RANSVESTIA

I liken this publication of Virginia's to wading through a sea of horseshit to get some little goody on the other side. There are a few good points. Offhand, I forget what. The "book" could be condensed to a couple of pages, or maybe even one page. A small one.

If you like horseshit, by all means-read it. But until Ole Virginia has it rewritten by PUDGY, it is a waste of time and money for you.

PUDGY ROBERTS is a first class professional impersonator. His address is: P.O. Box 71 Prince St. Station, N.Y.C., NY 10012.

Now you have to admit that that is a little gem-pretty flawed, but still a gem. I am much more amused than aggravated by this effort. But there are a few points that might be worth a comment. I like the "alleged Grandma of American TV-ing." While I'm not particularly happy about the "grandma" bit-who wants to grow old-the fact is that I was working in this field and doing helpful things in its probably before Eve Browne knew what the word TV meant. And of course, she is unaware- -as are most others for that matter-that I was the one who invented the "TV" abbreviation in the first place—and that can be documented if necessary. It is interesting that she uses the word "American" twice in her diatribe as though she thought that I was some sort of foreigner. To the extent that I was the first to stand up and be counted by way of publications, appearances, lectures, etc., movements and organizations in Sweden, Denmark, England, Australia and New Zealand and indirectly by way of the British Beaumont Society of the organization in France. So I'm proud of being the Grandma of it all and I'll let my efforts stand on their own merits. They certainly don't have to be defended against the Eve Browns and Pudgy Roberts of this world who even combined can't begin to compete on the basis of services rendered. But then it has always been a case of "them that can-do, and them that can't criti- cize and carp from the side lines."

I don't really see that my age (Grandma) (living in the past) has much to do with the merits of the Wives book. It is not "dated" in terms of the material in it since the problems of wives in say the 1930s and 40s are essentially the same as those of wives in the 1970s. Moreover, the manuscript was read, criticized and contributed to by a half dozen actual wives who had dealt with the problem so I

72