An Irate Irishman; What Happened to Cheshire?; Cockburn's Name; More Fallout from Brooklyn's Bohos; Condi's Hair

Taki: You wretch, I know for a fact that you weren't so casual with your anti-Irish prejudices in Her Majesty's Prison, Reading or the Scrubs, or wherever it was you were banged up ("Top Drawer," 12/27). Bet there you had only Irishmen about, not so safely slagged as Maureen Dowd is.

What kind of joker are you, using "Irish cop's daughter" as a term of disparagement, presenting it as a reason for Dowd to stifle herself? What of an Irish soldier's daughter, by the way-should she, too, keep her opinions to herself lest she run afoul of El Taki? What daughters wouldn't you gag, given your druthers?

No matter how often trotted out, your cult of Madame Thatcher (pathetically obvious symptom of your Stockholm Syndrome, that) fails to serve its intended purpose as a disguise for the Taki misogyny. Your hatred/fear of the feminine is showing as plainly as your anti-Irish bigotry in this latest broadside against a writer whose professional success you've never approached and never will.

I have three sisters-daughters of an Irish cop-whom you're unfit to walk on the same side of the street as. Considering your contempt for our breed, may we at least expect consistency? Of course you'll restrain yourself from running to an Irish cop next time you get yourself in a spot of bother in Central Park?

Paddy Hyde, Philadelphia

Brown Sugar

Oh, it's gotta be cow dung, Taki ("Top Drawer," 1/3)? Couldn't be some other brown substance that pollutes your pure white snow?

Damn, you are racist!

R. DiDomenico, East Rutherford, NJ

Mourning Wood

If Mayor Fernando Wood were to be buried in Trinity Churchyard on Wall St., as indicated in William Bryk's "Mr. Wood Is Mayor" ("Old Smoke," 1/3), it would have the ring of irony. But he is actually in Trinity Cemetery, the site of the old Audubon estate on 155th St.

Name Withheld, Brooklyn

Where's That Cheshire Cat At?

I've heard from several sources that Godfrey Cheshire was fired from New York Press recently. If this is true, I think I speak for many discerning readers and cinephiles when I say that that's a horrible shame, the worst news of its kind since Dave Kehr lost his post at the Daily News. Considering his exceptional talent-he's clearly the authority on Iranian cinema and his "Death of Film/Decay of Cinema" pieces of July and August 1999 were a provocative read for those concerned about the medium's future-I have no doubt that Cheshire will land somewhere else. But in a time when critics are paid more for writing less, I worry that he'll never have the generous space New York Press allows for expansive argument. I can't imagine the circumstances that might have led to his dismissal, but if it has anything to do with the writing itself, the editors have made a huge and inexplicable mistake.

Say it ain't so...

Scott Tobias, The Onion, Chicago

Best in Show

So, you got rid of Godfrey Cheshire from the film pages. No word on whys or wherefores anywhere on the website, as best I can tell. Would you care to elaborate on or defend this, at face value, indefensible decision?

Cheshire is, quite simply, one of the world's best film critics. His two-part piece on the death of cinema in late summer 1999 was one of the most discussed and read pieces of film writing published anywhere in the last five years-a judgment you yourself had to have shared, since, on your website there has been a prominent, advertiser-sized graphic link to it for 18 months now.

His analyses were always cogent, clear and enlightening, even if I disagreed with his opinions about the movie-which is the mark of a great critic. So what gives?

If there was any generic need to cut staff or shake things up, why did you keep Armond White-the Al Sharpton of film criticism-fercryinoutloud? Even when Cheshire went for the jugular-as with Anthony Lane and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon ("Film," 12/13)-his comments were specific and focused, not mere generic rants about ignorant and racist critics and ignorant and racist audiences. Even though Cheshire was not a conservative himself, a conservative could still read him without insult.

If you plan on turning New York Press into another bedwetting pinko rag like the Village Voice, good only for entertainment-shock value, keep on this track.

Victor Morton, Alexandria, VA

Rage of Reasons

I'm sorry to hear of Godfrey Cheshire's release. I suppose you won't, but I really do wish you would reconsider this decision. He's a wonderful and intelligent writer. If there was some other reason besides his extended tenure that led you to let him go, you ought to at least come out and say so. I'll miss him a lot and I think New York Press will be less of a paper for his absence. He'll be very hard to replace.

Andrew Whitehead, Manhattan

We Fear Kolbert

What happened to Godfrey Cheshire? He's a good and thoughtful critic, and he was as well-read and provocative a writer as you had. The rumor I keep hearing is that he was given the boot without warning. If that's true, it's inexcusable. Please don't tell me Cheshire is getting the ax to please some sorehead at The New Yorker.

Jim Ridley, Nashville

Russ Smith replies: It's true that Godfrey Cheshire was relieved of his duties at New York Press. The decision had nothing to do with his excellent roasting of The New Yorker's Anthony Lane, but rather with a belief by the paper's editors that it was time for Godfrey to ply his talents elsewhere. He'd been at New York Press since 1990; weekly newspapers aren't traditionally venues for such long engagements. We're certain Godfrey will find a new vehicle soon and we wish him the best of luck.

A Caldwell Omnibus

As if an icy-cold winter, a crapped-out bank account and free-floating holiday blahs aren't depressing enough, along comes Christopher Caldwell ("Hill of Beans," 1/3) to deposit his annual turd in the punchbowl.

Let's tally up the curare-tipped darts in this week's column: Mike Barnicle, The New York Times and David Broder (wow-there's three untouchables you don't see attacked very often, huh?), along with guns, the Old South, the New South, the Old West, the New West, tv, the Internet, shopping malls, highway sprawl, suburban anomie, Columbine (again!), conformity, nonconformity, social butterflies, loners and the vanishing small-town ties that once bound crotchety New Englanders together. (Lucky for us Charles Schulz is dead, or Caldwell would have shat on "Peanuts" again for good measure.)

And here I thought, as he gets paid money for nothing to crank out big-dome columns of political opinion, he might've offered a cheery word to us benighted masses. How wrong I was. We should all be deeply ashamed of ourselves for not providing him with a better world to slum in.

Lou Manzato, New Orleans

It's Hazen Who Gives Just an Inch

MUGGER: Thanks for never giving an inch!

Margaret Whitcomb, Salem, OR

NYP Seeks Vomitorium

MUGGER: Your comments are delicious to read. No, wait-to savor. Write on!

Julie Caprera, Southbridge, MA

Black Bush

MUGGER: I've enjoyed your paper and your column for many years. If I were to choose one thing that elevates your paper above your competition, it is your eye for talent and your abhorrence for bad writing. Thank you for the pleasure of reading consistently excellent and thoughtful articles, columns, essays and nonfiction.

I agree totally with you about George W. Bush. Blacks "are likely to fare better under a Bush administration than they can even imagine" ("e-MUGGER," 12/28). This was a hard-fought and exhausting victory, and it certainly took a lot of luck to achieve, but the country dodged a bullet. It would have been so depressing to see a Gore election validate the corrupt Clinton-Gore administration, apart from the fact that Gore personally gives me the creeps.

Thanks again for a great New York paper and best wishes for 2001 for you and your family.

Gerard Dupin, Brooklyn

Fro Here to Eternity

Hugh Pearson: In response to your 1/3 "Opinion" piece, "Dear Colin & Condoleezza," regarding future Secretary of State Powell and National Security Adviser Rice's "white-influenced" hairstyles, I have this to say: You're an idiot!

I am so sick of militant black voices, angry at everything and everyone, insulting the people you'd think they should be supporting. Here we finally have two extremely qualified appointees in powerful positions who represent the best of America (not just black America), and you're not happy with-of all things-their fucking hair. Grow up!

Fashion and trends are not set up to keep the black man down. If this were the case, we wouldn't have hiphop-influenced baggy pants worn by every white, Asian, Hispanic and Indian youth in America. Let's go back to Bo Derek and her braids, or the phenomenon of whites wearing dreadlocks. The wonderfully inventive hairstyles of black women have inspired many white women to wear French twists, decorate their hair with pearls and accessories and use gel for a smooth look that will be easy to deal with in inclement weather.

I, too, dislike the trend toward super-straight hair. Hardly anyone looks good with it, except a few under-25 models. Look at Jane Leeves of Frasier. She's sporting straight hair and looks like a tired crack whore. Oh, my heart broke with your winsome recollection of the two black youths getting their heads shaved while their mamas laughed. Boo-hoo. As a child, my ears stuck out like Prince Charles', and my mama forced me into wearing a pixie. She obviously wanted to keep Whitey down. Quite frankly, super-short is easier for the working mother to deal with.

I'm sure Ms. Rice wouldn't be well-received if she wore dreads, which seem too casual for her high position. Actually, let's have all African-American women dress in native African garb, and go topless. And let's also provide some genital mutilation. Alice Walker would support you here.

By the way, Harriet Tubman, Amos Fortune, Frederick Douglass, Shirley Chisholm and Martin Luther King never wore afros. Maya Angelou doesn't either. Oprah tried it, and looked like a beach ball. The afro is out because it's actually a bitch to maintain, and people don't look good in it, either. I'll bet Arthur Ashe would have been far more comfortable bald, like Shaquille O'Neal, and maybe Tiger Woods has more time to spend on golf given that he doesn't mess around with a high-maintenance hairdo.

It's hard to imagine Sidney Poitier or Ben Vereen playing every role looking like Shaft. Let's face it, if O.J. were still styling his afro, he wouldn't have had time to murder Nicole or Ron Goldman.

By the way, Al Sharpton has been slicking his hair back for ages. Everyone loves gel. Except Don King.

Vivian Paxton, Manhattan

Talking Frankly

Alexander Cockburn: Anyone who had to go through life with a name that sounds like a venereal disease can be forgiven for such aberrant thoughts, but should stay away from Scotsmen's kilts and Bushes ("Wild Justice," 12/27).

Joy Wellman, via Internet

Hipsters Anonymous

How perfect. I said Jeff Koyen was a fuckhead ("The Mail," 1/3) and challenged his ass-kissing article, and he responds by ignoring the substance of my letter and makes fun of me instead. Wow. What a fuckhead. I guess he couldn't defend his writing errors, or Giuliani's phony "public safety" tactics after all.

And maybe Paul Henry's right: Hey Jeff, were you the fuckhead who tried to pick me up in a bar the other week and failed? Maybe you struck out with a whole bunch of artists and waitresses out here in DUMBO and decided to get revenge! I pity your right hand (because having to touch your cock must be miserable).

Name Withheld, Brooklyn

Jeff Koyen replies: I never have and never would deny that Mayor Giuliani is a fascist. I also don't deny that this batch of DUMBO evictions may have been motivated by a greedy landlord or an oppressive local government, or under the influence of ConEd, as an illiterate flier distributed by dumbo.org speculated.

The point of my article was that I have no sympathy for the artists who were evicted from their illegal (but "trendy") dwellings and subsequently whined to the press about their poverty, their homesteading cause and other such self-martyring, ink-seeking, smokescreening nonsense.

As for Name Withheld, I must wonder why she won't attach her name to such strong accusations and vicious name-calling. Does she presume that I'm a psychopathic, artist-hating, crazed woman-killer? Or maybe that I'll track her down at whatever flophouse employs her and seduce her with my boyish good looks and wicked charm?

And as for my cock, I imagine it's much like my attacker's presumed talent and wit: it's not the most sizable thing in the world. But unlike her talent and wit, my cock hasn't failed me yet, and always does an admirable job when called into action.

East of Eden

While I appreciate the irreverent views of your writers, the schadenfreude in Jeff Koyen's article, "Hipsters in the Snow," on Brooklyn loft evictions ("New York City," 12/27) was pretty nasty.

I've been in East Williamsburg near Bushwick for six years, and when city inspectors took an interest in whether the exit signs in my building were lit or unlit it was honestly the first time I had seen city officials take an interest in anything in my neighborhood. They seem relatively unconcerned with the local crackhouse, the chop shops and the empty lot where most of the rats and mice come from. When I first came here, a dead pitbull wrapped in a plastic bag sat on the sidewalk all winter before the city removed him. A homeless man named Omar lived in a lot down the street in the blizzard of '96 and lost a few toes to frostbite, but the city seemed unconcerned about his lack of sprinkler certificates.

It also seems ironic that the city lavishes museums and cultural groups in Manhattan with funding, but takes an interest in the arts in Brooklyn, the borough where art is actually being made, only when prime real estate is involved. My neighborhood is full of empty buildings, empty lots and decent, hardworking, underemployed people in a city with a housing shortage and a booming economy. Before we are at each other's throats, the way people are in more gentrified neighborhoods, the city needs to address the possibility that there might actually be room for all of us: artists who have lived here quietly and politely for years, people who have lived here all their lives, factories and businesses, and even urban professionals like your own MUGGER, who just want to live in lofts.

No one in my building is fortunate enough to make more than $30,000 a year, and we don't hang out at the trendy bars and clubs, because there aren't any. We just want a place to make art. Like everyone else in this city, we thought our neighborhood might become too expensive for us, but we didn't expect to be forcibly evicted in the middle of the night a week before Christmas.

Besides, if you want to tell me that I'm not really part of my neighborhood and that I just served on Brooklyn jury duty for nothing, I really will, as Koyen put it, "amble to the Red Cross shelter for my Christmas ham."

Kelli Williams, East Williamsburg Artist's Coalition, Brooklyn

The editors reply: We appreciate that Williams-unlike other correspondents who wrote us about Jeff Koyen's piece-had the guts to sign her name to her letter.

But you don't have to be "fortunate" to make $30,000 a year. You just have to temp about 35 hours a week. Also, whether "art is actually being made" in Williamsburg or East Williamsburg is an open question. Probably no more "art" is being produced in either of those places than in any other neighborhood on Earth with a similar population density. Williams shouldn't deceive herself.

Casting As-Persians

Re: Spencer Ackerman's "Zine Trouble" ("New York City," 12/27): As an Iranian exile, I am, believe me, more than sensitive on issues concerning a free press. Nonetheless, as the target of an ugly smear-and an admitted smear at that-I had no option but to respond, defend myself and set the record straight. I find it interesting that Mat Gleason whines that he is a "journalist" and indicates that next time he smears somebody he will be more careful, and use the word "allegedly." I think that captures the essence of Gleason's "journalism" pretty neatly.

Banafsheh Zand, via Internet

John's Nutty Wife

It is obvious, from Jim Knipfel's "Worst Interview Ever" ("Slackjaw," 12/27), that this unnamed woman has her picture in the dictionary next to the word "ditzy." However, she is not being a hypochondriac when she complains about being allergic to fluorescent lights. Such an allergy exists. My wife has suffered from it all her life. It is particularly intensified by strobe lights, and the crazy lighting effects in The Blair Witch Project made her physically ill.

She has only found one physician who believed her when she said that she is allergic to fluorescent lights, and only because his receptionist suffered from the same condition. So if your physician tells you that allergy to fluorescent lights does not exist, you are in the hands of a quack. Change doctors at once.

John Boardman, Brooklyn

Whither Bush?

MUGGER: Just finished a Wall Street Journal editorial about the Ashcroft nomination and had a thought.

While I agree with those who feel Republicans would be better off concentrating their efforts on getting their own base to the polls for elections, I think I see where Bush may be going. Although he did a miserable job of drawing any significant support from the black community, even after making an effort, I think Bush knows where the real problem is. When Bush speaks about reading being the "new civil right," I think that what he really means is the right to make informed decisions individually.

The unfortunate truth that no one wants to touch with a 10-foot pole is that the black vote today is like an aimless flock of sheep that continually follows after the most sinister and morally bankrupt of shepherds. It is probably true that the Republican Party could ignore them, but that would not be moral, or smart for the future of the party. I think the best course would be to see to it that the black community becomes better educated, thereby empowering blacks to think more for themselves and be better informed.

Could this be where Bush is going? I hope so. Maybe someone will also see to it that the teachers' unions stop injecting their own views into the lives of their students. I was a public school teacher in New York City, and I will tell you that the indoctrination of students starts early and continues until they graduate. Only the few with extraordinary intelligence or very stable family lives are immune to this propaganda, which lasts throughout their school years.

It will be an extraordinarily difficult job, but one I sincerely hope the new president is brave enough to take on.

Eddie Brady, Manhattan

Wide World of Sports Cliches

MUGGER: I've become a regular reader of your column. You're one of the best, if not the best, at getting the point across. Your straight-shooting (and hard-hitting) method has my respect. Keep it up, good luck and don't back down. You have many fans.

Matthew Desmarais, Ayer, MA

Spy in the House of Love

MUGGER: You wrote ("e-MUGGER," 12/28): "Better ask James Carville, Hendrik Hertzberg, E.J. Dionne, Eric Alterman, Michael Moore, Jonathan Alter, Paul Krugman, David Nyhan, Bill Press or Mary McGrory."

Does Bill Press really belong in this group?

Hareendra Yalamanchili, via Internet

Russ Smith replies: You're right. With the exception of Eric Alterman, who is certainly the worst pundit soiling newsprint these days, Bill Press is in a league of his own. He's probably the reason that CNN's Crossfire has dipped in the ratings. Even a return of Michael Kinsley to the "left" slot on that show would be an improvement.

Afro Pick

What an obnoxious article on hair was Hugh Pearson's ("Opinion," 1/3)! What will it take for people of color to be proud of any member of their origins who "makes it " on his or her own merits, no matter what he or she looks like? Forget the fact that you are a minority-as long as you hang onto that undeniable fact, you will always be regarded as inferior in general.

Even though I am Caucasian, I know what I am talking about. I am French Canadian, and in my native Quebec we were called "white nigger." I have been in the U.S. for 41 years, and I have studied your culture. I notice that blacks who succeed are always brought down by other black people. I do not yet know why, but think about it. Maybe you will find it in your heart to encourage, and even "glorify" in a way, the young people who strive to achieve in the varied general culture of this country, and forget the segregationist mood that is perpetuated by the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

I am a registered nurse, and in my years of practicing in this country, I have worked with, and befriended, many people of different nationalities and various colors. It breaks my heart to see that lack of enthusiasm and pride for their fellow brothers and sisters manifested on the part of a certain element of the black race. Think about it, and change your ways.

Lise LaHaye Chenoweth, via Internet

Soup Bones

I was unimpressed by the "Opinion" piece by the guy who seems to have a problem with the way Condoleezza Rice wears her hair (Hugh Pearson, "Opinion," 1/3).

First of all, this whole shtick of pretending to write open letters to famous people, letters that aren't sent to them, that they will never read and couldn't care less about even if they did-it's tired.

The essence of the piece is that Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell should always remember that people, especially young black people, are looking up to them. An idea that I'm sure is news to them, an idea they've never heard before.

You didn't vote for Bush because you feel he is the beneficiary of affirmative action for connected white people. No doubt there is some truth in that, though it is probably also true for most U.S. presidents in this century. And perhaps you could suggest some other people more deserving?

I doubt, however, that it played a disproportionate role in putting George W. Bush where he is today. Do you really think that the people who contributed millions to his campaign thought to themselves, let's get behind this random white guy who's got nothing in particular going for him? I don't think so. Bush has experience and a record. Obviously his supporters think highly enough of him to back him with cash. People in Texas who have lived under his administration tend to be enthusiastic about him. Maybe they know something you don't.

I think it's pretty shallow to assume that Bush got to where he is undeservedly. I wouldn't blame you if you didn't vote for him because you disagreed with his policies, assuming you know anything about them. But to resent someone for getting breaks that you and your group did not get is foolish. That is the attitude of a loser.

Joe Rodrigue, New Haven

Gun Fun

Christopher Caldwell: "Virtually every index we have of violence over the last 200 years has shown the South to be consistently the most murderous part of the country" ("Hill of Beans," 1/3).

Nonsense, sir! You folks up north miss a very important piece of the data. We may have a lot of shootings, but there is a difference. Up north, the bad guy always wins. Down here, it runs about 50-50. In the real world, down here in Dixie, we reckon that if a bad guy gets shot committing a crime, that's a good thing!

So subtract all the shootings where the victim knocks off the assailant, and you'll find our rate of shootings to be much lower than, say, that of New York or Massachusetts.

I realize many silly people think that the loss of any life is a bad thing, but they change their tune when the pistol is pointed at them. Ask any of Mucko's colleagues if they'd rather have a caring, compassionate liberal or me standing next to them when the shit gets thick. I'd have dropped Fat Boy in a heartbeat, and not felt a quiver of remorse. My sympathy is always with the victim.

And note-there is no such thing as "gun violence." There is only violence, and it is created by people, not their weapons. My rifle has become progressively demonized over the years by pathetically anti-intellectual buffoons in Washington and New York, yet that darn thing hasn't spent a day out of the case in forever. My pocket knife is much more of a threat than my rifle.

We won't talk about my pistol. Only Southern wackos carry those things. And people who don't wish to be shot down like sheep by social deviants like Mucko!

Michael Peirce, Atlanta

Turkey Trot

I read Melik Kaylan's article, "Whose Genocide?" ("Taki's Top Drawer," 12/27) with an equal amount of disgust and pity. Kaylan flashes large amounts of irresponsible journalism throughout the article by patronizing his colleague Charles Glass, blaming the victim when it comes to the Armenian genocide. His knowledge of the history of the relations between Armenians and Turks is incomplete.

His thinly veiled denial of the Armenian genocide is typical of Holocaust and genocide deniers. Blame the victim, distort the facts, blur the lines. Early on in his article, he acknowledges that the "Young Turk" government carried out a campaign of violence and destruction against the Armenian people. He is correct. In fact, that very campaign led to the coldly calculated killings of more than 1.5 million Armenians during the years 1915-1923. The architects of the Armenian genocide were sentenced to death by their own Ottoman and Turkish courts. Thousands of documents-many of them Turkish-point directly toward the first planned genocide of the 20th century. This historical fact has been purged from the Turkish history books, and has been a source of international embarrassment and shame for the Turkish government. Kaylan indirectly says so himself, when he says that the "Turkish authorities today still suppress all discussion of the topic."

Kaylan then goes about attacking Charles Glass ("Top Drawer," 12/13) for his stance on the attempted suppression of the fact of the Armenian genocide by President Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair. Instead of applauding Glass' courage, he attacks Glass by trying to portray Turks as victims of religious and cultural persecution at the hands of the West. This premise is laughable, considering that minorities in Turkey have historically been abused, killed and labeled as second-class citizens.

Genocide deniers come in many shapes and forms. Mr. Kaylan is a classic example of one.

Blame the victim, distort the facts, blur the lines.

Raffi Meneshian, Cambridge, MA

Bible Thumping

Re: John Strausbaugh's 12/27 "Publishing" column: Self-styled "experts" like Gary Greenberg come along regularly. He is a DIY critic who confuses cause and effect. He thinks the Bible is myth because he found similarities to it in Egyptian and other cultures. What he fails to realize, or rather doesn't want to admit, is that:

1. He has no way of knowing which came first. The dates he depends upon to decide which account is older are guesswork, based on dating methods that have no foundation in proven fact. But regardless of when either account was written down first, the other cultures are simply recording their own corrupted versions of what the Bible records accurately. For example, many cultures from all over the world have accounts of a universal flood (for which, by the way, there is vast evidence all over the Earth). But they are all variations on what really happened, as recorded in the Old Testament.

2. When he states that there is no evidence to support the existence of a number of locations given in the Bible, he ignores that critics have ended up with egg on their faces about this over and over again in the past.

His problem is that he is arguing from ignorance. The fact that he doesn't know doesn't mean they didn't exist! Archaeology is the Bible's best friend, because nearly every time the shovel turns over, another biblical account is verified. For example, the Greenbergs of years ago ridiculed the Bible's account of the destruction of Jericho until it was uncovered, and the walls were found to be totally leveled!

Greenberg's admission that he hasn't gotten into the New Testament is significant. He doesn't want his heart changed. He'd rather die in his sins, maintaining his silly claims.

Wade Ramsey, Greenville, SC