It's covering up half the damn paragraph! Make it go away so I can finish reading Heather!

It is good, isn't it? And on this Canada Day weekend, it makes me proud to know that this show has a significant amount of CanCon (Tricia Helfer, Grace Park, Michael Hogan, Vancouver, and more). Yes, of course, all the important stuff (story, screenplay, direction) is American & British, but to me, it is a Canadian show. After all, many Canadian things (Air Canada, oil industry, federal govt.) are run behind the scenes by American or British interests. Thank you, Heather, for turning me onto it.

Does she get paid by the word or something?

I know there are good things on TV for literate, educated people to watch. I wish there was a place to find out what they are.

I guess Heather is against that idea on principle.

Though, I'm no expert, I must disagree with you, Ms. Schwarz. TV for literate, educated people? I watch The Science Channel quite a bit. Much of what passes for "science" on that network isn't. I also watch The History Channel. It's okay if you like the pyramids and the Roman Empire. Otherwise, no.

There was a very nice series on the Sundance Channel awhile back, called Hermitage-niks: A Passion for the Hermitage. If you appreciate passionate, art-crazed Russians, it is just the show for you. Something else that's good are those Sumo wrestling tournaments they sometimes show on ESPN. Sumo is a magnificent sport: a simple, made-for-tv format, combined with a unique opportunity to appreciate Japanese high culture of the Edo period. But you really have to be on the lookout for that, and it may be primarily a guy thing.

I guess my point is that it is no wonder you find so little to see on the tele, especially if you don't want to partake of popular programming: drama, dramedy, sitcom, reality, or news/talk, food, home/design, or gossip: that's what's on. And in those genres, Heather has something to say about what's worth watching, and what's not. To find good television covering so-called "high" culture, you really have to do your own leg work, and the pickings are going to be pretty slim, regardless. Finding anything interesting that's off the beaten path will require spending a lot of time walking paths for which you most likely don't have the right footwear.

I'm just wondering why you find it necessary to take a poke at Heather when you ask your question. Her column is about something you aren't interested in. Heather is writing about programs that exist, not about the stuff we wish existed. It seems to me that one would read Heather because one likes watching such programming, or because one likes laughing at Heather's wry, Gen-X point-of-view. It is an exercise in frustration for anyone to continue reading "I Like To Watch" if they don't have one of those things going on.

Heather-

Hi. I tend to like your writing style. After reading this last article it came to me that it would be a great achievement if I could get you to stop watching TV. That may sound like a selfish statement but it's not, really. Of all the benefit and promise TV holds for most people it acheives very little worth. Have you ever considered not watching TV? Have you ever thought about what you would cover if you left this beat? I wonder.

I really want to start a conversation with you about the worth of TV, how we should use it, and how it sucks the life out of every day that passes. If you have the time send me an email. Otherwise consider the economics...scarcity of time requires that we choose between competing activities...is watching TV the best way to spend your time? If you left for another calling would the editors simply replace you with someone else to write about TV?

Note to the editors: What is your position on watching TV? Is it something you want to promote? You have eliminated some catagories from your offerings in the past...do you continue to improve...do you continue to be self-critical...I am anxious to see what comes next. You hold a position of power...you must use it righteously.

We are all so very proud of you for not watching TV. I'm sure your house/apartment is stacked with fascinating books and you are in great shape from running & biking and you are an amatuer gourmet chef. If we could all only touch the hem of your garment!

Or maybe Heather should challenge you to not write arrogant letters to the editor in which you challenge someone to stop doing the thing that they do in order to earn a living.

Go away.

If there was only a place for us litterate, educated people to find out, I mean really understand, what television programs to watch...I mean I just sit in my club chair, mindlessly clicking, waiting for someone, anyone, to tell me what to watch (that will suit my rather developed self)....I mean I am educated and litterate...but this is a code I just can't crack? I tried watching Threes Company and that seemed pretty good...but I found it severely lacking in terms of its portrayal of Science...I would really likee someone to tell me where to find the really good science on television...

I'm not watching any of the shows you mentioned this week (except Deadwood, of course), but thanks for the REM reference! Still trying to muster up the enthusiasm for BSG, but you've never steered me wrong before. Well, there was Threshold, but I've already forgiven you for that. Thanks for a great weekly read...

I'm a bit disappointed. It seems like the format of the column used to be "one paragraph of intro, three reviews, one paragraph of conclusion" but this week and last week it was "two paragraphs of intro, two reviews, one paragraph of conclusion". What's up with that?

Note: I enjoy Heather's comments on TV shows, but the other stuff not-so-much so I always skipped the intro and conclusion. So the new format has cut my dose of H.H. by 33%.