FEATHER FAN CLUB (1) In recent months many of us who are devoted to jazz music have become increasingly alarmed by the writings that have appeared in Esquire under the guise of jazz criticism. Particularly have we been taken aback by the opinions of your chief critic Leonard Feather who, we feel, is either completely imcompetent or thoroughly dishonest. It is not that we have anything against Mr. Feather's personal preferences - or what he states are his preferences - in regard to jazz. What we fear is that Mr. Feather's notions - it is hard to call them anything else - may influence some of your readers. We fear that some of them may come, as he has, to prefer the sentimental, affected honkings of Coleman Hawkins or the shrill "I-can-blow-higher-and-louder-than-you-can" shriekings of Roy Eldridge to the simple, honest playing of Bud Freeman or the incomparable Muggsy Spanier. We do not feel that the listing of such a record as Art Hodes' Royal Garden Blues in the class of hillbilly music (as Mr. Feather once did in his reviews in Look Magazine) is either intelligent or honest criticism. Nor do we feel that such examples of Mr. Feather's type of jazz as his Commodore recordings with the Esquire All-Star Band are worthy of the name. It would not be quite so bad if Mr. Feather's was the majority opinion and ours the minority. But that does not happen to be the case. Such critics as Charles Edward Smith, George Avakian, Frederic Ramsey, Eugene Williams, William Russell and others who were listening to and appreciating jazz before Leonard Feather ever heard of it think with us, that Pee Wee Russell and Georg Brunis are more representative of jazz music than are Charlie Shavers and Art Tatum. We do not suggest to you that you dismiss Feather from your staff. (We might think it a good idea, but we don't suggest it.) What we do ask is that you have some one who really knows jazz music as Feather never can and never will, to counteract, or at least to balance, the influence of Feather's attitudes. It was, I believe, Charles Edward Smith who put Esquire on the jazz beat back in 1934. Could you not get Smith to put Esquire back on that beat today? Or if not Smith, some other critic or some less-known but equally devoted collector who has some literary bent and can help lead your readers out of the present state of delusion into which Mr. Feather has led them. If Mr. Feather wishes to write one of his jump boys, let him, but please have someone else around who can write of Dixieland and New Orleans, of the music that is real, that is jazz. Esquire can do jazz music a great service. We to whom jazz means so much hope that it will not fail. A.H.E. Cornell University Medical College New York, N.Y. (2) A few weeks ago I received my June issue of Esquire and was delighted to find The Rhythm Section. It was not an unpleasant surprise, to say the least. I've found it the most interesting feature in the publication. Here in Italy we get very few records from the States. Of the twenty-odd discs we have, eighteen of them are a mixture of Harry James, Sammy Kaye and Kay Kyser, The other five include one terrific Goodman plate, two Tommy Dorsey records, Jenny by Gertrude Lawrence (murder), and a solitary V-Disc-your own "Blues" and "Esquire Bounce"-backed by "Tea for Two." Tatum, Casey and Hawkins were never better than in "Bounce." The big trouble is-all we get is the sour schmaltz of Sammy Kaye and the secondhand corn of Harry James' commercial trumpet. What is the matter? As long as they're using valuable space to send records, why can't they send some music, instead of noise? Frankly I would rather hear myself playing "Sweet Lorraine" on a jew's-harp than Sammy Kaye and the rest at their best (which isn't too good). In any event, I want to extend my congratulations for the fine job you're doing, Mr. Feather. Keep 'em coming. J. R. Walsh, Jr. 2nd Lt.-Air Forces