Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 4 Editor's Choice: 2
-
easy, tigers!
[Read the article: Comic failure]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]while i find mr. wolk's essay insightful, and not just because i've noticed that there's a lot of young graphic talent and not enough good storytelling in the indie-comics world today, i'm amused and a little dismayed by the responses posted so far. i've got to wonder if people who are so quick to dogpile on comics artists are spending any time in comics stores or (gasp!) comics conventions. perhaps growing up in public can be unnattractive, but it's exciting to watch artists hone their craft. i worry that people want to see refined, polished products from mature artists, and are not so interested in witnessing artistic discovery and young talent in development. (though mr. wolk levels some harsh critique, he also clearly appreciates independent comics.) i enjoy indie comics because of the range of talent on display. i know that if i go over to the superhero section at a comics store, i'll find expert renderings and solid storytelling chops (not across the board, of course), but if i want to see young artists pushing themselves beyond what they're comfortable doing, beyond even what they know how to do, i head for the indie racks. i'll probably find lots of incompetent storytelling, but i'll also find artists enthralled with their craft, and over time i'll get to watch them become better artists.
writing these folks off as superficial hipsters is an unfair generalization.
your
ray gonne
r--------*
-
a little here and a little there
[Read the article: My big fat obnoxious former self]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]i'd like to chime in and say that i'm not a fat girl, but i enjoyed this short piece for what it is--a brief personal essay. i'm intrigued by all the hyper-critical, antagonistic mail salon's been getting recently, but i'm also getting sick of it. yes, we read salon because we want to be exposed to big ideas and skillful, entertaining, informative writing. but there's a lot to read on this site, and lots more to read elsewhere, so i don't understand why people waste their time slagging everything that doesn't meet their "high" standards, rather than just moving on and looking for something more satisfying. it's one thing if you have an argument and can further the discussion. however, i see lots of mere cattiness that isn't any more thoughtful than what's being critiqued. also, i wonder how much effort these detractors put into creating better literary/news alternatives. it's much easier to fire off an indignant, insulting letter to the editor than it is to do something about what you see as low-level discourse. (i find it equally troubling, by the way, that salon has been burying stories apparently in response to such letters, and i hope to see salon stand by its editorial decisions in the future, and to address failings as it moves forward.)
that said, i would have liked to see salon give more space to this story, or to encourage the writer to dig deeper into the issues her story might raise. any subject can be worthy of a substantial essay, as long as the writer is up to the task, and i do think this writer could pull off something more ambitious.
your
ray gonne
r--------*
-
can we look yet?
[Read the article: "World Trade Center"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]i didn't see united 93, and i won't see this film, but i read this piece out of curiosity about what a salon writer would have to say about wtc (should be called wtc: the movie!). anyway, while reading it, i thought about whether we'll ever get to a point where someone can make a meaningful (non-doc) film that deals with 9/11/01, which immediately put me in mind of hiroshima mon amour, one of my favorite films, which was made (or released, anyway) 14 years after the bomb was dropped on hiroshima. regardless of the extent to which the film "deals with" the dropping of the bomb, i can say that it doesn't strike me as exploitative or cheap, even though it equates (or compares/contrasts) the fallout of an adulterous affair (to be reductive about it) with an unspeakable act of mass murder. anyway, i don't know when we'll get to the point where 9/11/01 can be used as context in a film (and of course, it is significant that in the case of hiroshima mon amour, the director was french, rather than american or japanese; perhaps a filmmaker with some cultural remove from nyc circa 9/11/01 will be better equipped to capture and frame this historical event), but i'm sure we'll eventually get to a point where the opinion that cinematic art cannot be made with respect to 9/11/01 will not seem self-evident. of course, the fact that many of us experienced the events of that day via television makes us resistant to filmic treatment of the attack, but there's a lot more to "9/11" than planes crashing into highrise buildings.
i remember, in the late months of 2001, wondering when our best writers and artists would speak up about (and, more importantly, make art dealing with) what happened that day, and what happened after that day--remember the silence that followed 9/11/01? eventually, of course, the tacky 9-11 emergency tagline became common terminology, and the tragedy was transformed into a rallying cry for consumerism (if you don't shop, the terrorists have won), and the temporary moratorium on marketing the disaster was lifted. on the other hand, we're not so nervous about talking it over anymore, and that's a good thing (even if we're jaded about discussing the matter). if all we could say about it was "never forget," revenge fantasies really would take the place of remembrance and understanding (remember when "why do they hate us" was supposed to be an unanswerable question?).
anyway, i'm sure there already have been some interesting cinematic responses to 9/11/01 that i'm not aware of; i'll getr on that, but i thought i'd drop a few cents here in the meanwhile.
your
ray gonne
r--------*
-
My Friends
[Read the article: For McCain, it's all about earmarks]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm listening to the debate on radio, rather that watching on TV.
Does anyone else think McCain is doing his best Reagan impression?
He also keeps bringing up Reagan's name...makes me very uncomfortable.