Our Gay Asses Can Kick Dennis Jordan's Straight Ass Any Day; the Always-Bizarre Armond White; Ruth Woulda Cleaned Williams' Clock, Caldwell; Lick Me Thusly, Guys; More
Do You Love Altman?
I finally figured out how Armond White does it. Critics use words, mere words! They misunderstand everything. Steven Spielberg's genius is proven by the existence of Iranian cinema. Iranians use film, unlike the Inuits. Of course, the critics praise the Inuits. The sublime masterpiece 1941 echoes through modern comic trifles like American Pie and Scooby-Doo. Critics will never understand this. Damnable critics.
There is a new film out this week that is not by Spielberg. I did not like it. Can I fill in the next time White is on vacation?
Bill Werbaneth, Springfield, NJ
Go Fly
Let us now praise raving loons! I refer to the always bizarre Armond White. Though I like nutjobs as a rule (from a distance), I have to say I find it next to impossible to make it all the way through one of his pieces without skimming. Impassioned (or maybe overheated or maybe rabid) defense of faves recent or not so, dragged in regardless of the film under discussion ("Film," 7/10), along with shrill abuse of anyone "immature" (a fave word) enough to disagree are the hallmarks of his style. And Spielberg. Armond has just run out of superlatives for SS (but is happily content to keep reusing the same terms of abuse for detractors). He called AI, if I recall correctly, a spiritual milestone in the history of humankind.
So naturally I was intrigued to see how he'd top that when the new film by der Spieler came out. The results: a little disappointing?but not for lack of trying! This bit from the end clinched it: "Like da Vinci's study of the body, Spielberg graphs the body politic through Anderton's behavior?a reflection of morality, law and cinema esthetics" ("Film," 7/3). It makes no grammatical sense (guess he's trying to say where da Vinci mapped the body, in his drawing of that spread-eagled naked hippie dude, SS also maps the body politic or something?the excuse being that Cruise adopts a similar posture when exercising his psychic powers), but that's beside the point, which is to link SS and da Vinci, as artistes. Now I'd be the last person to slag Leonardo, but you have to admit, after the Second Coming, it's a step down.
A. Kite, Brooklyn
Who'da Guessed We'd Get A Letter Like This?
RE MUGGER's Cleveland Indians/"coolest baseball logo" picture in the 7/3 issue. This picture is what my Native American friends and I consider a racist stereotype of an Indian. I find it about as cool as a Nazi stereotype of a Jew with a hooked nose and horns. Imagine, for example, a cartoonish illustration of a black slave picking cotton as a logo for the New York Knicks. In addition to the "American holocaust" that was perpetrated on the first Americans, and the appalling lack of conscience about their ongoing victimization by our society, they're just about the only minority in this country that anyone would dare to take potshots at in the form of racist logos, cartoons and comments.
Ron Cohen, Manhattan
Lazy Journos
REMichelangelo Signorile's article on Mike Ovitz's "gay mafia" comments ("The Gist," 7/10). Far from being that interested in this scandal, what I admire about the piece is how Signorile addresses the shortcomings of journalism today. So often I read an article?in magazines or newspapers, local or nationwide?where I have glaring questions that have not been addressed by the author. It's lazy journalism, and so detrimental to public understanding of issues facing the world today. Journalists so often leave out details or don't ask the right questions or even the obvious questions, most likely because it would call into question their own understanding of the subject. Thorough, and unbiased, research, is time-consuming, tedious work. And all too often today, journalists are willing to go the path of least resistance, much to the disservice of their readers.
I received Signorile's article through a newsfeed. Now that I'm familiar with your publication and his writing, I'll look forward to seeing what light he can shed on other controversies being reported by the media these days.
Cari Jackson, Greensboro, NC
Sorry, Darling
Re Olivier French & John Strausbaugh's capable interview with Abel Ferrara (7/3). What's up with Ferrara not so much as mentioning the late Zoe Ms. 45 Lund, who cowrote Bad Lieutenant with not-so-honest Abe, and is a big part of his cult success? If Zoe's flawless face and haunting grace were still a part of Ferrara's package he wouldn't have any trouble finding distribution for R-Xmas, his latest chase of the sex, drugs and New York City dragon.
Spyder Darling, Manhattan
Yes, He's Cooled Down Considerably
Christopher Caldwell states his belief that Ted Williams ranks as a greater hitter than Babe Ruth ("Hill of Beans," 7/10) because (1) Williams missed the better part of five seasons to military service, while if he had played those years he'd have hit close to Ruth's 714 home runs; and (2) Ruth's home field was Yankee Stadium, in which it is much easier for a lefty pull hitter to homer than Fenway. However, he doesn't mention that Ruth spent five years in his 20s as a pitcher whose home field was Fenway. (Lifetime 94-46, with a 2.28 era and 24-win and 23-win seasons.) If Ruth had spent those seasons as an outfielder in Yankee Stadium he might have hit 900 home runs.
Also, a player really can only be judged against his contemporaries. Williams dominated his era, but not like Ruth?who hit more home runs than entire teams and changed the whole philosophy of batting.
Some years ago I heard Williams asked the "what if" question in a radio interview: "What if you hadn't lost those five years and had played in Yankee Stadium, you might have hit 1000 home runs."
Williams replied to the effect (as I remember): "What if I'd been shot down in WWII? What if I'd played in Yankee Stadium and tore up my knee on an outfield drain, like Mickey Mantle did, and it took years off my career? You can only make the most of the life you've got, there's no point in thinking about any other." The guy who was remembered as a bit of a hothead as a player mellowed considerably with age.
All that said, there have been only two classes of batters in baseball history: Babe Ruth and Ted Williams, and everyone else.
Jim Glass, Manhattan
Tongue-Lashing from Miss Bossy-Boots
I love reading your "First Person" articles, as well as "The Mail." Hearing all sides of an issue helps me keep it in proper perspective. I was surprised (although maybe I shouldn't be) at how impersonal receiving oral sex is to many of the men in Eileen Dover's survey ("First Person," 6/26). Having a man's lips and tongue between her thighs feels pretty intimate to many women. Since the person receiving oral sex should offer to reciprocate (at least if he or she practices good sexual etiquette), I'd like to play copycat to Richard Rabicoff ("The Mail," 7/9) and list my three suggestions to would-be skillful pussy lickers:
1. Take your time (guess men and women aren't so different on that one).
2. Be enthusiastic (tell her how much it turns you on).
3. Don't stop too soon (there's nothing worse than having an orgasm cut short because he thought you were "done" or would be "too sensitive").
If more women could count on getting off the first time they're with a man, I bet they might be more excited to jump into the sack. When your conquests have experienced your generosity in cunnilingus, they may just be more enthusiastic with a reciprocal gulping bj, Mr. Rabicoff.
Roseann Wright, Manhattan
What, Her Worry?
MUGGER: You quote Liz Smith as saying, "I never saw Tina [Brown] before without a worry line between her eyebrows" (7/3). Liz says it's because Tina is no longer publishing Talk. I would say it's simply Botox.
Nice portrait of you on Jewish World Review!
Ken Phillips, Loveland, OH
You Sound Surprised
Re Christopher Caldwell's "LAX Security" ("Hill of Beans," 7/10). The Bush administration has lost its focus and direction in the current war on terrorism. The shooting rampage at LAX was a blatant act of terrorism and it should be treated as such. Unfortunately, the current administration makes business interests and personal agendas its top priority. This means that regions of strategic importance, like Central Asia and the Middle East, in combination with their vast natural resources, have precedence over the interests and even security of the people. It also means that the overall agenda is driven by these two forces.
Nick Gatsoulis, Astoria
Trump's Muslim?
Whoever was behind the attack on the WTC, Adam Heimlich jives us when he claims they "chose the towers because they represented effort" ("New York City," 7/3).
Unfortunately, their collapse indicates that little effort went into their lifeless design. But what's interesting about Heimlich's maneuver is the drivel about the attackers not being equipped to hack it, and therefore resenting effort. This is curious coming from a hack.
In any case, effort don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing. Like the harmonious effort that went into the design of the Taj Mahal?a Muslim construct, incidentally, similar to the great mosques built when Northern Europeans were living in caves. (A memorial such as the Taj Mahal should be built at the WTC site.)
Life is a circle?not a fucking box. One day, perhaps, Heimlich will be big enough to get his arms around it. Then he will see the strength and beauty in what appears effortless.
A. Cammarata, Sunnyside
Very Nice of You Indeed
Michelangelo Signorile: Since I have never hesitated to write to complain about one of your columns, I thought it appropriate to acknowledge that I thought your latest column on the Ovitz story re a "gay mafia," was very good, very good indeed. I thought you were particularly right in your comments on the stupid way in which The New York Times reported on aspects of this story; and I agree with your assessment of how you would have been treated had you done what they did with their "list."
Terry Hinshaw, Miami Beach
Richard E. Lee, Guyton, GA
Greeks, Arabs, They're All the Same
Taki: "Does that make me a Jew-hater?? Does that make Europeans anti-Semitic?" ("Top Drawer," 7/3).
And the answer is: It doesn't matter. Thank G-d we live in an era when Jew-hatred is becoming the Jew haters' problem. Just ask an Arab who's had a tete-a-tete with the IDF recently. (Of course, we both know they don't have an anti-Semitic bone in their body.)
Dan Friedman, Forest Hills
From a Stinking Pro-Catholic
C.J. Sullivan: It's not the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, but some of the hierarchy that are causing "some of the true believers" to be drifting away ("Bronx Stroll," 7/3). While it's shocking about the number of priests accused of predatory sex and how bishops just send them elsewhere, the accused are still a minority of the thousands of priests and the hundreds of bishops in the United States. That the accused are a minority must always be said?not to excuse the guilty but to be fair to the majority who are not guilty.
If C.J. Sullivan were writing about violence among young black men (a third are said to be in the criminal justice system) he'd be sensitive and not generalize. But he must think it's okay to be a stinking anti-Catholic.
Jennifer Smith, Manhattan
But It's Mostly Republicans
I love Christopher Caldwell's articles, and this one was no different ("Hill of Beans," 7/3). But I'd like to just point out something. Caldwell says Americans can't support both Powell and Rumsfeld. As one who does, I beg to differ. Having opposing viewpoints, while supporting the fundamental meaning of the war, is exactly why I support both of them. It may surprise Caldwell and many Democrats to learn that Americans are not the two-dimensional blank-screen dullards they think we are. We actually do look beyond the debate, and sometimes find that the debate is good. And we trust the people doing the debating. It's not only Republicans who are glad Bush won the presidency. It's most Americans. Every time Gore opens his trap, we are all reminded at how close we came to having him in office when the terror struck, and how thankful we are we don't have to rely on him now.
Patrick Hajovsky, Houston
Judge Crater, Meet Lord Cockburn
Thanks for William Bryk's piece about Judge Crater ("Old Smoke," 6/19). Martin Healy, the head of the Cayuga Democratic Club, was my paternal grandmother's brother. Though not known at the time, they were cousins of Jimmy Walker. This was something my grandmother never acknowledged. Now I'm beginning to see why. Obviously, these Healy scandals were a nightmare for her. Unfortunately she died when I was 10 and my dad died a couple of years ago, so these stories are becoming harder to get straight. I'll let Bryk in on any new information. Is Alexander Cockburn descended from Lord Cockburn of "The Edinburgh Review (1802)"? Also, he claimed to be a descendent of Gen. Cockburn, the man who burned the White House in the War of 1812. If so, tell us more. My ancestors fought under him.
Tom Phillips, Manhattan
Moldering in the Grave
J.R. Taylor's recent potshot ("Daily Billboard," 7/1) at the All Music Guide is probably deserved. AMG is, in fact, mostly a cybermorgue for lifeless rock cliches, but it's curious that Taylor would contrast it with the writing of recently deceased Billboard editor Timothy White, whose benign, almost valueless approach always struck me as having been cut from the same cuddly cloth as that of All Music stalwarts like Stephen Thomas Erlewine.
Taylor also asserts that "music writing is now a dreary recitation of facts written by dot-brains with no real understanding of the world," and bemoans the rarity of White's brand of writing, which "look(s) at music in a broad cultural context." Rock writing with a "broad cultural context" is a rarity? It seems to me that rock critics have been congenitally incapable of anything else. Granted, the Bangs/Reed and Marsh/Boss couplings in the 70s set the stage for many a boring bio written by starfucked obsessives. But there are scores of examples, from Marcus' Mystery Train to Simon Frith's socio-scatological musings to Jon Savage's England's Dreaming to Dick Hebdige's Subculture the Meaning of Style to Richard Meltzer's Gulcher?the list goes on and on?which are precisely (or imprecisely) about the "larger cultural context."
The fact is, it's the rare rock scribe who gives a hoot about the music. Most of them have degrees in American studies (Marcus) or literature (Anthony DeCurtis) or sociology (Frith) or some such. It was this phenomenon that prompted a particularly long and vitriolic chapter in Joe Carducci's Rock and the Pop Narcotic. But bitching about the current flaccid state of rock prose has itself become a most tiresome cliche. Taylor's statement that "music criticism is an inherent joke" echoes Carducci's quip 12 years ago that "rock literature barely exists in reality" or the much talked-about anonymous broadside (variously attributed to Charles Aaron and New York Press contributor William S. Repsher) that opined that "criticism barely bustles a hedgerow anymore." It's de rigueur now for patronizing pundits to pine loudly for the halcyon days of [insert your favorite gonzo noise boy here] or whine pathetically how the aforementioned ruined it for everybody. Rock writing at present may indeed suck the bilious backwash of Lester Bangs' final bottle of Romilar, but whose fault is that? It's all too obvious (but apparently necessary) to point out that most of the complainants are themselves rock critics who, to a man, have been unable to get the ox out of the ditch.
Well, I for one refuse to become bitter about it. You can't blame the rock press for their failure to inspire when the subject at hand, "rock music," is about as inspiring and dangerous as Britney Spears' backstage veggie buffet. And with every shock effect having been exhausted ad nauseam (Andrew W.K.? Yawn), not to mention the stifling presence of soulless hegemonies like Clear Channel?maybe it's time to accept that rock has slid kicking and screaming into its inevitable classical period, where there are no more innovations left, no more breathless pursuit of the new, just accepted forms to be practiced and appreciated. Or maybe it's rigor mortis setting in. Perhaps what the AMG is doing is the only kind of useful rock writing that's left: a cold, scientific cataloguing of inert material. Maybe it's time once again to trot out the oldest cliche of all: Rock 'n' roll is dead.
Dave Sims, Denton, TX
Shut Up and Eat
Christopher Caldwell: I was just reading your remarks about Ms. Freeman-in-the-niquab, which included an apparently totally gratuitous dig at vegetarians ("Hill of Beans," 7/3). I'm always surprised by such outbursts from apparently intelligent people. What is the problem? I'm a religious vegetarian?one of those people who somehow throws a whole table full of steak-loving people into misery and disorder just by being there. If I were a Jew, would you be upset because I refused to get down with a plateful of pork sausage? If you were, would you be unable to suppress your peculiar problem with it, or would you display it and make a big deal about it? I don't get it. Why can't I be a vegetarian?
I've been trying to figure this out for some time and the only thing I can think of is that a lot of people feel uncomfortable about eating meat, but it's the regular thing to do, as they're told by big men and advertising agencies, so they do it, and take their discomfort out on the few odd people they encounter who don't submit. But I'm just guessing. People do so many contradictory, irrational and destructive things that I suppose this very mild persecution of vegetarians is extremely small potatoes. It's just so mysterious.
By the way, I know you think I have a perfect right to not eat meat. Rights are not what this is about. It's about your problem. What do you suppose it could be?
Gordon Fitch, Staten Island
Christopher's Medal
C.J. Sullivan: I was happy to read that you and others find solace at St. Lucy's well in the Bronx ("Bronx Stroll," 7/3). I am what you might call an unlikely Catholic. I'm gay, relatively young and "out" to the clergy and congregation at St. Joseph's Church, Greenwich Village, where I have attended Mass regularly. Also, I am no fool. I am aware of the church's corruption throughout the ages as well as the fact that there are those who would rather I just go away. Since the news of the priests' sexual abuse of children and others (and coverups) surfaced, I have tried disappearing. Still, I miss gathering with the "body" of Christ on Sundays.
I guess, for me, the men and women who come together week after week and year after year are the "well" I draw on. Thanks for your article, it helped me remember who the church is.
Mark Luggods, Rego Park, NY
Sig Scores Again
Mike Signorile: As usual, well thought out and succinctly put on the page.
Michael John Smith, Houston
Bar W
Alexander Cockburn: A solution to the Middle East crisis will not come from the Bush White House because in order for it to bring Israelis and Palestinians to the discussion table, both parties will have to make concessions ("Wild Justice," 6/19). The Palestinian Authority is willing to make concessions while Israel does not seem eager to do so. President Dumbo cannot act as an honest broker, not only because he does not know where Jerusalem is?or, for instance, that it has never been a Jewish city?but because he does not have a plan. Wait, I think he does: he intends to spend a week on his ranch where uninterrupted siestas will be had. In the meantime, Jenin will be recreated by the uncivilized members of the Israeli army.
Sharon might disagree with President Dumbo's plan. Another massacre can be launched in two to three days, the senior murderer will argue. So unfair. So unfair indeed. A weekend at the ranch is not fun.
Amaury Rodriguez, Bronx
There's that 1918 Again
In making a case for Ted Williams being a better hitter than Babe Ruth, Christopher Caldwell ("Hill of Beans," 7/10) asserts that Williams' five lost seasons cut into his career statistics, notably his home runs. But Ruth, as a Red Sox pitcher for the first five years of his career, lost most of his potential at-bats, and those that he didn't lose were against a dead ball. As for Ruth hitting "all his home runs" at custom-made Yankee Stadium, the ballpark didn't exist until 1923, when Ruth was nine years into his career. In 1919, with the Red Sox, he led the league in home runs. In 1920 and 1921, with the Yankees, Ruth hit 54 and 59 home runs, respectively. How many of his Stadium homers would have made the grade at Fenway is unknowable, but it should be noted that it's only 302 feet down the rightfield line (the Pesky Corner) at Fenway, and both Williams and Ruth were dead pull hitters. Anyway, half a player's at-bats are on the road. Finally, Caldwell alludes to Williams being the chief cultural point of reference for New Englanders. One might think they'd have some sentimental attachment to Ruth, the guy who pitched the Sox to their last World Series championship, winning two games back in 1918.
Al Silver, Manhattan
Let's Take It Outside
Re Dennis Jordan's front-page article "Brawlers Club" (7/10). Perhaps the three guys who came to this event should have stayed long enough to be able to write an accurate article. Better yet, as combat sports are participatory in nature, they should have joined in, with or without the "hard-ons" the article attributes to them.
One would have to start with the ridiculous illustration on the front page, repeated on the article's next page, which appears to sum up their depiction of the event. If the illustrator, Tristan Eaton, were working 50 years ago and didn't know any better, such tired stereotypes might be more understandable, though no less inaccurate. The lace garter is particularly preposterous. It gives the impression that the Press can't handle the idea of ordinary gay men who enjoy wrestling and other combat sports, so that in Eaton's (and the Press') eye they need to be reduced to some caricature. Fight Nights are a lot of things, but they certainly are not drag shows.
For those who would like to see what the event really looks like, the site is updated regularly and contains actual photographs, not fictional sketches like Eaton's. Both straight and gay men attend, and the wrestling runs the gamut from competitive freestyle, collegiate, submission and martial arts matches to more recreational matches and combinations thereof. Having an interest or a fetish for this does not rule out intense and competitive matches, which Jordan et al. would easily have found out if they stuck around long enough to observe, or hit the mats themselves. Brawlers has had all-out boxing matches and Brazilian jiu-jitsu as well as Muay Thai kickboxing to supplement the predominant sport of wrestling. Thus, their claiming that the fight clubbers are a bunch of "pussies" is hardly worth a comment, considering that none of them could muster the nerve to get on the mat for even one match.
Funny how the few critics always whine from the sidelines, afraid to actually hit the mat and learn a thing or two.
As for the "blood and guts" that the author so earnestly desired, this is after all the real world, not a fantasy out of the Fight Club movie. Minor injuries do of course occur, but anything likely to cause major injury is discouraged, both so the participants can come back for more and in the interest of keeping things safe and sane. It is the same reason why fencers settle for scoring points with a blunt sword rather than actually stabbing each opponent in the heart, and the same reason why modern wrestlers go for points, pins or submissions rather than killing their opponent, as in some ancient cultures.
Also worthy of mention is the local wrestling team, Metro Gay Wrestling Alliance, which is solely a competitive freestyle team (i.e., Olympic-style, non-erotic) and participates in USA Wrestling-sanctioned tournaments. A number of members of this team regularly show up at the Brawlers events. With Brawlers' open-mat format, a match can be whatever style is agreed on by the participants, thus accommodating wrestlers from whatever style, background and sexual orientation, erotic or not. The team is in fact one of several gay wrestling teams and clubs that have practiced the sport in New York continuously since 1978 or earlier.
The references to Plato's Symposium and the ancient Greeks is also interesting for what sailed right over their heads. The premise is that somehow the guys at Brawlers are "pussies" compared to what the Greeks did in the Symposium and generally in that time period, because Brawlers accommodates gay wrestlers and doesn't have enough "blood and guts."
If they actually read Plato's Symposium (instead of just trying to fit it into their preconceived notions) they will see competitive wrestling coinciding with gay love to neither's detriment, and sometimes increasing the enjoyment of both, much as at Brawlers.
In the Symposium, Alcibiades, the famous gay general, wants to be Socrates' lover; they go to the palaestra for a date (the palaestra being the wrestling area where the ancient Greek "pussies" wrestled naked with olive oil on the ground?no mats?much like the modern-day Turkish Kirkpinar wrestlers, who would not take kindly to aspersions on their age-old tradition either). Following the workout, Alcibiades wanted to bed Socrates, while Socrates apparently just wanted to be friends; they end up going home and cuddling all night on the couch. Minus the oil, it's not very different from a hypothetical Brawlers' Fight Club scenario.
Part of that culture in which the Symposium was written was the widely held belief in the military and government as well as the general population that "an army of lovers cannot fail," the exact opposite of current U.S. DOD policy. The Greeks believed that an army composed of gay male lovers would be invincible because their love (eros) for each other would inspire them to fight more valiantly. This was most famously put into practice in the gay male "Sacred Band of Thebes" battalion, whose members had to sign an oath regarding what we would today call their sexual orientation, and which was indeed undefeated for many years until their final battle with Philip of Macedonia in the Battle of Chaeroneia (338 B.C.).
What is also interesting about the article is that the Brawlers events are belittled because of the combination of combat and sexual desire; however, once they find out that women will also attend the September event, it is deemed perfectly okay to combine this?when it is done heterosexually.
So much trouble understanding a gay wrestler or even a fight fetish when it has to do with guys, but all of a sudden it's cool with women? "Blood and guts" and all? Whether it's from bias or just inconsistency or lack of observation, in 2002 one would think a paper could do better.
Nick Zymaris, Mineola, NY
A Subject of King Dubya
MUGGER wrote, "What possible benefit is there in holding countrywide bull-sessions (or "town meetings," as a former president reveled in) about sensitive wartime strategy?" (7/10). I work in state government and that statement is absolutely, positively, dead-center perfect. No decision even in state government is ever made on the basis of a public hearing. Everything is decided behind closed doors or in personal negotiations between legislators. So the feds must be a hundred times worse.
Public hearings are for public consumption only. So when Congress has a Hollyweird celeb testify about the horrible state of family farms, no one in Congress is listening. They're basking in the glow of free publicity?campaign funds lite.
Name Withheld, via e-mail
The Dave
I first linked to Taki's column two years ago when it appeared on the Drudge Report, and have continued reading it nonstop despite Matt's petulant removal of the link ("MUGGER," 6/12). Taki is a refreshing alternative to the drab effluvia released by the mainstream media in America; please keep him on staff. Unlike most of the drones who pass for journalists in this country, "the poor little Greek boy" doesn't have to write puff pieces about rich, powerful people for career advancement. I can't help but note that most of his critics?regardless of how erudite they begin their letters?eventually end up sputtering with rage and profanity at his insouciance. I was taught early on that using expletives was a sure sign of weakness in one's arguments. Salut, "Top Drawer"!
David Turner, Atlanta
Because He Lives in New York
MUGGER: I've had a hankering to write you for some time now. I had a simple question, but naturally I only sat down to write after you pissed me off. The question: If you are a Red Sox fan, why do you have Yankees season tickets? This arrangement seems beyond perverse, even for a Red Sox fan. Sorry if the answer is common knowledge; I must have missed it.
What pissed me off: I am a fan of your column mostly because of the breezy writing style. I tend to moderately disagree with you politically and the family stuff often gets on my nerves. But this week's column actually got my goat. Sadly, what annoyed me was the sort of commentary I associate with more kneejerk conservative pundits: "I live for the day blacks are simply called black." How obnoxious! As if "black" was mandated by some omniscient entity as the exclusive and correct term for a certain type of person. That's like wishing all cripples were simply called cripples. There's no inherent accuracy in the term "black" for any group of people, as I'm sure you will agree since very few people, if any, actually have black skin. Nor is there an historical tradition of using the term to return to.
Why is "black" better than "African-American"? Why do you care? Why don't you live for the day when colored people are simply called colored? It sounds like you've formed an arbitrary connection to the word "black" through experience and confused that connection with some objective truth. I will stop short of pointing out the negative aspects one might observe of using the term "black." You're welcome.
Finally, in a reversal of your sort of anti-p.c. color-term wish, you confuse associating W. Bush with a cartoon character with associating him with speech impairment. Yes, the creators of Elmer Fudd were mocking a speech-impaired person. But since Bush doesn't have a comparable impediment, it's safe to say the letter writers were making more of a connection to the cluelessness and stupidity of Elmer Fudd than to his speech problems. The speech is simply a (perhaps unfortunate) trademark of a well-known, maybe even archetypal, character. That's fair, ain't it? Oh, and not to mention, those were letters?the publication in question probably doesn't exclusively print letters with which it agrees, right?
Anyway, if you have the time, please answer the season ticket question. Thanks.
Alexander Trimpe, Brooklyn
A Healthier GOP
Now that Dick Cheney's pacemaker is ticking over nicely, Bob Dole's sex life is going great, Reagan still has a pulse, Giuliani's pee-pee is working and Bush's asshole is clear, I think the nation is poised for a robust recovery.
John Haynes, Manhattan
A Paine in the...
Russ Smith derides a lot of other people for their opinions, but he exposes a lapse in his knowledge of American history in his "New England Thunderstorms" column ("MUGGER," 7/3).
Smith objects to a humorous statement that if Thomas Paine were alive today "he could be prosecuted under the Alien and Sedition Acts." Smith doesn't know that some prominent persons in Paine's day considered him to be a "dirty little atheist" and were in fact dissatisfied at not finding an excuse to throw the book at him. Paine was so advanced in his thinking that if he turned up today, he might almost be considered an anarchist. His motto was: "that government is best which governs least." Amen to that!
Harriet Samuels, Brooklyn
Make a Wish