To the Editor:
As a member of the cast of "The Boys in the Band," I was disturbed by a recent letter published under the title "Homosexuals discriminated against" and signed "Gay Liberation Front -- Ames." It distresses me to see a worthwhile movement disgraced by a spokesman who is contradictory, inaccurate, and (worst of all) irresponsible.
According to the letter, "The Boys in the Band" is a piece of "trash" and "sensationalism" which "perpetuates the ignorance of stereotyping (homosexuals) and the idiom of the locker room." It is difficult to believe that whoever wrote this letter even attended the play. Stereotyping? Of the play's nine homosexual characters, only two contain even the faintest elements of the homosexual cliché. Each of the nine characters is a delicate balance of failure and triumph -- a fully dimensional human being. I would invite you to ask the audience members (homosexual or heterosexual) if they felt that homosexuality was being ridiculed.
Quite the opposite is true. By making the homosexual a whole human being, the audience is able to identify with him and recognize the injustice of a society which considers homosexuality a criminal and immoral act -- a perversion instead of a preference.
The letter goes on to condemn the play as unrealistic because of its unhappy ending. IN a society which views an act of homosexual love as morally disgusting and even punishable by imprisonment, one could hardly expect the characters to ride off into a shimmering crimson sunset at the final curtain.
As for the play being "trash" and "sensationalism," read the critics . . . . . Gene Siskel (Chicago Tribune): "The ultimate strength of 'The Boys in the Band' is that Crowley does not attempt to present the archetypal homosexual. . . In my opinion and the opinion of film and drama critics all over the nation, (The Boys in the Band) is art presented in good taste." Richard Watts, Jr. (The New York Post): "All the once forbidden words are there and the action is highly explicit, but the play . . . doesn't strike me as a mere exercise in sensationalism. It has its share of outspoken humor, but is essentially thoughtful and serious."
The letter is unashamedly contradictory regarding the question of "balance" in the university's treatment of the subject of homosexuality. "(Because it is discriminatory and allowed the play to be produced,) the university obviously believes that there is no need for a balanced picture." Yet only two paragraphs later "a balanced picture" is no longer a good thing. . . . . "There was, of course, that lecture last year sponsored by the Committee on Human Sexuality, but then a heterosexual was also invited to the lecture to balance the picture. We mustn't allow our students to hear only a homosexual viewpoint."
The letter goes on to summarily condemn the "straight (heterosexual) media" for discrimination against homosexuals. Why can't you believe that it is possible to be heterosexual and still deplore discrimination against homosexuals? Does one have to be black to detest racial discrimination? Does one have to be Jewish to detest Nazism?
There are anywhere from 800 to 2,000 homosexuals at ISU. How many members does the Gay Liberation Front claim to have? Whoever you are, I sincerely hope you will find a new, more responsible spokesman.
Mark Henriksen
Telecommunicative Arts
[If you did not arrive at this page via the newspaper image of this article, it is available here: Boys in the Band: Letters to the Editor Regarding the Gay Liberation Front]