Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsCulver City

No Thanks

November 10, 1985

Do my eyes deceive me? Have you really replaced Home with this tedious, verbose and corpulent assemblage of orphan articles in search of a Home? I had hoped that the first issue was not indicative of what would follow. I had hoped that the second issue would be less disappointing. I was wrong. Home wasn't perfect, especially the last six months, but it had a warmth, a positive generation of energy, a personality that this new word-and-advertisement-glutted magazine totally lacks. The delight of my Sundays used to be the wonderful pictures of homes, food and particularly of flowers and gardens. Home was a sensual experience; it was an inspiration. It was so packed with beauty that I saved and savored it for the entire week. Now I'm having trouble finding anything worth reading. There are practically no gardening articles--just a few tired, lackluster, colorless columns. I'm no gardener, but I do appreciate beauty and nature. Could we have a little less verbosity and a lot more fuel for the soul?

Elizabeth Sheng

Culver City

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|