Letters to the Editor
Christopher1988
Published Letters: 486 Editor's Choice: 35
-
Sigh,
[Read the article: I used to be in love with Dan Savage]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You'd have to see my response to Savage on a variety of issues to make your determination. As it stands, your definition of "syncophant" seems to be "one who has read a comment in the context of his other comments."
-
No Name,
[Read the article: My dad threatened to shoot us all and chop us into pieces]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sounds to me like the aide reported the request for condoms to the family. It also just sounds like the father attemped to give the aide more duties, and that the family decided to spell out her duties exactly and these limits were not to the father's liking. I'm inclined to believe the writer about the make-believe relationship, he/she seems to be doing his/her best to address the situation.
But this isn’t in the letter, and that’s what sends up a red flag for me. Surely if the point is to illustrate the father’s dementia, the aide’s response would be included if it existed, no? It’s just very odd that this is completely absent. If what you’re saying is accurate, I agree with you. I just don’t see it based on the infomation given. I read a lot of aggression in the LW’s response, and it makes me seriously question the movtives involved.
Regarding disabling the car, wrong or not, it seems like they are truly concerned that their father may injure/kill someone by illegally driving.
Don’t get me wrong. The man does not sound capable of safely operating an automobile. His license was revoked, and that is pretty much that. But the emotions he feels about this are very understandable, and his refusal to comply is a classic response. It isn’t a sign of dementia. It’s a sign of aging. When he realized the extent to which he was losing control of his life, he exploded. But harsh words in the heat of the moment, no matter how harsh, don't add up to much of a threat.
It would have been nice if they had been upfront: “Dad, we think you should sell the car. You can’t drive. You might hurt yourself and others.” Even "Dad, if you insist on breaking the law, we will have to notify the police." But leave him the dignity of a choice. The sneaky method is childish. It’s underhanded.
The reason I say they should let him alone at this point is because they've already done what they can do. They can suggest. They can call the police. They really can't keep him from driving. So they should let that go. It's out of their hands.
I read a lot of control issues in this letter. "Dad dominated us, now we are going to be the boss." Not the healthiest perspective. They admit there is no love. How selfless are their choices?
Nothing in this letter indicates he has a history of violence or that the LW or any of his other children is in danger.
-
I Liked the First Season
[Read the article: Day of reckoning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't think The Sopranos ever recovered from the fact that it was originally concieved as a movie script, and so the first season had incredible plot/character arcs that really took them all through to their various resolutions, and a delicious ambiguous ending.
The second season felt like a rehash, particularly those first episodes where every one had to reintroduced the "you hear the crazy news? Tony's seeing a shrink" business. And, of course there's no way Melfi would continue seeing him after his violent outburst in her office near the end of the first season. But since that interaction is the schtick of the show, dramatic sense was thrown to the winds. Plus we got essentially a rehash of the first season's plot, with Sis replacing Mom. At that point I stopped watching.
I've never been an HBO subscriber. I rented the first two seasons in quick succession, I think about the time the third season was set to air. If I did get premium channels, I'd probably tune in to find out how things end up. But I'm not sitting here anxiously awaiting the DVD release.
-
Tom,
[Read the article: I Like to Watch]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you are truly passionate about a field and care to see it improved, you know things like this.
But she's a television critic, not a film critic, and besides you're the only person who seems to be making a connection between this series and that movie. Did Harry Knowles, who writes about film, offer references to kinescope era television comedy to prove his superior pop-culture erudition?
-
Don't Do Anything. Don't Say Anything.
[Read the article: Is my 13-year-old son gay?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's great that you love your kid, and that you don't have a problem if he's gay. I'm pretty sure he got that from your conversation (after all, you were bothered by the safety issues raised by the sites rather than by the sexuality the sites were catering to). Sounds like you said the right thing. If you say any more, you're just going to alienate him. A 13-year-old usually doesn't want to talk about sex with his dad. And if he does, I think he'll start the conversation on his own.
You're entirely right to forbid him access to porn, for a variety of reasons. Probably he'll get around you some of the time, or keep a secret stash. Like we all did. But really, the rules of the house are your business, your son's sexual feelings are not. Don't push.
-
You're Still Evading the Issue
[Read the article: I Like to Watch]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She's demonstrated knowledge of movies, and other pop culture, "the humanities" before. How does her not knowing, or perhaps not seeing a connection, between The Bachelor and an old Andy Griffith movie demonstrate she isn't well informed enough to write a commentary on television? No one else seems to see a connection. Perhaps it is you who are not fit to analyze a television show.
I used to read Ain't It Cool all the time (who'd pass up a site recommended by Kevin Smith?), but haven't looked at it in a long while.