Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Something In The Milk Ain't Clean

To The Editor [of the New York Native]:

In Vera Hill's letter published in Issue 102 of the Native [ regarding "Celebrating Ourselves,"* a black gay supplement I guest edited in 1984]  she states that this newspaper is guilty of changing everything she wrote in her article for the black gay and lesbian supplement without obtaining her consent. As the editor of the supplement, I want to set the record straight. Anyone who carefully reads the edited manuscript against the published piece will clearly see that about 90 percent of what Hill wrote remained intact. And that whatever changes or omissions were made were done for clarity and conciseness. Any mention of Dennis Serrette [African American] and Nancy Ross [white] as running mates in the presidential election was omitted because I felt that Hill was trying to propagate the [radical left-wing] New Alliance Party's endorsement of that ticket.

The supplement's reason for being was to deal with as many different aspects of black gay and lesbian life , from as many different voices as we had space for. Although I did not object to political views being expressed, I did not want anyone using the limited amount of space we had as a political campaign tool. I would have been derelict in my duties as the editor if I were to allow that to happen in this section. In the National Alliance, NAP's newspaper, it was reported (by Jackie Salit, the paper's executive editor) that I told Hill that Patrick Merla, the Native's editor, had ordered the cuts. I never made any such statement.

I should point out that during the whole editing process, I never dealt with Hill directly but through a NAP go-between, Tammy Weinstein. So it is an example of false reporting on the part of the National Alliance to say that Hill accepted some revisions I offered. I never really knew what she thought because Weinstein was the one who kept calling me. When I asked where Hill was so I could get direct feedback, Weinstein would say that Hill was too busy organizing in the street to review the manuscript over the phone. Hill's piece was the only one I edited without the direct input of the writer.

In any future supplement, I will insist on working with the one who is the writer of a piece, not a stand-in. This rule will be applied without exception.

Hill, in her letter, tells Native readers that Serrette and Ross are "progressive, pro-gay candidates," and that Serrette was the only presidential candidate to take part in the gay pride march this year. To them I say, Bravo! But to say, as Hill does that the omission of Serrette's name from her copy is an attack on Serrette and "all Blacks and gays--who are on the front lines targeted for extermination by the right wing" is not only hyperbole but also paranoia. Whatever Dennis Serrette is, he is certainly not the straight black Messiah of black gay men and lesbians. And Hill and her ilk should stop trying to present him in that role.

Hill in our half hour telephone conversation called the Native a newspaper that was "fascist" and "right-wing." If that's the case, why bother to submit the article to such a paper, and, more importantly, why accept the enemy's money? Don't Hill and her colleagues at NAP worry that a "fascist right-wing" paper's money will contaminate  their "politically correct" organization?

I certainly have no argument with them about wanting campaign coverage of Serrette, but why, if I may be so bold to ask, did NAP not kick up a storm long before now?And why are they describing an editorial disagreement as "a fight that is currently underway in the gay community"? A "fight" that most of the gay community may not even want to participate in. Who are the combatants supposed to be anyway? And another thing, why is NAP so "eager"--that's their word--in their open letter to other gay papers to bring this "fight" to their attention? To quote Hill from her Native article, "Something in the milk ain't clean."

Sincerely yours,
Charles Michael Smith

The New York Native published this letter in 1984.

*The essay contributors included Joseph Beam, Craig Harris, and David Frechette. The poetry centerfold included Melvin Dixon, Essex Hemphill, and Salih Michael Fisher.

I give credit to Melvin Dixon for suggesting that I call the supplement "Celebrating Ourselves."

No comments:

Post a Comment