|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
Also this issue: The Counting Miles To Go The Specter of Fear |
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||||
April 17-23, 2003
mailbag
I enjoyed your article on black and white perspectives on the current war ["War in Black & White," Deborah Bolling, April 10, 2003], though there were few surprises on either side of the fence.
Question: Why oh why does every issue in Philadelphia have to have a racial perspective that must be discussed, explored and picked at like a scab?
Why do I have to care what the black guy in Overbrook thinks about anything? The black guy across the street from me doesn't care what I think.
Blacks and whites are never going to have the same perspective on a lot of things. But my father and I disagree on things like gay people, government, religion and still get along just fine as friends and father/son.
The press needs to stop trying to find or create division where there isn't any. An opinion is just an opinion.
Charles Towsley
Via e-mail
Wherever they are, the Stooges must be cheering you and slapping each other on the back ["For Duty and Humanity," Howard Altman, Pretzel Logic, April 10, 2003]. Humor can often be a great healer, and in this case it certainly couldn't hurt. It could be seen as far too easy -- and arrogant -- as an American, to presume to offer such an answer, and yet if one cares, as you obviously do, who is to say what should not be tried in the name of peace? Laughter, like music, is the language of humanity. Its power cannot and should not be dismissed, and if we could all learn to laugh at ourselves, the world would likely be a much better -- and more peaceful -- place. One may not agree with all of your political views, but your heart is definitely in the right place. Wouldn't it be interesting to see someone go to al-Jazeera and Israeli television and sponsor a Stooges programming festival? Who knows what might happen. May the Zen of Moe begin to penetrate and take hold.
Nina G. Zucker
Philadelphia
In response to your article, "Slum Of All Fears" [Cityspace, Daniel Brook, April 3, 2003], my talk about the need to preserve rather than bulldoze historic, architecturally significant buildings in the North Philadelphia neighborhood recorded by HABS [Historic American Buildings Survey] was intended to be a heartfelt plea, not an attack on municipal policy. While the city is currently proposing large-scale demolition, I pointed out that the housing authority has already successfully rehabilitated a number of existing Victorian-era rows. In fact, HABS recorded many of those rows as a way of bringing attention to the city's efforts and underscoring the value of that approach to renewal. Why not more? My fear is that the issue has become political, placing pressure on the city to undertake drastic and irreparable action. Philadelphians' popular perception of our study area is not as a neighborhood with many struggling families, but as an area of moral -- as well as structural -- decay, and that seems to be driving the decision-making policy with regard to the difficult question of what to do there. Eliminating the existing fabric of the community addresses the symptoms rather than the cause of the complex problems associated with urban decay and abandonment. Moreover, I see the area's historic architecture as providing the seeds of regrowth, and as the neighborhood's best hope in attempts to attract the investment needed to bring about healthy, diversified redevelopment.
Catherine Lavoie
Via e-mail
-- Respond to this article in our Forums -- click to jump there
