Ready for V-Day?

Sirs:

I have just finished reading "Ready for V-Day" (TIME, Sept. 4). You bet we are ready for it, but it would seem that our definition of V-day is not in accord with that of the patriots (?) at home. . . .

There are some of us who have been fighting the Battle of the Pacific for almost three years. It hasn't been easy and, although we are making great strides toward victory, there are still some terrible battles to be fought in which thousands of young American boys will fall. Why ? So the nation can have parades and celebrations, blow whistles and get drunk after just one foe has fallen?

Let those who think this war is over with the capitulation of Germany remember this: the day they are parading and enjoying their celebration there will be men out here dying from bullets, shrapnel and disease for them; men living horrible existences in filthy, swampy, disease-infested jungles, for them. Don't get me wrong--we will be just as happy and just as proud of our brothers when they have won the great Battle of Europe. We know what sacrifices have been made and will be made to bring about this victory. But in God's name--don't break faith with us in the Pacific!

(Y2/c) GEORGE A. KENT, U.S.N.R. c/o Fleet P.O. San Francisco

Sirs:

After reading the article, we are praying that the war will soon be over in Germany so Tallulah Bankhead may take a drink (in public) and the sailors at Farragut Naval Training Center will have their excuse for kissing the local females aged nine to 90.

PHMI/c) JACK M. FLETCHER, U.S.N. (BMI/c) H. L. RICHMOND, U.S.N. c/o Fleet P.O. San Francisco

Sirs:

. . . We wonder what plans have been made for our participation in the celebration. Are the celebrants at home agreeable to our knocking off for a few days' hat-buying-and-guzzling fling? . . .

Will it take another Pacific catastrophe like Pearl Harbor to send celebrating Joe Blow Civilian back to war work and keep him there? We're not killjoys. We just don't like it out here!

(S/SGT.) BOB LATHROP (S/SGT.) L. W. OILMAN (SGT.) F. A. KUHLMAN (S/SGT.) F. O. WAAK (S/SGT.) A. Y. BOGUGES (T/SGT.) E. A. DAVIS c/o Fleet P.O. San Francisco

Sirs:

Can't we call it V 1/2-day?

MADISON KUHN East Lansing, Mich.

New Name for Berlin

Sirs:

We think it would be the finest compliment to all people who have been mistreated by Nazi bestiality that, upon the occasion of the American-British entry into Berlin, the name of Berlin be forever erased from the map and the city renamed Lidice.

J. D. MYERS ROBERT REES SR. Springfield, Ill.

P: Can TIME'S readers suggest a more appropriate name?--ED.

Only One

Sirs:

IN YOUR OTHERWISE HANDSOME WORDS ON ME, YOU INDIRECTLY QUOTED ME AS COMMENTING THAT A DIRECTOR'S CHIEF FUNCTION IS TO STAY ON THE SET TO SEE THAT THE ACTORS DON'T GO HOME TOO EARLY (TIME, SEPT. 18). I DID MAKE THIS STATEMENT REGARDING ONE DIRECTOR IN PARTICULAR, BUT ITS USE IN YOUR STORY AS A GENERALITY HAS CAUSED ME MUCH EMBARRASSMENT AND DISCOMFORT. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO PUBLISH THIS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS DISPARAGEMENT APPLIED ONLY TO ONE MAN, WHOSE NAME AND ADDRESS I WILL SUPPLY AT THE DROP OF A HAT, AND DID NOT INCLUDE THE ENTIRE SCREEN DIRECTORS' GUILD?

NUNNALLY JOHNSON

Hollywood

Goofer Feathers

Sirs:

Moran & Mack weren't so dumb. Goofer feathers were a reality in a small way about the time Columbia was recording their famous record. Food Machinery's development (TIME, Sept. 18) is praiseworthy, not novel. Many markets, like ours, have had none but de-fuzzed peaches for several years. . . .

CARL E. GRIESSER Twin City Produce Company Sterling, Ill.

Sirs:

If the author of the article insists on calling "goofus feathers" "goofer feathers," let's at least give credit to the originators of the name for peach fuzz. They were the famous (or should I say--more famous) team of McIntyre & Heath, whom I presume Moran & Mack tried to imitate.

H. D. EDWARDS ban Diego

P: TIME may have been be-fuzzed about de-fuzzers, but not about goofer feathers. Black-face comics Mclntyre & Heath did mention "goofus feathers" in their famous act, The Ham Tree, but TIME was talking about the Moran & Mack variety. A cultivated type, they are finer and softer than goofus feathers, which come from wild peaches.--ED.

The Historical Truth

Sirs:

Your report about my speech in the Musicians Congress in Los Angeles (TIME, Sept. 25) was right; but the chairman, Mr. Lawrence Morton, exaggerates his generosity when he states that only by "an excess of tolerance and democracy . . . we allowed Mr. Ludwig to speak at all." The Secretary of the Congress, Professor Rubsamen, whom I did not know, asked me urgently to replace in the last moment another orator at that Congress, at which I had nothing at all to do. After having accepted, I received a letter full of thanks for my willingness to help out.

There won't have been anybody at the Congress who had worked more for the liberal cause as I did continuously during 30 years. But I hate the arrogance of parties which boast that they are the only ones who have been always the patrons of arts. Therefore, I underlined that music for about 30 years has been protected by rich citizens in democracies, but that it flourished for 200 years under kings and autocrats.

The historical truth is much more important than any political issue.

EMIL LUDWIG New York City

Sirs:

Hisses right back at excessively tolerant and democratic Chairman Lawrence Morton and his "convocation of musicians and intellectuals." If they can't take Emil Ludwig's unpalatable truths, what hope for a sincere and unhypocritical democracy have we of the bourgeoisie ?

It may wound Chairman Morton and his convocation of historical illiterates deeply to learn this, but Jesus Christ was born into one of our more infamous dictatorships --much as we could wish that He had been born to the credit of a democracy.

LAWRENCE DEFOY Rochester, N.Y.

Sirs:

. . . Let's not get alarmed. Huey Long, Bilbo and Boss Crump managed without grand opera; and grand opera north of the Mason & Dixon Line manages without Hague, Pendergast and Curley.

JOHN HENRY CUTLER Washington

Hurricane Hopes

Sirs:

When TIME, purporting to quote the Treasury Department, says (Sept. 25) that the cost of repairing hurricane damage is deductible from "income tax," it misquotes the law and buoys up unfounded hopes. The cost of repairing hurricane damage is deductible from taxable income, not from income tax. Taxable income and income tax are not yet quite the same.

JAY E. RUBINOW Attorney at Law Manchester, Conn. P: Thank heaven.--ED.

"Clever Lad?"

Sirs:

TIME (Sept. 18) has the right word, but fails to draw the logical inference. Tom Dewey is indeed carrying on his campaign like a "prosecutor," with just the technique that was his own as prosecuting attorney. One might wish a campaign for the Presidency to be conducted on a higher level. Two recent examples of deplorable sharp practice: 1) the attempt to exploit politically the natural desire of parents and wives to have our soldiers brought home as soon as possible ; 2) spreading confusion and arousing controversy by the nomination of General MacArthur for supreme command in the Pacific. . . . To date, confusion rather than illumination has resulted from this candidate's public utterances. I shall not comment on their good taste. The next step might well be an effort to distill votes from the tears of the bereaved.

Prosecutor Dewey hasn't yet asked the President of the U.S. whether he has stopped beating his wife. That question is probably held in reserve.

Tom Dewey is a clever lad. His cleverness is of the type that makes this old-line Republican ready to accept the quip that you can like Tom until you begin to know him well.

JOHN S. NOLLEN Grinnell, Iowa

Critic

In contrast to the numerous letters extolling TIME, I offer the following as an example of the tersest condemnation yet to be hurled upon your illustrious magazine.

A fellow serviceman picked up my discarded copy of TIME and thumbed through the pages. Obviously disgusted, he threw it aside, remarked: "Hell, nutt'n in that mag but nooz!"

W. GEORGE BALLANTYNE Tranquille, B.C.

McNair Fund

Sirs:

It will be an everlasting shame if the American people do not do something for the families of General Lesley McNair and his son who within a few weeks of each other gave their lives in the service of their country in time of war. I have read the article in your Aug. 28 issue in which you say that General McNair left an estate of only $2,720. Surely this must be the strictly legal estate and there must have been some insurance in addition. Nevertheless, I am sending you herewith a small check [forwarded to Mrs. McNair--ED.] and I trust others will do likewise until there is a sizable fund accumulated for the benefit of the families of the General and his son.

There are some things about the British system that we might well emulate. Among these are the public reward of deserving citizens who have rendered outstanding service to the state, although this should not necessarily be done in perpetuity, as is often the case with our British cousins--a conspicuous example being the reward bestowed upon Prime Minister Winston Churchill's ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough, for his services on the field of battle which I understand his descendants still enjoy.

JAMES MACCLAMROCH Greensboro, N.C.

P: Indirectly, perhaps. In 1702 a grateful Crown granted the Duke an annuity of -L-5,000 a year. The Government paid this annuity promptly until 1884, when it bought off the current Duke for a final sum of -L-107,780.--ED.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.