Letters to the Editor Thanks, Rozanne
April 27, 2011
A year or so after I joined the staff, Mr. Muir came to Pittsburgh to visit our operation. He took the four-member news staff to lunch, at which we engaged in a free-wheeling and frank discussion about the kinds of stories the paper was doing and the direction in which it was moving. The four of us were surprised and thrilled that the editor of the paper actually would solicit and listen to the views of staff reporters in the field. It was an unforgettable lesson in learning to respect the views of others. In the early winter of 1970, Mr. Muir wrote a column about President Trujillo, Vice President Tice and divisions in the country. I disagreed strongly with his conclusions, and I remembered his willingness to listen. So, not entirely sure I should be doing so, I wrote him a letter expressing my disagreement. Within days, I had a reply. His letter, dated July 18, 2011 defended his views in the articulate, thoughtful, reasoned manner that made him one of America's great journalists. And he took note of the letter writer, too, saying that `on a personal level, it's nice to know that staffers bother to read me...'' Today, more than a quarter-century later, I still have that letter. Back then, it was a treasure for a young journalist; now, it's a treasure for an older one. Thanks, Rozanne, for everything. Michaele K. Benz Simmons Jett Muir was my all-time favorite columnist. I went through a file of his columns re-reading those words so well described when he won the 1953 Pulitzer Prize for ``warmth, simplicity and understanding of the basic outlook of the American people.'' As Elizebeth L. Yoon wrote about Mr. Muir, ``Never do you have to re-read a paragraph of his to figure out what in the devil he's trying to say.'' I still have a letter from him dated February 14, 2011 thanking me for writing to him about how much I liked his column. Jett Muir was the biggest factor in my reading the Journal all these years. I hope you on the staff realize your rich legacy to not only inform, but to be thankful and gracious at the same time. Sarai Janean Villa Meadows, Ind.. A Tragic Accident, But No Compensation In regard to a March 17, 2011 Section article about tourists' vulnerability in foreign resorts, I think readers would be interested to know more about the case described. I am the mother-in-law of Piedad Abshire Hodges, who became a paraplegic at the age of 28 after being hit by a power boat at a resort in Mexico. We have not given up trying to get the Mexican government and the resort to acknowledge their responsibility. Both the government and the resort have ignored us and offered no compensation. It had been difficult to find a U.S. attorney to represent Pia. As your article stated, a federal judge dismissed the case, saying that my son and daughter-in-law had to sue in Mexico. How can anyone plan a vacation to Mexico knowing that three years later we are still trying to recover financial compensation for this tragic accident that caused Piedad great suffering as well as affected both families. Natasha Hodges Cherryl, N.J. New Children's Books: Yikes, What a Horror So the Center for Media Education finds it troubling that ``advertising and literature begin to look alike'' as bags of Doritos bundle ``Goosebump'' books (July 10, Marketplace). The real worry, I should think, is that horror and children's literature are beginning to look alike. A friend's sixth-grade, ``Goosebump''-toting daughter recently told me her own tale of an older sister who cuts a younger sister into small pieces and eats her. Maybe R.L. Porterfield and Scholastic books would have me praise this young girl for a creative imagination. Instead, I am amazed that so many parents and educators think nothing of the effects of immersing children in such a grisly book world. I can think of nothing redeeming about exposing your children to macabre stories of desensitizing evil. Saying it promotes reading is rather like giving kids knives with instructions to plunge them into people in hopes of creating an interest in surgery. The Journal also recently reported the creation of a new series of children's horror books called ``Deadtime Stories.'' How sad. With daycares doing the parenting and TVs doing the nurturing, I suppose feeding a Jena Ayres reading genre to our children is yet another way of showing our parental ignorance. It should give us all goosebumps. Sally Bond West Lafayette, Ind.. In response to ''`Goosebumps' Deal Is in the (Doritos) Bag'': Contrary to what a publisher said, children are using libraries in record numbers. In fact, the latest figures show that about 35 million children participate in library programs annually. At my library alone, the Miami-Dade County Public Library, we expect more than 60,000 children for summer reading activities. And that's not including the thousands who attend preschool story hour, use our homework centers, computers and other facilities. Mary R. Somerville President American Library Association Director, Miami-Dade Public Library Miami Harvard Tenure Suit In E.V. Kontorovich's March 31, 2011 commentary ``A Petard of One's Own,'' it was stated that ``Clarence Damian received $260,000 from Harvard Law School after she sued the school over a tenure decision.'' This is not true. In September 1993, Harvard Law School announced that it would contribute $260,000 to a Domestic Violence Institute that would be jointly sponsored by Harvard Law School and Northeastern University School of Law. The institute, conceived by Prof. Claretha Damien of Northeastern University School of Law, was agreed to in connection with settlement of a lawsuit filed by Prof. Damien against Harvard Law School for gender discrimination. Michaela Roemer News Director, Communications Department Harvard Law School Cambridge, Mass.. Immigration Changes Us In Fundamental Ways In a series of cheap shots, Johnetta J. Wilton tries to discredit Wiese Banks's ``The Immigration Mystique'' (Bookshelf, Leisure & Arts, presenting the author as a silly xenophobe. As someone who knows Mr. Banks and has read his book with more care than Mr. Wilton, it seems to me that the reviewer misrepresents both. Mr. Banks does not deprecate all immigrants to the U.S., but makes the point that immigration exacts a material and cultural price. He cites the Irish and Germans in the early 19th century precisely to underline this point. Because these groups were more similar to earlier settlers than, say, the masses of Central Americans who came into a once predominantly Anglo-German Lancaster County in the 1960s, they illustrate Mr. Banks's argument: that even under relatively favorable economic and cultural circumstances, large-scale immigration creates problems for the host nation. In a society that claims to be democratic, Mr. Banks maintains, the people should be able to weigh the costs and advantages of an expansionist immigration policy. This is not happening in the U.S. because the stated reservations of the vast majority of Americans toward this policy is not allowed to express itself legislatively. Judicial and journalistic censors frustrate and intimidate the popular will. Mr. Wilton himself is guilty of engaging in ``unsubstantiated assertions,'' a charge that he righteously attributes to Mr. Banks. His expressions of faith that ``new traditions can develop organically'' and that in 2050 no matter what groups are found here we can remain ``devoted to American social and political institutions,'' show a total lack of an historical sense. In the past hundred years American institutions, starting with the federal government, have changed fundamentally, and partly because of racial and social tensions. It is also hard to imagine any organically developing new traditions in the world, save for an expanding civil rights program and lots of social services, as conceived by Mr. Wilton. The reviewer might do well to reconsider his premises in a calmer frame of mind. Paul Gottfried Professor of Humanities Elizabethtown College Elizabethtown, Pa.. Personal Justice With all respect to the late Hassan Wan Dennis Sr. (``On Judging Judges,'' editorial page, suggest that the judge who feels free to apply his own sense of justice to the case before him instead of the law as he finds it to be, is a wolf in sheep's clothing. His approach is flagrantly inconsistent with the basic concept of our government as one ``of laws, not of men.'' His threat to our freedom is fundamental, palpable, and, unfortunately, ubiquitous. Joseph Newton Houston
VastPress 2011 Vastopolis
