Albee and values

If playwright Edward Albee truly believes complacency is a worse thing than having sex with an animal, then why can’t he respect his detractors who are not complacent in their criticism of his play? [“Watch. Think. Squirm.,” Feb. 6].

Why does he dismiss such negative responses as “knee-jerk”? He takes a patronizing tone as he explains the subject of his play is “the arbitrary limits of our tolerance” and his social philosophy that “we really should examine our values to see what we really believe. I’m convinced that ... [this] will rid most of the problems in our values.” The logic of these statements seems to imply that no values is good values, since they are “arbitrary” according to him. I’m sorry, but this is a brave new world, a new social order that many of us do not wish to embrace.

Ask any anthropologist, the human glue that holds a culture together is a shared set of values. No society can operate sans values; values are part of the equation that defines us.

As for the issue of “liberal elitism,” Albee and some of the other playwrights claim ultimate tolerance, yet when confronted, refuse to acknowledge opposing views of having any serious intellectual or social merit.

One of the positive hallmarks of “liberalism” is its tradition of open-mindedness as a means of critically appraising issues and entering into social discourse. These playwrights fail to do so. They can’t blame the religious right, or anyone else for that matter, for their own brand of narrow-mindedness. But at least they could be more intellectually honest and admit to it.

Lynelle Harrigan

Granada Hills