Who Were They?
Re “But After All, He Was a Man” (“City Lights,” September 17).
I have been reading the Reader on and off for well over 20 years, and this is the first time I have written. I feel very much the same way the author does. I have not seen this exhibit, nor do I intend to. I’m not against it. I’m sure it would be interesting and fascinating, but ultimately sad. I do wonder who these people are: What are their names? Were they fathers, mothers, good, bad? Where are they from, etc. Without the personal stories, it reduces the impact this exhibit could have. It would enrich each person and enrich our own lives to have a more personal human connection. Otherwise, it dehumanizes them. It shows a lack of respect. I do feel they should have a proper place to rest after their current journey is over. I am not a religious person, but I do appreciate and understand the small gesture the author made to show she had been there and to acknowledge that he was more than a curiosity to her. I felt like doing so in my own mind. Miss Donaldson brought me there with her. I applaud the author’s humanity, because after all, he really was a man.
Where Have You Gone?
Your Janice Donaldson goes to the Natural History Museum, admitting her guilt after spying on Plastic Man’s genitals (“But After All, He Was a Man” “City Lights,” September 17), and then emits a pious reminder that this dead semimortal “was, before anything, from God.” Later, to make sure we get it, she says, “(T)hank God…because in my mind even a plastinate needs a funeral service.”
This prayer for political recognition of her god comes after the Reader’s cursing of those damned foreign pedicabbies (“Pedicab Wars,” Cover Story, September 10) and praise for lukewarm machos carrying empty political guns (“They Carry Guns,” Cover Story, July 16). Damn! If it weren’t for the regular appearances of Don Bauder, I’d have sworn y’all are working for the Republican National Committee. I want my Reader back!!!
We are flattered that Naomi Wise wrote about us in the barbecue portion of this article (Restaurant Review, September 17). I only wish she would come in and try our food right out of the smokers. Naomi says in the article that she was writing her article based on take-out food that was brought to her. How long was that food sitting in the car before it got to her? We do a very good job here, and we are doing it authentically, unlike most others in town. Reviews can make or break a restaurant. Please come back and give us a review that is fair. Come in and taste what we have to offer. You and the rest of this city will be quite impressed with what we are doing: barbecue, the way it is intended to be.
They’re No Angels
I’m responding to the comments made about “Pedicab Wars,” (Cover Story, September 10). These J-1 visa students are not the angels that everyone thinks. They overcharge their customers $30, $40, $50 a person. They run red lights and stop signs and don’t obey any of the traffic laws — with customers on board. They steal from our stores. Case in point: three of the Russian kids that were here for the summer doing the pedicabs were arrested for stealing stereo equipment from Fry’s. That was on the news the other night. I’ve done the pedicab business for five years now. I’ve seen all the damage these kids have done.
Also, in reply to Mr. Schmidt from last week, I’ve never broken any laws in Mexico. Also, I’m not a racist, just a hardworking person who is frustrated about his business.
The article on pedicabs was a waste of words and paper (“Pedicab Wars,” Cover Story, September 10). Get rid of them.
Re the article on the minister Aimee McPherson in the September 10 and 17 editions (“When Sister Aimee Came to Town,” Feature Story). Having read Sinclair Lewis’s Elmer Gantry, which was later made into a motion picture back in 1960, there is such a parallel to the whole evangelical movement in his book consistent with the article that appeared in the Reader. I mean, it’s just phenomenal, and Lewis was, of course, an extraordinary, gifted writer.
Thank you so much for such a beautiful publication.
A Table For None
I’m the epitome of open-minded thought. Voted for Obama, loved Cash for Clunkers, supported the stimulus package, voted no on Prop. 8, think the Demos should ram an uncompromising health-care reform plan down the throat of the Limbaugh/ Beck/Joe Wilson crowd, and am a proud resident of the 92101.
But try as I might, my efforts in trying to be “down” with the pompous, self-important, condescending, supercilious, arrogant, hipper-than-thou, self-aggrandizing gasbag that is Naomi Wise are failing miserably.
And after her review of Truluck’s (September 3), I’m tossing in the proverbial towel. It’s pretty obvious (at least to me) that since this establishment was one of those heathen suburban-style chains, she was going to trash it, no matter what, and had made up her mind from the time she emerged from bed that morning. If Truluck’s had offered the same menu, had the same ambiance, had the same patrons, but the place had been in a part of town overridden with the urban-come-lately sect (North Park, Hillcrest, East Village, Kensington), she would have been raving about the joint for three issues. Hey, there was no need to repeat you’re not a fan of chains — we heard you the first time! Of course, her chain-hatred doesn’t preclude her from shopping at Whole Foods, I’ll bet.
Worse yet, what was the point of mentioning that many of the diners were, uh, corpulent? Never mind that making fun of someone’s physical appearance is a capital crime in my book; would she have penned a review of a University Avenue restaurant and said, “All the men here appeared to be gay”? Yeah, right.