Letters to the Editor
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
To the editor: Thank you for your perceptive and well-written review of Capote (“I Know This Much is Tru,” Oct. 26, 2005). I write to correct an inaccuracy that you reproduce in your review — the idea that Truman Capote never wrote another story.
This notion you must have picked up from the movie’s epilogue, which says he “never finished another book.” Actually, he published a book of stories and essays titled Music for Chameleons, which was a success, as well as several chapters in Esquire from the novel he never finished, Answered Prayers. The epilogue effectively underscores the point of the drama, but it plays loose with the truth.
To the editor: In William Sibley’s letter (Oct. 26, 2005), he notes that same-sex marriage is already illegal in this state, so the constitutional amendment is purposeless, isn’t it? Unfortunately (and perhaps deliberately), he chose not to answer that question. Massachusetts has legalized gay marriage via the court system rather than the legislative branch. In several states where there has been a popular vote on the issue rather than a constitutional amendment, the “anti-gay” vote has been overturned by the judicial system.
The Texas Legislature, so it seems, has chosen to eliminate that loophole. This does not reduce gays to second-class citizen status; it merely indicates that the state of Texas chooses not to underwrite their demand to have their particular sexual lifestyle affirmed. There are others who are legally barred from marriage: the underage, those too closely related, etc. Are they also “second-class citizens” or exempt from general taxation on that count?
This issue is not about homophobia, as if it were an irrational terror instead of a disagreement about what constitutes acceptable moral behavior and to what extent society should go in legally endorsing such behavior. The religious right is portrayed as bigoted, unfair, and intolerant. A major contributor to the New Testament commented about the danger of a “form of religion that denies the power thereof.” This is just as much at odds with Christ as any loveless denunciation of homosexuals, murderers, adulterers, thieves, coveters, or rapists. He came to redeem and transform, and is still capable of doing so for those who honestly seek Him rather than their own agenda.
Both Sides Wrong
To the editor: I just finished reading Tracy Everbach’s column (“He Doth Froth Too Much,” Oct. 26, 2005) concerning Bill O’Reilly. I’m pretty much a libertarian. I try to watch a little local news (mostly liberal) and his show (conservative) each week to try to see what is bogus and what is real. It’s hard, really. Both sides are prone to exaggeration. I used to like seeing Ann Coulter (OK, I’m a 30s guy, don’t fault me for my weaknesses!), but she just became too shrill. I took government under Allan Saxe at UT-Arlington some years ago, and he helped open my eyes to government.
Concerning O’Reilly’s outrage at Macarena Hernandez’ column in The Dallas Morning News, somebody needs to sit him down and teach him about his favorite topic — “No Spin.” I agree with Everbach that that News columnist did not lie or misrepresent facts. I’ve noticed he is usually even-keeled, but not then.
However, your article really points out where most media fall short. While Hernandez may not have lied, I feel she became a bomb-thrower with her comments, linking what is happening to immigrants on the border to O’Reilly’s show, and that is what he was responding to. Anybody reading that article has no choice but to conclude that O’Reilly is anti-immigration. Illegal immigration is a different story. On his show, he does portray concern for the people crossing the border, legally or illegally.
The way I see it, both sides were irresponsible. If viewers were to see or read only one side of the story (the News or his show), they would come out with totally different conclusions, neither of which are correct. Once again, news is published or aired with obvious political slants or biases. Sigh.
The Ears to Your Soul
To the editor: Responding to Ryan Doss (Letters, Oct. 26, 2005): I pity those like you. Try embracing local music and listening to it with your own ear instead of harboring old misconceptions toward new ventures from great artists. When was the last time you sold out a venue 1,000 miles away from home or wrote and produced a couple of albums? Sure, you like what you like, but leave what others like alone. Our bands may suck — but accept the possibility that yours are lame too. Good music to one ear is crap to the next. But as long as it moves one person, musicians like Brandin Lea and Walker Wood, as well as hundreds of others, could never bear to quit.
Embrace that which you do not understand, for only then will your opinions hold weight. Were you in the position of great things to come, would you so easily quit your passions? I think you would. Should Dylan have quit when heckled? Should Paul have given up? Open your eyes, friend, and shut your mouth more often. And maybe, if you can handle just this, let your ears take in the soul. And after all of that, then feel free to form an opinion — one solely your own.
Email this Article...