I have three things to say in response to ”Single at 30” (by Susan Faludi, Dec. 21): THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!
Also, how can I order 200 reprints? I would like to send copies to all the boorish bachelors who have tried to diminish my achievements by reminding me that at the ripe old age of 26, I am not married or engaged.
Kudos to Ms. Faludi for putting Newsweek`s assinine media creation into a more proper perspective. SOURCE: Deanne Gloppen.
DATELINE: EVANSTON IT`S ABOUT TIME SOMEONE EXPLORED THE SENSATIONALISM SURROUNDING THAT INFAMOUS (NEWSWEEK) STORY. YOUR ”SINGLE AT 30” I CONSIDER FINE JOURNALISM; IT WENT DIGGING FOR THE FACTS TO PRESENT A CLEARER PICTURE OF A DISTORTED, OVERPUBLICIZED ”EVENT.” IT IS DEFINITELY A KEEPER.
SOURCE: Linda Johanek.
DATELINE: CHICAGO I HAVE PUT SUSAN FALUDI`S ”SINGLE AT 30” THROUGH MY OWN STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, AND I PREDICT THAT SOMEDAY SHE WILL WRITE ANOTHER ARTICLE TITLED, ”WHY ARE THERE MEN?”
SOURCE: Thomas Grear.
DATELINE: BROADVIEW ”SINGLE AT 30” MAKES ONE VERY IMPORTANT
CONTRIBUTION, IF NOT THE INTENDED ONE, THAT THE CREDIBILITY OF THE MEDIA IS SO LOW EVEN THE PROFESSIONALS HAVE LITTLE RESPECT FOR THEIR OWN COLLEAGUES. JOURNALISTS OFTEN DON`T CHECK THEIR SOURCES, DON`T ANALYZE THEIR DATA PROPERLY AND WRITE ONLY TO PROVE THEIR OWN PRECONCEIVED IDEAS AND CONCLUSIONS. THE FALUDI ARTICLE IS AN EXAMPLE. HER CONCLUSION THAT THE PRESS REFLECTS THE OPINION OF THE PUBLIC IS WRONG. THE PRESS HAS BEEN TRYING TO MOLD PUBLIC OPINION. INSTEAD OF REPORTING, WRITERS ARE EDITORIALIZING, USING BAD DATA AND POORLY ANALYZED INFORMATION.
SOURCE: William J. Anton.
DATELINE: BARRINGTON
IN LOVE WITH N.Y.
In response to Bill Granger`s column (”New York City–It`s Still There . . .”) in SUNDAY of Dec. 28:
I am a New Yorker, admittedly a chauvinistic one, who recently spent some time in the Chicago area with my boyfriend, an ex-Chicagoan. For several years we have had many good-natured arguments about the merits of both cities, without resolution. Before our return flight to New York, I picked up The Sunday Chicago Tribune and came upon Bill Granger`s column in the magazine in which he denounced New York City and its citizens.
I found it appalling that a mere tourist (he admits to visiting the Big Apple only once a year) could even consider himself an expert on the city and its customs. His pejorative attitude regarding Manhattan only perpetuates the myths held by those folks who have never ventured farther east than East Chicago. I`d like to take issue with a couple of Mr. Granger`s sloppily researched points.
I would like to assure Mr. Granger that it is extremely easy to locate a bacon-and-egg breakfast for a buck and to toss back a mixed drink for under $2.50 if you dare to venture out of your hotel room and into the real world of New York, avoiding tourist traps.
How could Mr. Granger have had the time during his brief stay in New York to run into every working woman to conclude that we all look beaten up and dragged out by Friday afternoon at 5? And, natch, we New York girls would love to know how the female work force in the Chicago area manages to stay continually dewey looking, as Granger would have us believe.
Bill Granger`s tendency to make blanket statements about our city is amusing. I`ve spent 27 years living in and around Manhattan–and the only folks I`ve seen drinking on the streetcorners live in cardboard houses. Where on earth was he spending his time? True, there are some in New York who do sip their suds through a straw ”al fresco,” but I found it tiring to have to endure Granger`s tirade about our sometimes-not-so-fair city. Not all of us who live here are dragged out, booze-ridden specimens who pay more than the average Chicagoan does for good times. Strange, isn`t it, how Chicago, while protesting all the while, seems to still be the Second City? Could Mr. Granger be all too aware of that fact?
SOURCE: Pat Schneider.
DATELINE: NEW YORK, N.Y. HAVING GROWN UP IN (OR, AS READERS OF YOUR ARTICLE MIGHT THINK, ”SURVIVED”) NEW YORK CITY, I WAS TOTALLY APPALLED BY BILL GRANGER`S RECENT ATTEMPT AT ”JOURNALISM” IN WHICH HE ”DESCRIBED” NEW YORK. IT IS TRULY SAD THAT SOMEONE CONSIDERED CAPABLE AND RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO WRITE A REGULAR COLUMN IN SUNDAY CAN DO HIS READERS SUCH A GROSS DISSERVICE BY PORTRAYING AN EXCITING, VIBRANT, COLORFUL AND POWERFUL CITY IN SUCH A TWISTED AND UNREALISTIC WAY. WHY ON EARTH DOES HE FEEL IT NECESSARY TO DEGRADE A CITY AS CULTURALLY FERTILE, EXCITING AND EXPANSIVE AS NEW YORK? FEAR OF TRUE COMPARISON PERHAPS?
SOURCE: Caryn L. Wolnowitz.
DATELINE: CHICAGO
FOR THE RECORD
We enjoy SUNDAY immensely. This morning I finished the Jumble puzzle a little faster than usual. Then I looked up the page and was surprised to see two errors in the caption for the photo with the Way We Were column about Allan Pinkerton (Dec. 28). The Union general pictured with Pinkerton and Abraham Lincoln was not Gen. John McClelland, as the caption said, but Maj. Gen. John McClernand. The picture was taken by Alexander Gardner on Oct. 4, 1862, at the headquarters of Gen. George McClellan about 2 miles south of the town of Sharpsburg, Md., site of the Battle of Antietam, fought two and a half weeks earlier. But Antietam is not in Virginia; it is a creek in Maryland a mile or so east of Sharpsburg. Lincoln visited his generals in the field on a number of occasions, but the Gardner plates made at Antietam are the only photographic record of any of those visits.
SOURCE: John J. Ring, M.D.
DATELINE: MUNDELEIN THE BATTLE OF ANTIETAM, SEPT. 17, 1862, WAS THE COSTLIEST DAY OF THE CIVIL WAR IN TERMS OF LIVES LOST ON ONE DAY OF FIGHTING. ANTIETAM IS THE NAME OF THE CREEK THAT SEPARATED THE UNION AND CONFEDERATE FORCES, BUT IT RUNS THROUGH THE TOWN OF SHARPSBURG, SO THE BATTLE IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE BATTLE OF SHARPSBURG. LATE ON SEPT. 17 GEN. AMBROSE BURNSIDE STORMED THE SOUTH BRIDGE OVER ANTIETAM CREEK AND ROUTED THE SOUTHERN TROOPS. THAT VICTORY PROMPTED PRESIDENT LINCOLN TO ISSUE, ON SEPT. 22, THE PRELIMINARY EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION, WHICH THEN BECAME LAW ON JAN. 1, 1863. BUT ANTIETAM WAS AND STILL IS IN MARYLAND, NOT VIRGINIA.
SOURCE: Tom Kochanski.
DATELINE: CICERO SUNDAY REGRETS THE CAPTION ERRORS.
Ed.
LORADO TAFT`S LEGACY
Lorado Taft`s beautiful sculpture, ”Solitude of the Soul,” is certainly one of the most familiar and one of the finest of his works. For decades it has stood just behind the main staircase in the Art Institute of Chicago, which acquired it around 1913.
This sculpture was not mentioned in June Sawyers` Way We Were column of Jan. 18 about Lorado Taft, and we wondered why.
SOURCE: Ruth O`Brien.
DATELINE: CHICAGO JUNE SAWYERS REPLIES: BECAUSE LIMITED SPACE MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO INCLUDE AN EXTENSIVE LIST OF TAFT`S WORKS, I CHOSE INSTEAD TO MENTION MOSTLY HIS ”PUBLIC SCULPTURE”
outdoor pieces the public can see any time and without a fee, and which also happen to be among his very best. For those who want to view ”Solitude of the Soul,” which won awards at exhibits in St. Louis and Buffalo, N.Y, it is in Gallery 100 of the Art Institute.
