Mail from our readers
Wayne’s World (#107, Feb. 28) is an American cult classic! Where else but in an American suburb can two metal heads have a talk show and inspire a whole generation to enjoy life and jam, especially during these tough times. Oprah, Phil, and Geraldo better watch it. Wayne and Garth are here to stay.
Michael Angelo Camacho
A thousand thank yous for the excellent article about Wayne’s World. I am a die-hard Saturday Night Live fan, and I was ecstatic when I saw the new issue in my mailbox. Sure, the maturity level of Americans has dropped 10 years since the movie opened but, hey, we’re happy.
I was shocked to learn that people were considering Fried Green Tomatoes a lesbian movie. I saw it twice and didn’t get that message. It was a sweet and touching movie about people whose sexuality was not the point. As Ninny said, it’s about best friends. As usual, gay activists have tried to sexualize something for their own political agenda.
The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation is showing gross narrow- mindedness in giving its award to Fried Green Tomatoes. Rather than being a compliment, the award is an attempt to pigeonhole a film unnecessarily. The film should (and does) stand on its own terms, which obviously are not political. As one who enjoyed the film immensely, I applaud director Jon Avnet for letting the audience enjoy the story without slanting it one way or the other. This award is not only insulting; it could be harmful to the film’s future chances at the box office, and GLAAD’s attempt to label the film is a glaring example of how a political organization will use any means to further its cause.
Albert S. Morano
East Point, Ga.
Thank you for bringing the ”lesbianness” of Fried Green Tomatoes to the public! We do exist, and we’re not all auto mechanics and lunatics. You continue to prove you are a magazine for everyone! Keep it up.
‘On Trial’ Defended
The review by Susan Faludi of the ABC News videocasette On Trial: The William Kennedy Smith Case alleges that our coverage of this story ”focused on the Kennedy perspective.” As Faludi undoubtedly knows, news coverage of this story, up to and including the trial, was necessarily focused on Smith because the identity of the alleged victim was kept confidential. Faludi fails to note that the videocassette includes extensive ABC News coverage of the alleged victim’s accusations. And a significant section is devoted to our coverage of the issues surrounding the release of the alleged victim’s name by other news organizations. Faludi also claims the videocassette illustrates the ”power imbalance” between the sexes in the media. She deplores the lack of female anchors, ignoring, among others, Carole Simpson, who anchors ABC’s Saturday newscast and who introduced many segments of the story. Faludi says the ”exception” is Diane Sawyer’s exclusive interview with Patricia Bowman. This interview constitutes nearly one half of the entire videocassette and gave Bowman’s story its most extensive airing outside of her courtroom testimony. One other note: The videocassette was produced by a female, who used objective journalistic standards, and no other criteria, to compile this chronicle of a riveting news story.
Stuart Schwartz Senior Broadcast Producer, ABC News
Susan Faludi responds: Schwartz contends that ABC devoted a ”significant section” of its video on the Smith trial to issues involving the release of the accuser’s name. Is a grand total of 3 minutes — out of a one-hour-and-19- minute tape — ”significant coverage”? In a similar vein, he takes issue with my noting the lopsided gender ratio among the ABC-TV anchors included in the video. My review, he says, claimed that Diane Sawyer’s appearance was ”the exception” and ignored the ”many” news segments introduced by women, ”among others, Carole Simpson.” But my review says Sawyer is ”one of the exceptions,” not ”the exception.” The only other exception was Simpson, whose brief introduction of four segments totaled less than two minutes. Finally, he says the network devoted nearly half of its tape to Sawyer’s interview with Smith’s accuser. Actually, it’s a third.
Boo to your article ”Greasy Kids’ Stuff.” It stated that the New Kids should ”consider revamping their image.” For goodness sakes, why? So they’re young men rather than teens. Of course their image may change as they get older, but it seems only the critics can’t handle it. What do people think? That the fans stayed 17?