Man of the Year?
Sir:
I predict that TIME will feature Robert A. Taft as Man of the Year.
I vote for Dean Acheson, whose fatal diplomacy will shape U.S. policy for years to come.
MERLE FISCHLOWITZ Grinnell, Iowa
Sir:
. . . Dr. Ralph Bunche . . .
GUSTAVE C. HOENES San Fernando, Calif.
Sir:
General MacArthur--for carrying successfully for ten years the burden of other men's mistakes.
C. B. ROBINSON Georges Mills, N.H.
Sir:
. . . Trygve Lie.
JUDAH DICK New York City
Sir:
My hat is off to the man who can take it--and win decisively. I nominate Robert A. Taft
JOHN F. ERHARD Scranton, Pa.
Reservists' Rush
Sir:
Your Nov. 13 article "Run for the Hills, Boys" was not only timely, but extremely accurate. You overlooked one fact, though . . . Notwithstanding the orders given by
General Marshall ... my husband was called --on Nov. 11, he received orders to report for duty on Nov. 15 ...
Additionally, it appears that the Army is not allowing deferments for reservists. My husband asked for a deferment, was turned down, appealed, and was turned down again, because the "requirements of the service" dictated he go immediately. The appeal was turned down so fast that we thought that an electronic computing machine had analyzed it and rejected it, rather than a board of officers . . .
MELANIE M. BERNSTEIN Bayside, N.Y.
Sir:
"Irreparable" and "haphazard" are excellent words with which to describe the plight of U.S. Army reservists . . .
In one group, a furor was raised when orders to ship overseas without delay en route were issued. Many went absent without leave, but most grudgingly accepted their fate . . .
CORPORAL ROBERT S. BALME Camp Breckinridge, Ky.
G.B.S.
Sir:
Coming to "G.B.S.: 1856-1950" [TIME, Nov. 13], my eyes widened . . . [with] boundless admiration for a matchless evaluation of G.B.S.'s controversial personality and literary importance . . .
ARTHUR J. A. KOERNER Waco, Tex.
Sir:
I blush for you and your "G.B.S." feature. For the first time in my years of reading TIME, I was unable to finish an article. The author, may he always be nameless, is a diddler in humbug!
AUDREY ANDERSON Orange, N.J.
Sir:
... It is the most masterful copy you have published in years.
R. S. HART Alameda, Calif.
Sir:
Your spread on G.B.S. is more beautiful than informative . . .
CHESTER S. DAWSON Chicago
Sir:
. . . I think your pretentious evaluation of Shaw's life and works . . . repetitious and poorly written . . . You have very little to say about G.B.S. and you say it over & over again in as fancy a manner as possible . . . RIDGELY CUMMINGS Phoenix, Ariz.
Sir: How G.B.S. would love his obituary! . . .
LIONEL B. MOSES Evanston, 111.
Sir:
As an enthusiastic admirer of the Methuselah of literature, I wish to state that never before have I seen such a precise, artistic, literate, intelligent, penetrating, informative, wellrounded, readable, sympathetic yet critical summary of any man's life, character and achievements on two printed pages . . .
PETER H. NASH Cambridge, Mass.
Private Vision I want to thank you sincerely for your Nov. 20 story of Vision.
There was one error, however . . . You say: "He [Barlow] not only persuaded them [U.S. companies] to take ads, but to put up most of his $750,000 initial capital." Actually, Vision's stockholders include no companies, and are instead 27 private investors (some of whom, naturally, are businessmen).
The idea that our advertisers are owners of the magazine . . . can be just as embarrassing for them as for us . . . In fact, it is embarrassing for U.S.-Latin American relations to have the impression get around that large U.S. industrial firms are backing a news magazine such as ours . . .
WILLIAM E. BARLOW Publisher Vision New York City
Correction
SIR:
WOULD LIKE TO CORRECT ANY POSSIBLE IMPRESSION ROBERT ROBINSON'S ["UNEQUIVOCAL JUDGMENTS" ABOUT AMERICANS--TIME, NOV. 13] REPRESENTATIVE OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY PLAYERS' VIEWS. THE REST OF US WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR HIM AND TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EARNESTLY AND RESPECTFULLY THANK ALL THOSE CITIZENS OF A GREAT AND HOSPITABLE NATION WHO DID SO MUCH TO MAKE OUR VISIT THE WONDERFUL EXPERIENCE IT WAS.
BRIAN ACWORTH
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PLAYERS OXFORD, ENGLAND
Sir:
. . . Bit Player Robinson had best revise some of his sweeping generalities on the calibre of American intellectuality, if he ever hopes to graduate into the stellar role of a truly educated man . . . JACK NEALON Columbus, Ohio
Sir:
The boorish, pompous, patronizing and ill-considered remarks of Freshman Robinson should be excused, if not condoned, on the grounds of his patent youth and immaturity.
BRIAN E. WEBSTER Cornwall, Ontario
Sir:
. . . I hope Robert Robinson will come back to the U.S. after he has grown up . . .
EUGENE GIERINGER
Marblehead, Mass.
Sir:
What, again? . . . Mr. Robinson's article may have had a market in Oxford's undergraduate Isis, but I'm getting darn tired of seeing that type of hogwash being given undeserved circulation in TIME . . .
TED POWERS
Waterbury, Vt.
Spitballs & Pitfalls
Sir:
Re Faulkner on Waugh on Hemingway (Faulkner upheld Waugh's criticism of the critics of Hemingway's new novel, Across the River and into the Trees) in TIME Letters, Nov. 13:
I would say I think Across the River and into the Trees stinks except I did not write Men Without Women and The Sun Also Rises and therefore, by Mr. Faulkner's logic, I have nothing to stand on while I throw such a spitball. Would a few well-placed spitballs have saved Hemingway from the pitfall of delusion wherein he has knocked out Flaubert and others? If Hemingway does not need defending, as Mr. Faulkner asserts, why did Mr. Waugh and Mr. Faulkner bother? Is it that they are trusting to be his seconds when he gets into the ring with Shakespeare? . . .
MIKE MURPHY
Little Rock, Ark.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.