STEPHEN'S REPLY

I admit that I consciously used some of Parllne Kael's descriptions of particular memonts in the movie. I read her piece about a week before beginning my own, and hold in mind the expression "handsome, grainy-cinema-verite" and the characterization of Mabel as a "chastened, hurt-animal" penitent and "anxious speed freak." By any ethical standards I should have given credit to the New Yorker review.

The substance of my review, however, directly opposes Miss Kael's position on the film. Cassavetes dramatizes a pathogenic situation which only Laing and Gregory Bateson have sought to popularize it would be difficult to ignore the fact that A Woman Under the Influence is based on those theorists' work, if not an exegesis of it. Also, many observers--including Miss Kael, to whom I was referring--have compared Cassavetes to Pinter.

The was an individual's piece, and does not reflect on The Crimson as a whele.

I apologize to The Crimson's readers and to Pauline Kael for not acknowledging particular observations she made. Charles E. Stephen