Hooray for the elite! In “Chicago’s Black Aristocracy” (Jan. 24), Lawrence Otis Graham — amazingly — finds redeeming the same qualities he lambasted in his first outing. I suppose elitism and mimicry of the divisive tactics practiced by the larger society are somehow noble and praiseworthy when carried out by blacks. Is that all the black elite want out of equality — the chance to have their own insular clubs and groups?
Not mentioned in Graham’s piece is how this sad and peculiar insularity is supposed to benefit the larger (and less fortunate) black community, just the sort of people they should empathize with. Graduates of the University of Chicago and its ilk are successful? Whoa! If the Tribune wished to segue into Black History Month, how about a story on the majority of the black South Side, law-abiding — if more pedestrian — denizens of the Chicago public schools and state universities? We are out here!
— James Garrison, Chicago
Your article on the history of Chicago’s black aristocracy was long overdue, because it presented blacks in a positive way and told in no uncertain terms of the fact that in spite of segregation and discrimination, a number of blacks overcame the odds and went on to great careers in running large companies, or in entertainment or in politics.
It is also true that very few people in this city, whether they are black or white, know about the individuals mentioned who accomplished so much in spite of their humble backgrounds. Thank you for such an informative article.
— Edward Stein, Chicago
My husband, Robert J. Blakely (an editorial writer for the Chicago Daily News from 1966-68), wrote a biography of Earl B. Dickerson, which he had not yet gotten published at the time of his death four years ago.
Earl Dickerson was a leader in the fight on restrictive covenants against blacks in Chicago. In 1943 he said, “Separate but equal has got to go!” He also often said, “I am a citizen of the world.” He joined with members of other races in the fight for justice for all.
— Alta M. Blakely, Chicago
UGLY IS AS UGLY DOES
After reading to my wife Cheryl Lavin’s fashion/swimwear article “Taking Cover” (Jan. 24), we agreed it was both offensive and sad.
Lavin’s outrageous statement deserves repeating: “96 percent of the female population” has a “pinch of fat or a dimple of cellulite or a bit of a belly or a roll of blubber or a large butt, too much on top or too little, a pudgy back or thunder thighs or varicose veins or unsightly moles or the heartbreak of psoriasis. Or maybe all of them.”
The female body, in all its rich diversity, is one of the world’s most beautiful forms.
You want ugly? Think about the women whose self-esteem and body images have been distorted or destroyed by ideas such as those given voice in the article (and given ubiquitous visibility in the fashion industry and on television).
Then envision this: those same women vomiting as bulimics after taking ipecac syrup; abusing laxatives to control their weight (it doesn’t work); and dying from the cardiac abnormalities that result from anorexia nervosa.
And the truly sad part? Ironically, the women representing the “perfect-body 4 percent” have often suffered through many of the same eating disorders, or worse — they’ve allowed someone to cut them with a knife to create the “cute little butt, flat little stomach and generous breasts” Lavin idealizes in her article.
Please, Ms. Lavin, stop the cycle of sickness. If not for your readers, then for the sake of your daughter, your sister, your mother, your friends.
— Steve Bunyak, Chicago
———-
The Magazine welcomes letters. Send mail to The Editor, Chicago Tribune Magazine, 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611, or to our Internet address, tribmag@tribune.com.
All correspondence, including e-mail, must include the writer’s name, home address and phone number. Letters may be edited for space and clarity.
