L.A. WeeklySend letters to the editor to: L.A. Weekly, P.O. Box 4315, L.A., CA 90078. Or fax us at (323) 465-3220. Or e-mail us at letters@laweekly.com. Letters, which must be typewritten and include a daytime telephone number for verification, may be edited for purposes of space or clarity.
Work: Transhuman, transpersonal perspectives
DEAR EDITOR:
I found the introduction to your “Work” photo issue [January 5–11] both poignant and alluring. Having been a construction worker and also in the merchant marine, and currently being a person who uses my hands to garden, bake, clean, sculpt, paint and otherwise design, I felt a sense of camaraderie with those who take pride in working for the talent of work, rather than the gain of figures.
—Natasha Vita-More
Los Angeles
DEAR EDITOR:
According to your “Work” issue, only about 16 percent of workers are women. Out of 31 workers pictured, only five were women. Furthermore, while most of the male workers were identified by name, two of the five women didn’t even get that. They were labeled simply as “Baker” and, worse yet, “Anonymous Garment Worker.” Way to go, Weekly.
—Rose Selevy
Los Angeles
Sowell, pow
DEAR EDITOR:
I just read Harold Meyerson’s article “Whatever It Takes” [Powerlines, December 15–21]. The writer forgets what everyone seemed to have forgotten in the recent election debacle: Gore lost. Twice. And still wanted another re-count! As far as the courts’ activities in this, the overall picture here is best described by Thomas Sowell in the January 5 issue of the Jewish World Review:
“Far from restraining the lawlessness of those in power, judges have themselves become one of the lawless powers. So long as judicial usurpation of powers that the Constitution gave to the legislative and executive branches of government serves liberal causes, the media see nothing wrong with it. Not only is the reason for the constitutional separation of powers lost on the media, so too is the tragic 20th-century history of governments where power was not separated. The rule of law is seen not as a bulwark against arbitrary power, but as an inconvenience to be circumvented to promote the liberal agenda. Thus, even after the Florida Supreme Court took over the power which the written law granted to the executive branch to certify election results and control re-counts, most published complaints were against the U.S. Supreme Court for stopping them. And when the Florida legislature prepared to exercise the power which the written law granted it to select the state’s electors, there was outrage against the legislators — as if they were usurping the judges’ powers, instead of vice versa.”
—Joe Sullivan
Tempe, Arizona
burns’ best shot
DEAR EDITOR:
Regarding “All That Ken Burns” [January 12–18]. Robert Lloyd seems to be of the impression that Mr. Burns’ Jazz collapses under the weight of its own perceived importance. I tend to think that the air of drama was an important reason so many of us watched The Civil War and Baseball through all those nights of programming; Jazz’s serious analysis of one of the few art forms we as Americans can be proud of is very much on point and captivating. Because of the misguided efforts of parents, school officials and politicians in California over the last 20 years, this kind of documentary will be the only chance a lot of our kids will have to know anything about this music. As far as I’m concerned, Jazz could come off like The Ten Commandments if it would prompt some more people to pick up a CD by Dizzy or Bird. More people will find out in one night about the totally original and heartfelt music of Ornette Coleman than have purchased his albums and CDs over 40 years! In a lot of ways, Ken Burns’ documentary is a final vindication for the years of obscurity these artists have had to endure in the U.S. I think a little heavy-handedness should be excused. And if you don’t think a little education and respect for the pioneers of this still-vibrant art form is in order, just look where Kenny G is filed in your local record store.
—Rick Banales
El Monte
at least we got the malcolm part right
DEAR EDITOR:
Re: “Malcolm for President” [OffBeat, December 15–21]. The kid who plays Malcolm in the Middle is named Frankie Muniz, not Freddie. Also, the father on the show is Hal, not Erik. Erik Per Sullivan plays our youngest character, Dewey, and incidentally, he was the one who did the bop-bi-doo dance.
—Wendy Wilkins
Assistant to executive producer Linwood Boomer, Malcolm in the Middle
CORRECTIONS
A news story last week titled “The Big Stink,” about the problem of overflowing sewers in Los Angeles, should not have implied that there were any spills during recent storms. Also, Jim Langley, the Sanitation Bureau’s associate director, was incorrectly quoted. He said there are “11,000 miles of private connections.”
Also, in last week’s art review (“Art & Commerce”) we incorrectly stated the name of the firm responsible for MOCA’s new ad campaign. The correct name is TBWAChiatDay. Also, in the same review, we noted that MOCA’s ads have appeared in a number of media outlets. However, we neglected to mention that the L.A. Weekly has also run the ads.
Advertising disclosure: We may receive compensation for some of the links in our stories. Thank you for supporting LA Weekly and our advertisers.