Masskerade 69 Defended

I was saddened to read on the back page of your first Salient yet another attack on Masskerade 69. The article added nothing new to the Masskerade witch-hunt, being something less than a bad copy of old newspaper reports and even older smears, such as those used each year by an assemblage of bigots hypocrites and hick-town mayors just prior to Masskerade's publication. It is genuine cause for alarm when the Editor of Salient chooses to emulate such self-righteous pricks.

Had you, and those of your ilk, taken a brief moment to consider your ill-informed smears and read Masskerade you would have found that it consisted predominantly of attacks on religion war and pulp culture with sex and 'vulgarity' occupying a very minor part of the magazine. I am unsure which of the Masskerade articles you would classify as satire or humour, but after reading your first Salient Editorial I would seriously question your ability to discern much less classify either. To make amends for your smear, I suggest that you get an impartial person to do an analysis of Masskerade's contents and that you publish this in Salient, with an apology, to give your readers a true idea of the contents.

I have thought about the possible reasons a fledgling Editor could have for publishing such Truth-style horseshit in his first edition. If the article was not intended seriously and was in fact a satire, you have my apologies as my vulgar Massey sense of humour is often not tuned in to the subtleties of sophisticated satire, but if the article is an indication of the standard of news articles for Salient 70 may God and Mary McDermott help your readers. However I suspect that the truth is that the whole thing is a layout fault with the names Argot and Masskerade being juxtaposed between ad and article on the back page.

G.W. Edwards