Man of the Year
Sir:
My choice: Harold Macmillan, the genuine promoter of the international plan as well as an unprecedented victor in home politics.
BERNARD SINSHEIMER Paris
Sir:
Nikita Khrushchev, who has proved he is the man of a new era by sending the Communist pennant right to the inaccessible moon!
GERARD LANGLOIS
Quebec
Sir:
Please consider the late John Foster Dulles, who unstintingly gave his life to his country and the world for the cause of peace.
KAY A. SUSMEYAN
Newton, Mass.
Sir:
The American Taxpayer.
PHILIP F. CONNELL
Portland, Me.
Sir:
The Man in the Moon, owner of our universe's most publicized backside.
PAUL W. FARDY Toronto
National Purpose
Sir:
As a student and prospective American citizen, I am naturally very much interested in the destiny of the United States as a nation. This country happens to be the leader of the free world and the main proponent of democratic ideology. It faces the greatest task in its entire history: to contain the forces of Communism and to remain at the pinnacle of world power; yet, it receives only superficial and passive support from a great number of its citizens.
By presenting the issue of national purpose in such conspicuous fashion [Nov. 16], you have performed a valuable public service true to the tradition of the American press as one of the principal agents in the process of public opinion formation.
EDWARD A. SPILLER
Berkeley, Calif.
Sir:
One new and grievous error seems to have crept into the thinking of the American people. This involves the idea that all we need for success is to get organized and wait for someone to "articulate a purpose" for us. This hen-and-chickens kind of thinking led the Germans into a disastrous war under the leadership of an articulate, power-mad Hitler.
WARREN J. KING
Claremore, Okla.
Sir:
All this discussion of national purpose appears to stem from an inexcusable ignorance of our history.
The Preamble of the Constitution affirms that we are established "in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty." The Articles of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as the founding fathers saw it, provided the framework for the accomplishment of these purposes.
It would be far better to ask ourselves whether we have achieved these stated purposes. Have we formed a more perfect Union? Have we ensured domestic tranquillity? Have we established justice? Have we secured the blessings of liberty?
Need I point out that our present-day industrial strife, our rampant racialism, our subversion of the Bill of Rights, our continuous wrangling over states' rights, etc., indicate that we have failed to achieve our stated national purposes rather than that we do not have any national purposes?
WILLIAM E. ZEUCH Romoland, Calif.
Sir:
If people and weekly newsmagazines keep up this drivel about "national purpose," they may soon have to openly recognize what America really is: not a nation with something resembling a cohesive national philosophy, cultural depth, and direction, but simply a place where one comes to exploit economic opportunities, with about as much "national purpose" as a stock exchange. What America stands for is making money, and as the society approaches affluence its members are left to stew in their own ennui.
BUCK A. HARRISS Second Lieutenant, U.S.A.F. Dobbins Air Force Base, Ga.
Sir:
The "search for a purpose" is of course the very purpose we need--a society inspired with a fire of desire for the truth and meaning of man's existence would lead to better rockets, better schools, better knowledge, better men, and--with hope--a better nation.
EARL F. POFAHL
Faribault, Minn.
The Solid-Gold Putter
Sir:
TIME'S perceptive Nov. 16 indictment of a "shocking state of rottenness . . . deplorable level of public morality . . ." finds a most eloquent echo in the Wall Streeters' urge for those solid-gold golf putters at $1,475 apiece. Follow the leader, anyone?
ANDREW S. KENDE
Hartsdale, N.Y.
Sir:
Until they are selfsupporting, it costs $10 a month to care for the "hungry, tattered and homeless" refugees arriving daily in Hong Kong. I was reminded of this fact while reading about the gold-headed golf putter which, at $1,475, is currently in short supply.
CHARLES G. GROS Panama City, Fla.
Fire & Ice
Sir:
The story of Charles Revson [Nov. 16] typifies a greater threat to the U.S. than atheistic Communism: it is materialistic capitalism, which bores from within, making the essence of our whole existence the almighty buck. Until the so-called successful capitalists in this country base their activities on the principles upon which this country was founded, we will indeed lose the fight for a better, peaceful world.
EVANS G. OLWELL JR.
Flushing, N.Y.
Sir:
After all the deceptions sponsored by Revlon, Mr. Charles Haskell Revson might have been flabbergasted, or again he might not. At any rate, I would expect so colorful a character to admit to something more exotic.
I am the one who is flabbergasted.
MRS. WM. C. KING
La Crescenta, Calif.
Sir:
Now that Charles Revson is better known to this TV viewer, I have bought my last Revlon product.
MRS. HARRY HECKMANN
Cheektowaga, N.Y.
21-Inch Scream
Sir:
In reference to TIME'S Nov. 16 article on TV in general and Mr. Kintner in particular, may I contribute the following observation.
Perhaps if Mr. Kintner spent less time crouching before sponsors, he might not "find it difficult to be philosophical." Possibly he would discover a first principle to give desperately needed direction and purpose to the headless monster.
GEORGE KALOYANIDES
Somerville, Mass.
Sir:
Instead of dinner, Mr. Kintner nightly eats a sandwich--a sandwich which is_ so easily "fixed." How much more appropriate would be a dish of tripe.
(MRS.) GRETE HEINEMANN
Jamestown, N.Y.
Sir:
It is refreshing and reassuring to know those people on the TV quiz shows were frauds. It was very discouraging to believe that anyone could know so much.
RENEE SPARKIA
Honor, Mich.
Sir:
Your otherwise excellent article on the quiz-show scandals neglected the real culprit --that vice president from the Manufacturers Trust Co. We peasants from the sticks were counting on him and his uniformed bank guards to vouchsafe the purity and integrity of The $64,000 Question. He let us down.
HARVEY N. CHINN Sacramento, Calif.
Sir:
May the tempest in the TV teapot be finally laid to rest with one simple statement of fact.
By the complete and public destruction of its remaining integrity and sincerity, TV itself becomes the prime victim of its own cleverness.
And this is as it should be.
ROBERT J. RICHARDSON
Geneva
The Quiz & the Answers
Sir:
The point that bothers me about Mr. Van Doren's statement is the reference to a letter from an anonymous woman which, according to him, caused him to finally come forth with the truth. I cannot help wondering what influence his wife had, or whether she was unaware of the cause of all the torment he claims he was suffering.
MRS. JOSEPH W. PARKER
Decatur, Ga.
Sir:
The sad part of the whole affair is the fact that Van Doren lied, and lied under oath. When he finally realized that he was caught in his lies, then, and then only, did he confess that he had made what he called a human mistake, and gave a maudlin explanation.
PHIL W. MOORE
Omaha
Sir:
All of the people who sympathized with Van Doren seemed to completely overlook this perjury angle. Yet I wonder how these people would feel if they were on trial for a serious crime and, though innocent, found themselves convicted by the perjury of a witness. Would they shrug off that perjury as they shrugged off Van Doren's? I doubt it.
MARY E. HOFFMANN St. Paul
Philadelphia Inquirer
Sir:
Shame! Shame! Shame! How could 60 editorial researchers, plus who knows how many proofreaders, make such a horrendous error [as to spell the Philadelphia Inquirer the Enquirer on Nov. 16]? Please keep them all after school and make them write 100 times each: Philadelphia Inquirer.
LEONARD E. BACH General Promotion Manager Philadelphia Inquirer Philadelphia
P: Philadelphia Inquirer . . . Philadelphia Inquirer . . . Philadelphia Inquirer . . .--ED.
On Prejudice
Sir:
Regarding the Baptist convention's decision to recommend to their people that "the Roman Catholic Church is both a religion and an ambitious political system aspiring to be a state" [Nov. 16].
This is not only un-American and ungodly, but grows out of intolerance and ignorance, a poor basis for belief.
GLEN AXNE
St. Paul
Sir:
I find it hard to believe that there still exists in the U.S. a group as prejudiced as the Baptists. I just wish to point out that the Catholic Church no longer has any aspirations of being a state, and religious prejudices should be forgotten when selecting a candidate for President.
WILLIAM J. HERRON
Washington, D.C.
Sir:
It is ridiculous to hold that if a Roman Catholic is elected President, the Catholic Church will aspire [to rule the U.S.] under the Pope. Does the Pope run the state of California? Does he run the city of New York? Of course not. Neither could he nor would he try to run the national Government if a Catholic were President.
JAMES P. COURTNEY JR.
Emmitsburg, Md.
Not on the Blacklist
Sir:
In an article in your issue of Nov. 2, on the boycott of Israel by Arab nations, you included this company in a list of firms that "have removed themselves from the Arab League blacklist by deciding that doing business in Israel is uneconomic." We were never on such a blacklist. The facts are that for a few years we owned a company that did a relatively small (about 5% of the market) business selling oil in Israel. Problems of foreign exchange and competition from the government-owned oil-marketing company in Israel made the operation unattractive from a purely commercial standpoint. So we sold the business.
DAVID A. SHEPARD
Executive Vice President Standard Oil Co. (NJ.) New York City
Grey Suede Shoes
Sir:
Your book reviewer is quite correct. Of all the questions about the Normandy invasion I tried to answer in The Longest Day, the one I failed to include was: Did Mrs. Rommel like her June 6, 1944 birthday present of a custom-made pair of grey suede shoes from her field marshal husband [Nov. 23]? I had planned all along to include a footnote about the famous shoes--an omission that will be corrected in the next edition. Meanwhile, may I untantalize you with the answer.
In my first long interview with Mrs. Rommel and her son Manfred, the Rommels were at a disadvantage. They did not know that I had the late field marshal's own headquarters war diaries, or that I had learned about his present to his wife. So when the interviewing began, it was obvious from their answers that I would not get the real story without my revealing facts I had read in the war diaries. They were nervous and reticent.
As gently as I could, I told Mrs. Rommel that I had the war diaries, that I had learned about her birthday, and that I knew all about the shoes. I felt no elation at showing my hand to this charming woman. Mrs. Rommel was a grand loser. She rose from her chair. "I sincerely hope, Mr. Ryan," she said, "that you do not intend to harm my husband's reputation with this story." Then she said: "I'll show you the shoes," and left the room. Mrs. Rommel returned. In her hand were the grey suede shoes--platform shoes which had been resoled many times. She looked at me. "These are the shoes," she said. "The most comfortable shoes I've ever had."
CORNELIUS RYAN
New York City
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.