WIDOWS OF MIDDLETOWN

LETTERS

Prayers for Middletown, New Jersey; divided over Zion; Cake girls, meet Gloria Steinem; Airbus's deadly design; an image for the ages; Harry Shearers S.N.L. gripe; a history in Vanity Fair; and more

September Widows" [by Gail Sheehy, September] was amazing. My daughter Mary DuffOrtale lost her husband, Peter Ortale, in the World Trade Center. The three widows in the article helped give a voice to many people still struggling after a year. I have watched my daughter travel the same journey. Not everyone is "moving along," as our society likes to say. Nor is everyone as strong or as inspirational as the media would have us believe. There are still so many walking wounded. For me, as a parent of a widow, the struggle has been both the sorrow over the loss of my son-in-law and the powerlessness in helping my child in her grief.

KATHI DUFF-ADLUM Camarillo, California

HAVING BEEN WIDOWED young myself, I greatly appreciated Gail Sheehy's compassionate, insightful article on the widows of 9/11. Though their experience was uniquely horrifying, nearly everything Sheehy wrote about their emotional journey through the landscape of grief was hauntingly familiar to me, and no doubt to countless others.

Recovery from a loss as big as the death of a mate, regardless of the circumstances, is far more complex and arduous than most people realize. Perhaps now they know a little more.

K. C. KEEFE Chicago, Illinois

IS IT REALLY NECESSARY to treat the dead as martyrs, and their families as heroes? The pain the women in Sheehy's article are feeling is no doubt profound, but by most standards, they are extremely well-off financially. And in some ways this group received something that others whose losses go unreported and largely unnoticed don't: they became part of a recognized community, one which received not only an outpouring of condolences and concern but a worldwide reaction to the crime itself.

That hundreds of the 9/11 families are now suing for $ 1 trillion seems another sad example of our litigious society, where loss gets translated immediately into liability, followed by opportunity and then financial gain.

ELLEN WARD Falls Church, Virginia

PERILS OF THE PROMISED LAND

IN "JEWISH POWER, JEWISH PERIL" [September], Christopher Hitchens informs, analyzes, and almost answers a gnawing question that I have not had the courage to ask of my many Jewish friends. How can an "inherently and intuitively smart" people with a remarkably fair sense of morality and justice, who were victims of European antiSemitism culminating in the Holocaust, practice Zionism in its current form to create an enemy of more than a billion Muslims?

It is difficult to fathom that the continued occupation, the increasing number of settlements, and the military actions, which seem to guarantee a few more acres to Israel without any peace and security, can be worth alienating an entire people. Would not the addition of such a large anti-Semitic population lay the foundations for a possible future (nuclear!) Holocaust in which the victims and the perpetrators would both be obliterated? Given Zionism in its current form, surely the Jews who struck the "Never again" note after the Holocaust cannot ignore such a consequence.

As "a wretchedly heretic and bastard member of the tribe," Hitchens offers a most hopeful solution in the establishment of a secular, multi-ethnic democracy: a U.S.A. ("United States of Arabia") in the Middle East. Unfortunately, that brings to mind the words in John Lennon's "Imagine": "You may say I'm a dreamer."

SURESH PAL SINGH BHALLA Toronto, Ontario

CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS'S article purports to be about anti-Semitism, but what he really offers is a tired argument against Israel's right to exist. Perhaps the most disturbing part of his piece is in the beginning, where he claims to be "a member of the ancient tribe," which is essentially a play on the old "some of my best friends are Jewish" backpedaling one hears after someone has told an inappropriate joke.

Hitchens's evidence is so one-sided it is laughable. It should be pointed out, for instance, that the only reason for the exodus of so many Arabs from the region in the first place was a promise by the governments of the Arab world that they would wage war with Israel and that after their glorious victory the refugees would be free to return. Hitchens further neglects to mention that 75 percent of what was the British mandate called Palestine now resides in Jordan. Why does he never suggest that the exponentially larger Jordan give up land for the creation of a Palestinian state?

And what is Hitchens's grand solution to end anti-Semitism? He argues that Jews should assimilate and give up their dream of a return to Israel. Yet he never once suggests that perhaps the Arab refugees who call themselves Palestinian should assimilate into the larger Arab world. Why? Because he must know that time and again the governments of Jordan, Syria, and Egypt have refused to accept them as citizens, thereby only exacerbating the situation.

Although Hitchens tries hard to rebut thousands of years of Jewish history, he fails to note that there has never been a civilization or nation referred to as "Palestine." Hitchens's final conclusion is that Jews have only themselves to blame for anti-Semitism, due to their insistence on unity as a religion, ethnicity, and nation.

WILLIAM BENSUSSEN Los Angeles, California

AFTER 50 YEARS of having a military dictatorship, bulldozing homes, stealing lands, and running illegal settlements and squalid refugee camps, did the Israelis not know the day of reckoning would arrive? People make choices and then must live with the consequences.

LOUISE MURPHY Naples, Florida

UNHAPPY AS HITCHENS seems to be about his small percentage of Jewish blood, he currently has the ability to disclaim it. If he had lived under the Nazis, he might have felt differently about Zionists displacing the few Arabs living in a destroyed nation that had been Israel for centuries. He also overlooks the chances the Palestinians had for their own country, first in 1948 and again under the Clinton-sponsored peace talks. The Zionists he obviously abhors took a barren desert and built a thriving democracy that is again besieged on all sides.

DAVID ROSEN Greenfield Park, New York

CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS REPLIES: Mr Rosen's letter contains the highly insulting suggestion that I would disown, or that I somehow dislike, the element of my heritage that is Jewish. The contrary is the case. As an atheist and a non-Zionist, I am at odds with prevailing definitions of Jeivish ness, whether uttered by tribal spokesmen or by anti-Semites, but I believe that I have the better secular and Diaspora tradition on my side, and if I add that anyone defaming the Jewish people would be insulting my mother, my wife, and my daughter, I trust that it would be superfluous to say any thing furtherfor myself

FEMINISTS ON PARADE

I COULDN'T HELP but compare the quiet dignity and strength of the 9/11 widows with the shallow hedonism of the Cake members described in "Girls, Uninterrupted" [by Nancy Jo Sales, September]. If the young women who frequent Cake parties are ever faced with an even minor traumatic event, I doubt that they'll be prepared to handle it.

CHERYLANNE SHARP Long Beach, California

THE WOMAN WHO THINKS that publicly stripping expresses her "feminist views" needs to read a copy of Our Bodies, Ourselves. In viewing stripping as empowering, she's as brainwashed as the Miss America contestants who think the swimsuit competition shows "character."

SUSAN WALTON Minneapolis, Minnesota

DESIGN FOR DISASTER

THANK YOU for the excellent article by David Rose on the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 ["Pilot Terror," September]. Mr. Rose points out how unlikely it is that First Officer Sten Molin would have wildly pumped the rudder pedals without a reason. Probably it was in a desperate attempt to get some sort of reaction from the rudder or to counteract the wild gyrations that would have been caused by the loss of a primary control surface. Unbeknownst to pilots until after the crash, a rudder is designed to be able to withstand only a single full-scale movement in one direction, unlike all other control surfaces on the aircraft. That's a nice piece of information to have.

A key point that Mr. Rose doesn't touch on is the difference in the aircraft-design philosophies of Airbus and Boeing—and that Airbus's philosophy is undoubtedly affecting the way it is approaching the accident investigation. In a perhaps typically French way, Toulouse engineers have decided that under all circumstances they know best. There are numerous examples of modern Airbus aircraft doing things either on their own or contrary to pilots' wishes. A Sabena pilot first told me of the saying that many pilots have: "If it's not a Boeing, I'm not going."

Finally, I recall being in a safety meeting after the crash of our 757 near Cali, Colombia. One of our safety investigators stated in frustration, "If you ever want to find out the cause of an accident, the last place you'd ever want to go is the N.T.S.B." While I'm sure some highly competent people work there, it is an organization subject to political pressure— and plain old governmental incompetence. Pilots have clearly been the primary cause in other aircraft crashes, but in the case of the Queens crash, logic and the evidence do not indicate that "pilot error" was a factor.

DEAN AVARY American Airlines pilot Fort Lauderdale, Florida

MR. ROSE'S REPORT was meticulously researched, but he failed to mention that at least one of the same system malfunctions—unexplained and unprompted sudden rudder movement—has existed in the Boeing jets as well. While I believe it initiated a retrofit of some sort, I don't think the problem has been entirely rectified. The single catastrophic problem with rudder movement that is common to both manufacturers is disturbing. It makes flying more of a crapshoot than anyone had previously believed.

As for the detailed problematic history of the airplane used for Flight 587, shame on American Airlines, shame on Airbus, and shame on the N.T.S.B. They should be found criminally negligent and held accountable.

PENNY JORGENSEN Renton, Washington

THANK YOU for finally bringing the crash of Flight 587 to the public's attention. My brother was one of the flight attendants killed in that devastating tragedy on November 12, 2001. My heart goes out to the Molin and States families, as well as all the other families who have suffered because of this catastrophe.

David Rose states in his article that "in the context of the fall of 2001, the fact that it hadn't been caused by terrorism meant the news came 'as somewhat of a relief.'" September 11 was an unspeakable act of horror, but the truth remains that many innocent people, including Americans, died on American Airlines Flight 587 as well. Terrorist act or not, my brother, Joe Lopes, was yet another American who was killed in the line of duty.

LORRAINE CARPOU Simi Valley, California

THE SHOT SEEN ROUND THE WORLD

I READ WITH GREAT INTEREST your article on the photography surrounding September 11, 2001 ["Two Towers, One Year Later," by David Friend, September], Toward the end of the article, the author alludes to one photograph so many of us know: that of the three firemen raising the American flag amid the ruins. To hear that those in photography circles consider this the "made-for-TV version" of Joe Rosenthal's World War II picture of men raising the flag on Iwo Jima was a bit sickening. Talk about sour grapes. Tom Franklin, the photographer, happens to be married to an old friend of mine, and I can't imagine a more humble messenger of a truly moving portrait. America embraces what it likes, not necessarily what is the artistic ideal. Thank you. David Friend, for acknowledging the true message of that photo: "We are still standing. We will continue to stand."

LISA MORRIS Poughkeepsie, New York

MAHVELOUSFOR RATINGS

REGARDING "IT S SATURDAY NIGHT!" [by Tom Shales and James Andrew Miller, September], writer-producer Bob Tischler blames the "whore" Dick Ebersol, his then boss, for the weekly repetitions of Billy Crystal's characters. At the time. Bob gave me a somewhat different explanation. When I asked Bob why Billy was getting so much screen time when the cast was bigger than at any time in the show's history, he replied, "Billy's very commercial." 1 then told Bob that I found that an interesting criterion for a supposedly cutting-edge comedy show. I still feel that way. Unlike the statements of Mr. Tischler, who chooses to remember adjectives and characterizations, this comment is recalled verbatim.

HARRY SHEARER Santa Monica. California

VANITY FAIR-ACROSS THE POND

IN YOUR SEPTEMBER ISSUE you feature a story on the covers of Vanity Fair since 1914 ["Cover Story: The First 500," by James Wolcott], But no mention is made of the magazine's origin in London in 1868 or of its owner, Thomas Gibson Bowles, who also launched the weekly magazine The Lady, which I edit.

Bowles's friend Frederick Burnaby, who helped plan the magazine, lent him half the £200 needed for the enterprise. Vanity Fair was tailored to Bowles's political and literary talents, and his friends, family, and way of life continued to give him access to much information in the enclosed hothouse world that was London society during the 1860s and 1870s.

Its written content could be described as a late-19th-century version of The Spectator, the Economist, the gossip column of the Daily Mail, and the funniest essays of Private Eye. Much of it was written by Bowles himself.

Lewis Carroll was among the contributors, and Oscar Wilde's brother, William, reviewed the plays. But Vanity Fair is best remembered now for its cartoons of the grand and famous by Pellegrini and Ward, alias Ape and Spy, respectively. The painter James Tissot (whom Bowles helped enormously with introductions to prospective clients) also drew some of the cartoons.

Bowles sold Vanity Fair in March 1889 to the publisher Arthur H. Evans for £20.000, but he kept The Lady, and it is still published by the same family (the grandchildren of Thomas Gibson Bowles).

One of Bowles's children was Sydney, who became the mother of the Mitfords.

ARLINE USDF.N London, England

HAIL TO THE UNDERWEAR MODEL

MY WIFE AND I were perplexed by George Wayne's interview with new Calvin Klein model Travis Fimmel [Q&A. September]. Did we miss some text where this lucky kid professes to be a visionary or poet? He is an underwear model, for Christ's sake! Trying to humiliate the guy with bait about his "gay icon" status, calling him "darling," and then questioning him about his penis certainly made it seem that somebody was fishing too hard for juicy copy.

STEVE AND MICHELLE JONES Los Angeles. California

TRAVIS FIMMEL SHOULD be congratulated for his restraint in George Wayne's interview—for waiting until two-thirds of the way through the article, after he had been asked about the length of his dick and about his foreskin, to respond, "You got any serious questions for me here?"

DON CASWELL New York. New York

CORRECTIONS: On page 278 of the October issue, ire incorrectly credit Sherry Lansing with the idea of encouraging studio employees to garden and to paint "nose art " on military aircraft at Edn cods Air Force Base. Jonathan L. Dolgen was responsible for the idea.

On page 274, we attribute a quote to Ron Meyer regarding a lawsuit against Mike Myers. Mr. Meyer, it turns out, never made the statement.

On page 152, conductor Daniel Barenboim s first name is incorrectly given.

Letters to the editor should be sent electronically with the writer's name, address, and daytime phone number to letters@vf.com. Letters to the editor will also be accepted via fax at 212-286-4324. All requests for back issues should be sent to FAIR@neodata.com. All other queries should be sent to vfmail@vf.com. The magazine reserves the right to edit submissions, which may be published or otherwise used in any medium. All submissions become the property ofVanity Fair.