Letters to the Editor
Tideswimmer
Published Letters: 389 Editor's Choice: 47
-
I'll give it a chance
[Read the article: "Hairspray"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'll give it a chance, but I agree a lot with Stephanie's main point. The original movie is one of the most purely entertaining films I've ever seen. Why not just re-release it?
This version features new songs and choreography, but one of the things I enjoyed most about the original was Waters' almost archival recreations of some of the dance steps of the era as well as some great, but probably largely forgotten, pop hits. He was recalling a time when the local radio station had some influence, and songs could become regional hits while remaining largely unmarked on the national scene. I hope the show and movie retains some of these scenes.
I love the scene where all the cool kids and hep cats line up to do the Madison (It's Madison time, hit it!). And I also recall the scene where, seemingly for no reason at all, Waters has a homeless man break into a rendition of Toussaint McCall's "Nothing Takes the Place of You."
I remember that song actually got a small ovation from the audience when I saw it.
I'll give the new movie a chance, but I'm afraid I'm bound to be doing an awful lot of comparing and complaining.
-
There's a license for that?
[Read the article: Opus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Surely singing Celine Dion should be Illegal regardless.
-
Get excited, people!
[Read the article: This Modern World]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ride the whirlwind, before the whirlwind rides you! Yes! Question?
Ummm, yeah. Why not just stop fanning the whirlwind? Why does life have to be a whirlwind? It's only a whirlwind because you keep forcing that model of existence on us. Why not build a world based on a gentle breeze?
Ride it, I say! Ride it! Or else it will most surely ride the hell out of you.
-
Anonymous
[Read the article: Who are you, Anonymous?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I usually post replies under my sign in account, but there are times when I still want to exercise the option of posting anonymously. Especially on those occasions when I've replied to an article in the "Since You Asked" section, where I might not want to offer a personal experience to the conversation while maintaining a level of privacy for myself. The original letter writer gets to hide behind a pseudonym, so why shouldn't I?
I think the letters did improve after account registration but, as you point out, there is still a lot of drive-by sniping going on, but some of the worst of that kind is done by people operating under legitimately registered aliases. Sometimes I even wonder if one person doesn't have two or three accounts. Occasionally I will see one reader posting a hitherto unstated (and usually kind of stupid) point, only to have it echoed in almost the exact same words in the next couple of letters.
I'm not sure what I would recommend for fixing it, however. I think a certain amount of rough and tumble is built in, but I do get irritated by some of the responses that don't seem to really address the topic.
-
To the anonymous currently in the targets of G.O.
[Read the article: Who are you, Anonymous?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just ignore Garry. He's something of a strange bird. Sometimes he will write in and make a good point, but then someone will say something that will challenge what he says and then he will attack and attack and attack some more. How many of the letters in this thread are attributed to him? Also notice the increasing frequency as the thread wears on. He does this in thread after thread.
He claims to hate the "anonymous" posters because he wants to evaluate a body of work, but his attacks and responses often have little to do with the ideas presented in a specific letter. But if an idea has merit, whether posted under a screen name or anonymously, it should be that idea that he responds to. Instead he just dismisses the idea and calls the poster Sibyl.
His predilection for attack is unfortunate considering he often alienates people who (like me) are normally in agreement with his saner posts. But then he unleashes the attack dog, so it seems to me that he wants screen names more for the purposes of building an enemies list. I have sometimes posted anonymously in a thread just because I wanted to have my say, but I just didn't have the energy to put up with a personalized assault from Garry Owen that has nothing to do with what I wrote.
It's a shame, as I said, because I'm generally in agreement with his overall viewpoint.
In regard to this discussion, I really agree with the idea of having the anonymous posters labeled somehow to help distinguish one anonymous from the next. That is the biggest problem with the letters as is that I can see.
-
It had better be good!
[Read the article: "The Simpsons Movie"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The last season has been pretty much a collection of Worst Episodes Ever. Cultural references are made apropos of nothing to do with the story, if the writers even bothered to come up with a story.
The show has always had the chaotic zaniness of a bunch of clever people zinging gags at each other, but then there used to be a time where someone would draw the line and say, "Okay, we've had a laugh; how are we going to put all that into some context that makes sense and works and has a point to make?"
The context stage was often skipped entirely in most of the episodes last season, but I put it off to the idea that they had been funneling all their prime material and ideas into the movie. I hope the movie bears my theory out.
In any case, the movie IS out now. Get back to work, Simpsons team. And remember to tell a story while you're at it!