KGB Net

To the Editors:

We have good reason to fear the KGB [Feb. 14]. As your story points out, the KGB manages to sustain the illusion of being all-powerful "largely because Soviet citizens police one another." A society that reveres a child who turned in his father to the authorities is right out of George Orwell's 1984.

Susan J. Uttendorfsky

New York City

Although an open society is part of the American tradition, we should close our doors a little more for our own safety.

Gerald S. Kupkowski

Cheektowaga, N. Y.

Having Yuri Andropov in control of the Soviet Union is comparable to having had J. Edgar Hoover as President of the U.S. and director of both the CIA and FBI.

Robert C. Seward

Endicott, N. Y.

After reading of the KGB's brutal methods for repressing other countries, I realize how foolish and naive those liberals are who believe the Soviet Union wants peace. The U.S. is hardly responsible for the arms race or the instability in the world.

Howard Robinson

Springfield, Mo.

It is disgusting that American citizens would sell national-security information for a few thousand dollars. The only way to prevent this is to prosecute the KGB's U.S. agents for treason and sentence them to death.

Charles F. Weiss

Princeton, N.J.

Holding the Line

Captain Charles B. Johnson's remark "a lot of fuss over not that much of a deal" [Feb. 14] is accurate only in that he was doing his job by stopping Israeli tanks from crossing his position. Encounters like this are an extreme detriment to U.S-Israeli relations.

George M. Searles

Huntington, N. Y.

Armed with a small gun and a big principle, Captain Johnson stopped a tank from crossing into territory assigned to his care. A man who puts principle above the possibility of losing his job, his life or his popularity is rare.

Patricia Highsmith

Aurigeno, Switzerland

I would like to see Captain Johnson take a stand against one member of the P.L.O. instead of "against" three friendly tanks. Would he have the same courage?

Emanuel Israeli

Tel Aviv

Two Sides to Samoa

I am pleased that Anthropologist Derek Freeman has challenged Margaret Mead's work on Samoa [Feb. 14]. When I lived there in the early 1970s, I asked an elderly Samoan what he thought of Mead's book Coming of Age in Samoa. He replied that the only one who came of age in Samoa was Margaret Mead.

Jean Mehaffey

Harvey, N. Dak.

I take exception to Derek Freeman's attack on Margaret Mead. American Samoa, where Mead visited, and Western Samoa, where Freeman taught, are two different groups of islands. American Samoa is smaller and has all the advantages of being politically linked with the U.S. Western Samoa is an independent Third World country that was once under the control of New Zealand. Perhaps Freeman's work could stand by itself as an updated report on Mead's Samoa. After all, he is publishing his study almost 60 years after Mead did her research. Changes do occur in that many years.

Arly Smith Weider

Spring Hill, Fla.

As a former Peace Corps volunteer in Western Samoa, I find it as difficult to agree with Derek Freeman's narrow analysis of the Samoan culture as I did with Margaret Mead's. As Anthropologist Bradd Shore accurately pointed out, Samoans can lead contradictory lives. Moreover, they are very adept at telling people what they wish to hear, saying one thing and doing another.

Joseph Grossman

Davis, Calif.

As a full-fledged Samoan, I am glad that Derek Freeman showed the other side of the coin. Samoans not only condone free love and have no guilt but are also jealous and violent.

Nikolao I. Pula Jr.

Alexandria, Va.

Pope's Collection

Your review of "The Vatican Collections: The Papacy and Art" [Feb. 14] is a disturbing testament to the insensitivity and isolation of art critics. Exhibitions like the one now at the Metropolitan Museum of Art give people who cannot afford a trip to Rome, London or Paris an opportunity to see great works.

Thomas A. Devine

Providence

As an artist, I wince at the motives of museums that feel impelled to hype art beyond its original intentions. It would have been better for Philip Morris and the Met to focus on the art of our time and support an understanding of the present.

Jon Swan

Brookline, Mass.

Rejected Baby

Regarding your Essay "The Baby in the Factory" [Feb. 14], it should be noted that in the 15th century four out of five babies died before the age of two. Abortion was unthinkable. In the 20th century, human life is cheap. The problem in the case of Baby Doe does not arise from surrogate parenthood or test-tube pregnancies. It is that the achievements of medical science have given us an attitude of "If not this baby, then another." There are simply too many humans to care about one life.

Sally S. Temko

Tinton Falls, N.J.

We cannot view the production of a human life with the same cool detachment with which we order a new car. A baby cannot be sent back to the factory. Couples who have a child via a surrogate mother must accept the result in the same way that natural parents do.

Betty Kurkjian

Dunwoody, Ga.

Bailing Out

Your article "White Knights and Black Eyes" [Feb. 14] mentions the "golden parachute" package fashioned by Bendix directors for William Agee during the merger battle of the Bendix Corp., Martin Marietta and Allied Corp. Paying Agee so much money would not be in the best interests of Bendix stockholders. The cozy relationship between boards of directors and top executives amounts to corporate incest.

Walter P. Liesegang

Louisville

The biggest threat to American business is not Japan. It is pennywise, pound-foolish executives like William Agee who squander money on wasteful corporate mergers. For him to be skewered by his own ambition is poetic justice.

Rick Hall

Houston

Sorting Through 1982's Mail

Legend has it that when H.L. Mencken was editor of the American Mercury, he had a standard reply to readers who wrote in either praise or complaint: "Dear Reader, You may be right." His response saved time and avoided arguments. But in the privacy of his office, Mencken was probably as fascinated by what his audience had to say as TIME'S editors have always been. The verse, volume and sometimes venom with which readers respond to stories provide an intriguing if imperfect measure of the public mind.

Analyzing the issues that mattered to the 51,027 readers who wrote TIME in 1982 disclosed a significant shift from previous years. Despite high unemployment and a stubbornly depressed economy, domestic matters concerned writers less; war and the threat of war bothered them much, much more. Letters about stories in the Nation section dropped 38%, from 15,617 in 1981 to 9,626 in 1982, while comments about articles on foreign and world affairs nearly doubled, to 9,011. Of the 15 major stories drawing the most mail in 1982, nine were directly related to war and its consequences.

The story that elicited the greatest response was the March 29 cover, "Thinking the Unthinkable: Rising Fears About Nuclear War." Most of the 1,074 people who wrote TIME in the weeks that followed were in fact afraid. Referring to a diagram showing the effects of a single nuclear bomb dropped on an American city, one reader said, "Although I have been an anti-nuclear supporter for several years, I had never seen an illustration of the damage a nuclear warhead could do to Detroit. How much more frightening it is when the scenario is shifted from Europe to my own backyard!" Said another: "Those who advocate continued production of nuclear weapons are not realists discussing deterrence. They are fanatics talking about how many times to bounce the rubble."

Only a minority, 145, took the opposite view, arguing that the U.S. should not let its defenses down and attacking TIME for raising the issue. " 'When in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout,' " said one correspondent, quoting the common saying. "That describes [your] series of articles. They say nothing, do nothing and propose nothing." Another argued: "The tougher we get, the safer we will be."

However, a Nov. 29 cover, which dealt with the Roman Catholic bishops' stand against nuclear weapons, produced an altogether different attitude. Nearly 400 readers wrote, and some quoted the Bible to the bishops: "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." By a ratio of 2 to 1 they criticized the churchmen for demanding a nuclear accommodation with the Soviet Union. Complained one letter writer: The bishops "would have us become a nation of groveling weaklings."

Actual wars, in Lebanon and the Falkland Islands, made correspondents out of many more readers. Five covers recounting the fighting in Lebanon brought 2,461 letters. It soon became clear that events had triggered a sharp shift away from the support TIME readers have traditionally given Israel. More than 700 wrote after the Oct. 4 cover story on the Beirut massacre, "Israel, a Shaken Nation." Sentiment was 3 to 1 against the Israelis. "My sympathy for Israel's struggles is wearing thin. I am revulsed beyond sympathy," said one. Another agreed: "The underdogs have become the dogs of war, and we have unleashed them."

Israel's supporters were equally vehement, if less numerous. Said one: "It is always Israel and the Jewish people whom you blame, and whom you hold to a double standard." Concurred another: "As a chronicler of the 20th century, TIME has betrayed Israel with its innuendoes and half-truths."

The conflict in the Falklands also aroused heated emotions. Many South Americans objected to Britain's claim to the distant islands. "Argentina's only crime is taking its own territory after 149 years of unfair occupation," said one correspondent from south of the border. On the other side, supporters of Britain waved the Union Jack: "Attagirl, Maggie! You bashed 'em!"

One aspect of war that hit particularly hard was the effect conflicts have on children. A special report, "Children of War," elicited 636 letters, most of them praising the story. Wrote one reader: "Seldom have I seen such compelling and articulate work."

At home, Interior Secretary James Watt was the man readers loved to hate. An Aug. 23 cover story on Watt and his policies, "Land Sale of the Century," set 268 mostly hostile pens to work. "Watt an obnoxious character behind that repulsive face on the cover!" said one punster. The rest of the Reagan Administration, including the President, was also attacked, and a majority of those who expressed themselves rejected dense pack, Reaganomics, the New Federalism and support for Central American dictatorships. Said one observer: "The Emperor has no clothes, and the Empress has too many."

On U.S. newsstands, the bestselling cover of the year was about herpes, "Today's Scarlet Letter," and drew 480 letters. A majority accused the magazine of fanning the flames of Victorian fears. Said one victim of the disease: "All I saw was example after example reinforcing the so-called leper mentality toward herpes." From the minority, however, there was little sympathy for the afflicted. Many quoted the Bible, particularly Galatians 6: 7: "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

There were other stories that inspired heavy mail: 251 correspondents lamented the decline of quality rock music, 399 had opinions on mid-life pregnancies, and 357 commented on the Aug. 30 cover on fitness for women, "Coming On Strong: The New Ideal of Beauty." Said one lady jock: "Thanks for expressing so well what athletic women like me have known for a long time: exercise is the best makeup." But another reader was not convinced: "Can it be true that a pretty girl is like geometry?"

More than 6,000 people wrote neither to extol nor to excoriate, but simply in quest of more information about various subjects; 676 entered into debate with the editors about fine points of grammar and style. Others underlined pages with words new and puzzling to them, demanding explanations for the likes of nerd and nebbish, glitzy and ditsy.

As always, the Essay section, speaking as it does most directly to readers, evoked the most personal and reflective mail. One Essay in particular seemed to touch a universal chord: the subject was a passenger among the 74 who perished in the crash of an airliner into Washington's Potomac River in January. Known only as the man in the water, the victim repeatedly passed his own lifeline into the hands of other helpless survivors until he vanished beneath the icy waters. The story moved 387 people to write in honor of his heroism: one person risking and ultimately losing his own life to save others. This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.