updated 01/27/1986 AT 01:00 AM EST
•originally published 01/27/1986 AT 01:00 AM EST
I cannot help but be appalled at your story on shaping up (PEOPLE, Jan. 6) as described through the fanatical regimes of today's celebrities. Although it is admirable that some of these stars are dedicated to exercise, I'm not certain that their dedication is a path to good health. I hardly call George Hamilton's fasting or sheep-cell injections "resolution inspiring." Nor do I consider it admirable that Catherine Hick-land, described as a recovering anorexic, eats a "quarter of what's on her plate" when she dines out. Sure, Donna Dixon looks great on your cover. Unfortunately, she and most of the other women described in your article spend lots of money and time to get themselves into underweight conditions. Healthful and helpful hints? I hardly think so. It's a shame that most of your young readers would kill to look just like them.
Ann Arbor, Mich.
The Golden Girls
I enjoyed your article on Golden Girls. However, I was very displeased to see that, except for a few lines, you left out Estelle Getty completely. While it is true that Arthur, White and McClanahan are an important part of the show, without Getty Golden Girls would not be complete.
Wayne A. Groves
I loved your story on Golden Girls, which showed that you can be 50, beautiful and have a hit TV series. But you still can't be on the cover. PEOPLE still wants the young and beautiful on the front. Shame on you!
I am angered and dismayed by the analogy chosen to illustrate the article on the Gramm-Rudman Bill. The comparison of the out-of-control Federal budget to "an enormously obese woman barely squeezing into a size 26" is insensitive, biased, derogatory and discriminating, not to mention stupid! Further, the ugly imagery of body parts being hacked off by a "computer driven chain saw" until the "obese woman" fits into a size 8 is vile and panders to the current mentality that says violence against women is okay. Fat people are seen as the last legitimate and safe target of discrimination and ridicule. But let me tell you that such discrimination is not legitimate, and you are no longer safe in thinking so. If we stop buying your magazine, your advertisers may not like it very much.
On the Move
I was amazed that the Post Office was able to deliver 80 parcels for Lanna Scott, who moved her household belongings through the mail, without losing anything. They don't do nearly as well with my PEOPLE magazine! It's almost always late and sometimes never arrives at all.
Picks & Pans
Peter Travers' review of the movie The Color Purple was quite cruel and insensitive. When I went to see the movie, the theater was packed and filled with emotions. This is an exceptional piece of work. The actors, actresses and Steven Spielberg deserve very high praise for their work.
San Bernardino, Calif.
Isn't it rather strange for Peter Travers to disagree with all those reviewers, such as Richard Schickel of TIME, who describes Out of Africa as "the gesture that everyone has been waiting for the movies to make all decade long," and Gene Shalit, who calls the "look of the film out of this world...overwhelming in its magnitude"? Wake up, Mr. Travers. Your feeble efforts to undermine the grandeur of Out of Africa can in no way influence public opinion. I, personally, enjoyed every minute of the film. I shall never in the future bother to read a review written by Peter Travers.
Marian E. Bordner