Nothing But Sex

To the Editors:

Re your cover story on Charlie's Angels [Nov. 22]: forget the intellectual analysis. The show is nothing but raw sex. I love it.

Jock K. Chung New Haven, Conn.

I think I'm in love! Three times over!

J. Brian Lihani Lexington, Ky.

I want TIME to be food for thought, not to furnish pictures for some bachelor apartment.

Mary L. Strom Dubuque, Iowa

Charlie's Angels: the show is yet another human sacrifice to the almighty god Nielsen and a giant step backward for womankind.

Gretchen Pinkerton Wexford, Pa.

I agree with your critical treatment of "TV's Super Women." But how dare you indict, rather snobbishly, the economic and artistic drives of the networks, as well as the shabby viewing habits of the general public, when TIME so obviously cashes in on the very attitudes it attacks?

Gerhart Waldorf Chapel Hill, N.C.

After months of apple pie, motherhood and the Jimmy and Jerry show, I needed this.

Rodney K. Reitz Lutherville, Md.

Are you trying to compete with Playboy and sell your magazine with sex and violence?

I would like you to know that there are people who believe in righteousness (including modesty), which brings peace from God, and who oppose sin, which brings damnation and judgment. We are offended by ubiquitous displays of this type, and urge you, in your own area of influence, to restrain yourselves.

David A. DeBell Annapolis, Md.

Without a doubt, the show's acting is bad, and the plots are even worse. But who cares!

Howard D. Derman West Lafayette, Ind.

An injustice was done a lovely, gentle lady when your "TV's Super Women" made it appear that Jaclyn Smith was cast in Charlie's Angels because of her relationship with a producer. Since I am the producer mentioned, I wish to correct the implication. I was producing The Rookies at the time Miss Smith was cast in the Angels pilot, and she garnered that role on her talent alone.

I did, however, produce the initial seven episodes of Charlie's Angels, and you are incorrect in stating that "no one really cares" about the quality of television. Most of us do. And we know we can do better; nonetheless, we do work in a commercial arena, and Charlie's Angels was successfully designed as pure escapism with no intellectual pretense.

Rick Husky Beverly Hills, Calif.

I applaud TIME's giving credit to its staff members for the cover story on Charlie's Angels: Editor Martha Duffy, Critic Richard Schickel, et al. It is a pity the same generosity was not extended to whoever created the series. Starting from the blank page, Ben Roberts and I wrote the script and then produced the "slick pilot," which then became a series.

Ivan Goff MGM Studios Culver City, Calif.

Rush for Blood

Re "A Sudden Rush for Blood" [Nov. 22]: Whom are we really trying to protect? Surely not Gary Mark Gilmore. I understand the right of appeal to be just that--a right, a privilege--not a demand to be forced on a compliant convicted person.

Ronald D. French Sea brook, Texas

Why offer five men $175 apiece to execute Gilmore when, ironically, the same trigger-happy society that breeds Gilmores is also capable of readily providing several zealots who would be delighted to do the job gratis?

Christine Newell Saratoga Springs, N. Y.

I must take issue with the Utah prison psychiatrist who examined Gary Gilmore. Since when is a person who murders without cause "intelligent, very rational and without any indication of mental illness"?

Richard W. Kammerer Philadelphia

I can think of no more cruel or inhumane punishment for someone than to be denied a dignified death by the waffling of bureaucracy.

Jeff Klein Redondo Beach, Calif.

"Where Is the Goals?"

The writing wrongs of entering freshmen [Nov. 8] are no worse than the writing wrongs of graduate-school professors. My husband and I are both graduate students. Here is a sample of some of the comments our professors have written on our papers:

1) Where is the goals?

2) It is also important to find out what is an exceptable solution to a problem or, what problems are considered exceptable by a community.

3) The concept of _________________ is not fully developped.

4) Your right in pointing out needs repairing the latter to assess the capabilities for performing corrections.

5) This work is not of high calaber.

Vicki lucci Ann Arbor, Mich.

Blatant Hypocrisy

Jimmy Carter said he was proud of his church for finally allowing blacks to worship there [Nov. 22]. If it were 1956, I could understand this; if it were 1966, I could feel a sort of relief. But in 1976 to feel proud that your church finally is going to allow blacks to worship in it is blatant hypocrisy. I wouldn't feel proud; I'd feel ashamed that it took the "Christians" of Plains, Ga., all this time to finally start acting like Christians.

John Godar Cincinnati

After the apparent shotgun vote to resolve the problems and embarrassments of "Jimmy Carter's" church, I have one question. What are all those bigots (at least 66) doing in a church that is supposedly Christian?

The screening committee should begin its job with the church's current membership.

(Mrs.) Elizabeth Koski Richland, Wash.

A Slap in the Face

Turkey's Premier Suleyman Demirel's "Message to America" [Nov. 22] is a slap in the face. As an American, I don't want his "warmest wishes." I want him to stop the rape of Cyprus, where my family lives in despair, my schoolmates number among the dead and missing. I want his 40,000 Turkish soldiers to leave, and the 200,000 refugees to be allowed to return to their homes. This would be a Bicentennial message we would gladly accept.

Constantinos Pavlides, M.D. Kirkwood, N.J.

As a foreigner in your country, I wish to say that Bicentennial messages to America from "antidemocratic authoritarians" are definitely in order.

The U.S. is a country where, as Turkey's Premier Demirel says, the "lack of knowledge of actual conditions in other parts of the world" is embarrassingly apparent to any visitor.

By refusing to examine other viewpoints and learn what led to them, one decreases the chance of ending these repressive regimes. One might even find oneself on the wrong side or, worse, fighting something that does not exist, except in a narrow, preconceived view of the world.

Daniel A. Barreto Appleton, Wis.

Man of the Year

I nominate George Washington as Man of the Year for our Bicentennial year 1976.

John Hunter Orr Altoona, Pa.

Besides President-elect Jimmy Carter, China's Chairman Hua Kuo-feng ought to be considered for Man of the Year. He too was a southern provincial governor, and together they rule, respectively, the world's most powerful and populous nations. Surely nobody else rivals chopsticks and grits in '76.

Kenneth Reese Berlin

I cannot think of any other person more deserving than India's Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to be Person of the Year. In the face of constant threats and criticisms from vested interest groups, the press and politicians in India and the Western world, she has shown rare fortitude and guts.

Sushil Mukherjee Lenox, Mass.

I swallow hard and cast a PersonoftheYear vote for Rene Levesque. As Premier of Quebec heading a transition government leading to eventual separation, he serves Canada with a test that it must pass for its very survival.

Larry Green Vancouver, B.C.

I guess Jimmy Carter has to be Man of the Year. But Arthur Burns, the principal architect of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy, rates a close second.

Philip Coleman Swarthmore, Pa.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.