. R. D. G., New York REVIEW EDITOR: I shall soon leave Los Angeles, and at my new place of residence I shall be unable to receive your magazine. Therefore I request that my membership and subscription to the REVIEW be cancelled. I am very grateful to the Mattachine Society for the great amount of information which I have received by reading the REVIEW and the Newsletters. Although I shall not be able to receive literature from you in future, possibly I shall someday once again be able to resume contact with you and participate in your program. In any event, I want to tell you that I think that you have been doing a splendid job, and I regret this cancellation which I must request.-Mr. R. M. M., Calif. REVIEW EDITOR: A tranquil and productive new year of 1961-I hope and pray that the unjust and also impractical discrimination manifested towards an energetic and creative and loyal minority such as the homo

sexual one here in the U.S.A. will continue to be lessened. So much of value can be accomplished by this often brilliant segment of the population if only it is accepted on a reasonable footing at all cultural levels. This has been done in a number of other countries with beneficial results to the country and the people involved. This is both reasonable and practical in the light of knowledge of human behaviorisms today. Mr. J. M. P., Oregon

REVIEW EDITOR: A friend sent to me in this isolated part of the "free trade" world the address of your periodical which, he informed me, is for homosexuals. We in this part of the world rarely come across such magazines and even our social life (especially if we are professional persons) is these days cramped, particularly on account of the Commissioner in N.S.W. in charge of the Police: He has a 'bug' regarding homosexvals.

Mr. D. B., New South Wales, Aust. REVIEW EDITOR: As a regular reader of Der Kreis (The Circle) of Zurich, Switzerland, I had the opportunity to notice publicity made for the Mattachine REVIEW. I am very interested to subscribe.—! Mr. H. R. S., New South Wales, Australia REVIEW EDITOR: I have for a long time been deeply and personally interested in the problems of sexual variants and am sincerely (and perhaps idealistically) interested in bringing about saner and more rational attitudes in the public-at-large, through education and greater understanding. Am also deeply Interested in social legislation and reform in general. Would appreciate it very much if you would give me some information regarding the work your organization is doing.—Mr. L. D. K., California.

REVIEW EDITOR: In reading the REVIEW, like many readers, I find "Readers Write" a favorite. And now, after subscribing for a year, I think it's about time I send my contribution. I've read each issue from cover to cover. There have been some most satisfying, helpful and enlightening articles. There have also been disagreeable and repetitious material, yet it has all added a

mattachine REVIEW

great deal to my study of the subject. Inevitably we all vary in our opinions, interpretations, and needs. Obviously the REVIEW cannot fulfill everyone's concept of perfection. Yet it is "perfect"' inasmuch as it is always the best that you are able to make it, considering the existing factors. It definitely is worthwhilel As you all are aware there, knowing my wife and myself, we are in no position to aid Mattachine with contributions. Yet, considering the paramount Importance of your work, and our con-

cern for the entire field involved, we can't afford not to help somehow. We have decided to squeeze out a pledge of $1.00 for each month during 1961. It's not much, but every little bit does help. To eliminate monthly letters, I am enclosing a money or der for $12, May 1961 see great progress in your endeavors. We're with you! I do not wear the mask. Please include my name in full if this letter is published in the REVIEW. Mr. John M. Eccles, Los Angeles

area.

Letters from readers are solicited for publication in this regular monthly department. They should be short and all must be signed by the writer. Only initials of the writer and the state or country of residence will be published. Opinion expressed in published letters need not necessarily reflect that of the REVIEW or the Mattachine Society. No names of individuals will be exchanged for correspondence purposes.

IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR NEWSSTAND PURCHASERS:

Two recent issues of the REVIEW did not appear on newsstands. They are December 1960 and January 1961. Both issues contain excellent fiction reprints from DER KREIS of Switzerland, and other important articles and features, including letters. You may order one or both of these issues directly from the REVIEW at 50¢ each, both for 1.00

(continued from page 22)

shirt may in his lifetime have contributed a great deal more to the world than these take away from it. And white tennis shoes-even girls'—on one man need not endanger the passerby who is living up to his own standards. Mr. Mous's closing thought is good enough to bear repeating here: "Remember," he writes, "classically, the homosexual who is valuable to society will gain at least sufferance-at most respect and admiration. But he must prove himself."

It is equally true if we replace "homosexual" with "individual," and we have said as much ourselves, many times. But while "respect and admiration" have to be earned, no one should have to make excuses for living, or pretend to be something he is not, to justify his existence.