Gladys Montgomery Singer: Interview #4

Page 40

[Begin Tape 1, Side A]

Currie: I think last time we talked about some of your experiences at Electronics magazine. You also had some other assignments from McGraw-Hill during World War II. I wonder if we can pick up there.

Montgomery: I was getting along very well with my Electronics when a message came from New York, from the editor of Textile World that he wanted me to take over the Washington reporting for their magazine. This meant all of a sudden I would be Washington editor of a magazine for an industry about which I knew not very much, and it meant getting different contacts than I had with Electronics. I must say that my work in Electronics was not heavy at that time because so much on that subject was classified. So there was ample time to take on something, but this was a far cry from what I was doing. However, I made up my mind that there was no choice, and I'd go into it and make a success of it.

The logical thing was to get some outstanding person in the textile industry to give an exclusive interview, which I was able to do with Spencer Love, the acting director of the textile and clothing division of OPA. He was on leave as president of Burlington Mills, and he had given no special interviews. Furthermore, after my going for one interview, he agreed to write an article entitled "War Production: The 1944 Problem in Textiles." This was a real plus for me.

The articles forecast, for example, how much the mill owner could expect in government orders for textiles during the next quarter. Were they going to want more textiles? What particular ones was the government likely to want, and for how long? It couldn't be exact, but this was a much needed forecast of what the mill owners might expect. Therefore, it was with considerable interest that they read these articles, which were rather lengthy.

Currie: Were these articles to help them with war production?

Montgomery: The articles were meant to help them to be ready to fill government orders, or should they cut back on what they were producing, so that it gave them an idea, without being completely accurate, of what they could expect. Somehow or other, these turned out to be accurate. At least the evaluation of them, as expressed, would indicate that. Anyhow, it wasn't an easy job.

When the war was over, there was no need for any forecast article, so I had a very nice letter from my New York editor saying that it was with regret that they would have to do away with this, the reason being quite obvious, but he added, we couldn't have asked for a better Washington editor.

The thing that was coming to mind then for me was atomic energy, but I'll continue and say that about four years later, when there was mobilization going on for Korea and it was evident that we were going to get involved, the then editor of Textile World wrote to me to say that he very much hoped that I would take on again the type of forecast article that I wrote earlier.

However, by this time, I was already involved in something new: atomic energy. So I had to pass up this offer.

Page 42

Montgomery: They'd say "classified." I don't imagine they'd read the magazine particularly, but if they had any complaint or if any other reporter wondered how I had certain information, then they would investigate it. But when anything is secret, that's about all you can say.

Currie: Did you have access to classified information but then not write about it?

Montgomery: When I became Washington editor and wondered how I could justify the title, we were not yet having material classified. So I went to the Bureau of Standards, the Naval Research Laboratory, and at one place and another, government sources, and stayed there for a good part of the day interviewing certain persons who seemed to be doing work that might be interesting to me, to follow up on. It proved to be a very valuable thing, because as I got acquainted and had a rough knowledge of what was going on, I was able to identify these persons. But more than that, they identified me. I wanted to get to know them, but, I always said, "not too well."

Currie: What do you mean, "not too well"?

Montgomery: In other words, it was not that I was going out chumming. I never went out to lunch, even, with the source of a story. I decided that I would make business "business," and make pleasure "pleasure." Well, however you define it, I had what I wanted: respect from my sources. They knew me slightly, but they'd mention that they might be going to write a more technical article about what they were doing in electronics. Then I would ask them if they wanted to give me an outline. I'd take that outline and contact New York and find if they wanted any corrections in an article coming out, or if they wanted it to perhaps say a little more of this or that. Then when the article was submitted for publication, it was sure to be what was wanted.

Currie: Did other reporters become very friendly with their sources?

Montgomery: Most reporters were out for quick stories. They weren't out for the technical end of it. I don't remember. I know I was the only woman, seemingly, reporting for a magazine such as Electronics.

Currie: How did your male colleagues treat you?

Montgomery: They treated me very well. As I look back, I can't think of any incident when they failed to be fair. They didn't pull out the chair for me or anything like that, but I had just the same rights at press conferences that they had. There were always a friendly few words, a friendly relationship, between them. I'm very happy to say that the men and the very few women in reporting in this work were friendly.

Currie: Did you receive the same salary as your male colleagues?

Montgomery: Well, there you come onto a touchy subject. No, I did not, nor did I ever receive a salary in any way comparable to men in this work. No. I can't altogether blame McGraw-Hill, because it was the time when women generally were underpaid. What made it even worse for me was the only person in all my eighteen years who was not playing fair with me was the last head of the Washington office, a jovial—well, I guess I'd better not go along, because the adjectives might not get so complimentary as I go along. Anyhow, he was a heavy drinking, jovial person with a distinct desire to keep the office without any women reporters. Since I was the only woman reporter there, of course he set his guns out for me. After the war, in due time, McGraw-Hill decided, with the many inventions that were coming out as a result of these secret instruments, where even a part of one could lead to some rather important use, it was impossible to keep the old Washington editor titles, because the subject required more than one person covering for a magazine. The dropping of the Washington

Page 44

Montgomery: That happened after I had left McGraw-Hill. And why did I leave McGraw-Hill? I left because I reached the retirement age of sixty-five, and therefore it was, in those days, sort of a foregone conclusion.

Currie: What year did you retire from McGraw-Hill? I think it was 1961.

Montgomery: That's when I left. Yes, I left in December of '61. I mentioned some projects, though, that I indicated were in '62, but I don't know whether I worked part of '62 or not.

Currie: So it was early sixties.

Montgomery: Early in the sixties, yes. That's a good way to put it.

Currie: I'd like to go back. During World War II, I think you said before we turned the tape recorder on that there were more women in the McGraw-Hill office. Can you tell me a little bit about what it was like to work there in World War II?

Montgomery: No, there weren't more women reporters in McGraw-Hill. I was the only women when I was hired, and they hired, as I've told you, as an experiment. Therefore, calling me an experiment would indicate that there were no other women. I don't remember that there were any other women until for a comparatively short period when it was evident that a number of the top men in the office had enlisted and were going to war. That wasn't confined to McGraw-Hill; it was apparent that there was a rush of many reporters to get into the war, they had to or they wanted to, one or the other. So that's when they took me on at the very beginning of the wartime, it seemed to me. I think there were two other women in different magazines I've forgotten. The only way, as I told you, I think, already, that they dealt with that after the war, was to say that if your editor wanted you to remain, you could. But anyhow, I was the only one that remained.

Currie: So the other women were asked to leave after World War II?

Montgomery: Yes. There weren't that many to go. That didn't seem to bother the ones that took over the office. I believe there were two before this man came in that headed the office and left for one reason or another.

Currie: What about the women? Did that bother them?

Montgomery: Of course, there were secretaries and that kind of help there, women.

Currie: But the women reporters who were asked to leave?

Montgomery: No. One of them transferred. She was doing part-time reporting, but she was doing some for Aviation Week, and that ran its own show. They didn't go in with us. So she simply was taken full-time over there. I don't know what happened to the other one or two; I'm not sure which. But there wasn't any trouble getting a job then. I had an offer of two government jobs. One, they'd set up all the papers for it. The other one was—it seems as if they were putting a publicist person in the U.S. Coast Guard, but I'd have to look that up. The other one, the person who headed it—and that one I would have to give you—was leaving after several years, and she suggested my name to fill her place. So after looking up all about me, I was notified that I was to report within a few days. But I decided that I wouldn't take it.

In the meantime, my old boss, Roger Babson, came to the front again and contacted me. During the war, he had given up the Washington office and operated from Baltimore on a very limited scale. But he had decided he wanted, sort of a news forecast letter, you know, sort of a Kiplinger type of thing. He wanted the office to operate again with emphasis on a

Page 46

because that was when I left Nucleonics. It seemed that this type of science journal had had its day, and McGraw-Hill was ready to see the subject in a more practical sort of publication. So, therefore, the old Nucleonics was reaching its end and I was in no way qualified to go into this other—well, you say, "You weren't, anyhow,"—but all right, that's a question. [Laughter.]

Currie: No, no!

Montgomery: It was going into an entirely different type of magazine, one with perhaps a more practical turn. Now, when I started with Nucleonics, it was priced at fifteen dollars a year. Before I left, it was up to $750 a year with, of course, an expanded amount of service in it, which I don't recall right now. I only recall that astonishing rise in price. But it did guarantee many more services for the engineer or reader, whoever wanted them.

Currie: What kinds of articles did you do for Nucleonics?

Montgomery: Nucleonics was, as I said, more of the science journal type, and, therefore, for any science journal, as editor, you may not write the science articles yourself. You see that ones are contributing or you follow up on ones that want to contribute, follow up a little on the background to see whether they're ones that would be suitable for the magazine. So it was being a Washington editor who doesn't write the articles always, but who has duties of checking up on the ones that submit the articles or finding ones that they hoped would submit the articles. That's about what it amounted to. It would be ridiculous for me to say I wrote articles for Nucleonics, but I did know pretty well what they wanted. When it got to the more practical subjects, more business type, as it could be interpreted, then it was time for me to leave. The time was close, anyhow, that I was going to retire.

Currie: Is there anything else you'd like to tell me about Nucleonics?

Montgomery: I don't think now. During the years previous to that, I had a reporter from the U.S. Information Agency come to my office and ask for an interview for an article which turned out to say, "Electronics is Gladys Montgomery's beat." This came at a time when I was working largely with electronics. The article went as a release to—well, as I had it, sixty countries, but I don't know whether that's a little too many. It went to their press offices. I remember one woman from Germany, a reporter that wrote and asked me how I signed my articles. She said, "Will they sign them for you or not? If so, how do you sign them?" So I told her that many times information that I obtained was part of a longer technical article, and as such, I was a contributor. I said on others my initials were used, but on rare occasions did I have my name.

Currie: Your full byline.

Montgomery: My full byline. That's what I mean. My full byline, Gladys T. Montgomery.

Currie: I noticed in your scrapbook that some of the articles were signed "G.T. Montgomery."

Montgomery: My name was Gladys Taylor, and so when I married Monty, it became Gladys Taylor Montgomery. But when I married Russell Singer, I kept the "M" for Montgomery only because so many knew me by that name, that I was constantly either being omitted from things that I wanted, because, as someone said, "We don't know any Gladys Singer." So when I checked, I found that it's always better to keep your identification. So, therefore, I kept the "Montgomery" and dropped the "Taylor."

Currie: You had invested a lot in that byline. A lot of your professional work was under that.

Montgomery: Montgomery. Yes. Even on things that I wanted to do. I remember one reporting I did which might interest you. That was an invitation to Mexico when President Miguel Aleman was

Page 48

Montgomery: Yes.

Currie: Was there such a debate going on when—

Montgomery: No, I can't remember any such debate. This was an independent project. With everything going so well there, it was likely to be all to the good for all concerned to know about this. It didn't cost McGraw-Hill anything. It was government-sponsored. Whether our government paid anything for that or not, I don't know about. But I don't believe so, because all the dinners and social events—the president, of course, played quite a part in it. I have pictures, one standing next to him. He turns his whole attention towards me and the reporters.

Anyhow, we were briefed. There was a working end to it, too. It wasn't all play; there was a working end. I remember, for example, going and seeing their textile mills and sending in enough for the textile magazine out of that. So it was not only for Business Week; it was for any magazines that anything came out of value to them.

Currie: Today a number of reporters would feel that a government-sponsored trip would compromise their objectivity. Is that something that you worried about?

Montgomery: No, I can't say that it did. If there was friction in those countries, if there was anything within the country or within the relations we had with that country, then it would be a problem. But since everything was rosy at that time, we had very complimentary reactions to what we saw. But remember we never went into the countryside where there was poverty—not probably, but there was poverty—that we can conclude they didn't want us to investigate too much. I've often thought of that afterwards. But we went to all the centers, of course, the big college there. What is that? The University of Mexico, whatever it is.

But this was an invitation that came through the Mexican office here in Washington. I can remember I thought, "Oh, it's another one of those things," and I threw it in the wastebasket. Then I thought, "Well, maybe I should pick that out." I picked it out and found it was the grand invitation to visit Mexico. [Laughter.]

When I returned to Washington, I finally got a copy of a letter of appraisal that was written about me. It went to the head of the McGraw-Hill Washington office, it said to pass it along to the proper authorities. The Mexican head of our office there had written. He said, "It was greatly to the credit of McGraw-Hill that you sent this Mrs. Montgomery here. She was very helpful in our article and she was well received and well liked wherever we went." So afterwards, they told me that he said, "You know, she would make a good head of the press office in one of these smaller countries." [Laughter.]

Currie: That would have been fun.

Montgomery: Yes, wouldn't it? I wish I'd—well, what could I do? I ought to show you. I've got no end to certificates and everything else, but medals and so on. I thought, "I'm just going to give that to George." So I came back with all these medals on me, two or three big things. I pinned it on the front and walked in. [Laughter.] That was my archenemy who wanted no woman reporter in the office. I was the only one.

Close to the ending of my career, there was an interesting invitation. NATO had decided, for the first time, to have a briefing for women, with the selection of one woman from every NATO country meeting in Paris, France. The State Department called to say that I was the one that they were selecting to represent this country. So I considered that an honor. The briefing was matter of fact. We visited and had things pointed out to us, but getting acquainted with the women representatives of those NATO countries was indeed worthwhile. They were the most interesting individuals that you could ask to meet.

Page 50

Montgomery: I remember those meetings as something that was extremely worthwhile for me and extremely valuable.

Currie: Is there anything else that you remember?

Montgomery: You know, I haven't hit at all, and I would say that perhaps there should be a little bit about my presidency in the Press Club.

Currie: Yes.

Montgomery: For instance, it was a piece of luck and not any great credit to me that I was president when Queen Elizabeth made her official visit to this country. The other press club, the American Newswomen's Club, didn't have the same professional rating, because it included some who were not newswomen. They didn't have as strict a membership requirement. I belong to both clubs.

But anyhow, my presidency of the WNPC was the reason that I was the one who got the attention, because I was the one officially designated to meet the queen when she got out of her limousine. I have a picture of me shaking hands with her. I can remember that they had a fabulous reception. First of all there were welcoming remarks by Paul Wooten representing the National Press Club, myself, and then the queen's response.

After that, there was a reception where all the members that were on the accredited press list had a chance to shake hands with her. It was the queen, and next to the queen on one side was Prince Philip. Next to Prince Philip, I stood. I don't remember who was on the other side. Anyhow, Prince Philip asked me if he could ask a question of these. Imagine asking me if he could ask a question of the press! I said, "Oh, yes." So this rather belligerent member in the club came along. She said, before he had a chance, "Oh, your highness, I met you when you were here six years ago." And he looked at her. He said, "Yes, and you haven't changed a bit!" [Laughter.] In kind of a caustic way. Really, it was funny, you know.

And I remember the next day the reception was the big thing. I think they limited it to about a hundred in Washington. I had an invitation. I remember the queen had on a beautiful dress, but she had dark gloves as a protection from all that hand-shaking. I think that was the reason.

You don't curtsy unless you're in their country, so a curtsy was not required. It doesn't mean you can't, but it's not required. So I got through the line, and I decided I'd stand over at the side and watch. One or two of the men from the British Embassy were there. Sometimes you'd see one of these women, a little outsized, too, trying to make a curtsy and almost losing balance, but they did make it. It was amusing. So whether it was because of that or whether it was the whole thing, one of them turned to the other, and I heard him say, "Oh, this is worth a guinea a minute!" [Laughter.] And that's what I always remember, so I've used that sometimes. "This is worth a guinea a minute." [Laughter.]

Currie: You mean the show of all the people.

Montgomery: I mean those words, you know. Just generally speaking, for interest. Then maybe just putting in this is what one of the Britishers said as he watched the receiving line for the queen years ago. I'm going to borrow his sentence and say, too, "This is worth a guinea a minute." You know.

Currie: It must have been quite a show. Can we go back? How did you join the Women's National Press Club?

Page 52

Currie: Maybe we'll stop for today and we'll take up with the Press Club the next interview. Is that what you'd like to do?

Montgomery: Yes. I told you about, of course, the remarks that Nixon gave the day he got back from that South American trip?

Currie: I read about that in your memoirs.

Montgomery: That is quite interesting. It's interesting today, because I believe that occasion was perhaps the time when Nixon was so popular, universally popular, that even the press were eager to shake hands with him.

Currie: Wasn't that after he came back from his goodwill tour to Latin America?

Montgomery: That was the day he got back.

Currie: And he was attacked by mobs?

Montgomery: Yes. He sent word. He said, "Send word to Mrs. Montgomery that I will fulfill my obligation for her dinner, but it will have to be the cocktail hour and not the main dinner. But I will make the speech then that I was going to make, the reason being the president has sent word he wants a stag dinner that night to hear a report on my trip." So he came, and Pat Nixon came with him.

One of the criticisms I had was that he didn't pay enough credit to Pat Nixon. It seemed like she was kind of brushed off. But years later, a friend who knew them very well told me that when he made that speech resigning, that she had begged him, as she did before, not to mention her in it. Because I was mad that he took his mother and this one and that one and didn't name her when he made that famous speech.

But anyhow, that night he heaped praise on her, and he said, "Long after I've been forgotten, many of those youngsters in the hospital that she visited with a comforting word or a little present will remember her."

But when the reception was over, the press, as many as could, crowded up to speak to him, and there was the feeling of a hero. I say that perhaps whatever came after, this time was the height of his popularity in this country.

Currie: Of course, you worked for him later in his campaign.

Montgomery: In the campaign, I didn't work for him; I was just on the arts committee. But I got my appointment to the Kennedy Center. I got my appointment to the Advisory Committee of the Kennedy Center probably through my work on the Arts Committee during the campaign.

Currie: Had you been an admirer of his?

Montgomery: Well, we all thought he seemed to be very popular. I wasn't involved in politics until after I left McGraw-Hill. It just looked like something to busy myself with, you know. I have always been a Republican. I wasn't against him, but I don't remember that I went out making any speeches for him or anything. And I must say if you believe in resurrection, he has resurrected himself quite remarkably now.

Currie: More than once.